President Bush has repeatedly said that he will veto any SCHIP expansion bill that fails to put low-income children first and relies on a tobacco tax for funding. Congressional Democrats nonetheless sent him another one that failed both tests, and he kept his promise:
In a statement notifying Congress of his decision [to veto the legislation], Bush said the bill was unacceptable because … it allows adults into the program, would cover people in families with incomes above the U.S. median. and raises taxes.
The Democrats, against all the evidence, still believe this is a political winner for them. So, they have decided to use the poor kids now on SCHIP as human shields. Funding for the current program is about to run out, but they are still playing politics.
The good news is that the states who must administer SCHIP and a variety of child health care advocates are putting pressure on the Democrats to cut it out. They’re afraid of running out of money. So, the current program will probably be extended via some obscure rider on a general spending bill.
But SCHIP will be back next year, just in time for the election.
Comments 6
In regards to pediatrics, the number one (by far) factor effecting the health of a child is the health and welfare of the childs caregiver (parent).
Posted 13 Dec 2007 at 6:51 am ¶Yes, we have all heard that talking point. But how about producing some objective data to support your claim.
Posted 13 Dec 2007 at 7:22 am ¶A talking point is a mindless line handed to someone in defense of an arguement, with all due respect I have not only studied pediatrics for more than ten years but have also practiced. If you would like particular studies there are thousands, would you prefer, randomized controlled trials on specific disease processes? review articles on prventative medicine? prospective studies, case controlled studies, longitudinal studies? or you can take a few classes in pediatric health care and risk assessment. You can research pediatrics for 10 years or better or you can just ask for “objective data” and cry foul when 10 years of research and studies in all areas of disease process can’t be objectified on a blog?
Posted 13 Dec 2007 at 8:38 am ¶A link or two from some credible source will do. And, to save you some trouble, the PNHP does not qualify as a “credible” source.
Posted 13 Dec 2007 at 9:47 am ¶‘The research literature consistently shows that family coverage leads to increases in enrollment and access to care for children’
From Kaiser report
http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/7644.pdf
Posted 13 Dec 2007 at 10:07 am ¶Johnston BD, et al. Healthy Steps in an integrated delivery system: child and parent outcomes at 30 months. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med August 2006;160:793-800.
Winickoff JP, et al. Child heath care clinicians’ use of medications to help parents quit smoking: a national parent survey. Pediatrics April 2005;115:1013-7.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/110/6/e73
Posted 13 Dec 2007 at 10:29 am ¶Post a Comment