Rep. Lynn Jenkins Laughs Off Uninsured Single Mother (VIDEO)

U.S. Rep. Lynn Jenkins stood just a few feet away as a young mother expressed frustration at not being able to afford a doctor for her son, but Jenkins was not swayed from her opposition to a new government-run insurance plan.

Jenkins, a freshman Republican representing the 2nd District of eastern Kansas, is part of a GOP-dominated congressional delegation that has largely decided against what's become known as the public option in federal health care reform. The delegation -- split 5-1 in favor of the GOP -- went into its summer recess opposed to the idea, and nothing in the town hall meetings Republicans have held appears to have changed that.

After several people at town hall meeting in Ottawa advocated a public option, Jenkins reached a not-so-surprising conclusion.

"We're just going to agree to disagree about the public option," she said.

One person in disagreement was Elizabeth Smith, a 27-year-old Ottawa waitress who wanted to know what was wrong with a government-run plan for Americans who are currently uninsured. Smith's 2 1/2-year-old son, Jonah, sat on a nearby table, swinging his legs, as his mother questioned Jenkins.

Jenkins told Smith she'd rather give subsidies to families to allow them to buy private insurance.

When asked directly why she was against a government-run program, Jenkins laughed and said, "A government-run program is going to subsidize not only yours but everybody in this room. So I'm not sure what we're talking about here."

Watch, via Mike Nellis [1:47 minute mark]:

Afterward, Smith said her son hasn't been to a doctor in 21 months, except for emergency room visits for ear infections, because she can't afford either insurance or a doctor's visit.

"I am frustrated," she said. "In a functioning, civil society, people take care of each other."

Jenkins is already under scrutiny for her remark last week that the Republican Party needs a "great white hope" to lead them back to power.

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[alimal123]

03:21 PM on 09/05/2009

Who was that idiot who shouted it's not my job to pay for your healthcare­? Well the reality is that everyone is already paying for the uninsured at a higher rate. Who do you think pays for someone when they show up at the emergency room and they are uninsured? Taxpayer's do.

[gatogato]

03:03 PM on 09/04/2009

Jenkin's - the great white hype

[mamalisa38]

11:42 AM on 09/04/2009

For profit health insurance is immoral. The only way to maximize profits is to raise premiums and deductible­s and deny claims. The only answer to our health care crisis is single payer.

[jake1492]

10:52 AM on 09/04/2009

The republican lady's comments are inaccurate­.

She stated that she supported providing subsidies to low income people to assist them in buying health insurance, but she does not support the public option. She further states that a public option would subsidize everyone in the room.

This group of comments is a blazing example of misinforma­tion and in her case, possibly being misinforme­d. It is is so typical of the fruitless non-discus­sion taking place between left and right.

The idea of the public option is that it is a publicly run insurance company that competes with private insurance companies. All insured people need to buy insurance from one of those competitor­s. And part of the overal plan is to provide subsidies to those low income people who need it to be able to pay those insurance premiums.

In other words..... the scheme being proposed, which she opposes, is exactly what she says she supports. It is nonsensica­l. It is sound bite politics. It is a form of lying (probably by her, but possibly only by those who are influencin­g her, which would make her misinforme­d.... but deliberate­ly or incompeten­tly so)

This things won't be won by sweet reason alone. The opposition is non honorable about the realities being "discussed­".

[campfreddy]

09:34 AM on 09/04/2009

Wow - I am so glad I'm British. I don't know anyone from here who has ever lost their home or been put into dire financial straits because they were ill. It is just madness - how can anyone - and I mean ANYONE - not want to ensure that they and everyone they know is happy and healthy for a small tax.

Why is there no logic to this?

When I nearly died during child birth, I was cared for, saved and made well. It didn't cost me a penny.
The NHS over here also carries out pre-illnes­s care to check that your general health is good - they run schemes which can help you to lose weight, give up smoking & drinking, and helping you become more active and eat a better diet so that you don't BECOME ill. All these sorts of schemes (incl counsellin­g, osteopathy­, physiother­apy and so on) are included within the NHS - which means they are free. By working to prevent illness, the NHS saves millions a year in their costs and the nation become healthier. And these schemes are available to everyone - including the poorer sections of the comminitie­s who maybe lack education and so tend to have more health issues.

Does your insurance policy give you access to this sort of stuff as part of your premium? If not, why not?

It's just so weird that you pay sooo much for your health care and get so little.

[phlashba]

10:50 AM on 09/04/2009

You don't get it: This is like a football match to Americans.­..they just pick a side and continue to work and vote against their own best interests.

[KristinNoelle]

12:07 AM on 09/19/2009

Not everyone, just the "illiterat­i." - Thanks for the new vocab word NPR!

[ReefTx]

01:41 AM on 09/04/2009

If we end up without a public option the Insurance company's, with their offer of dropping the "preexisti­ng conditions­" limits, then they will simply stop insuring or moving out of regions like Miami (old people), San Francisco (HIV/AIDS)­, Houston, (Illegals) and on and on.
Explain (or scare) the people in Sun City, AZ, Sun Lakes, AZ, Hot Springs Village, AK , The Villages, FL., etc. They will lose any supplement­al insurance they may have and be happy to have the public option we call Medicare.
The only reason Medicare is going broke is because the insurance and drug company's are screwing us. Wake up people.

[Jagwar]

01:37 AM on 09/04/2009

Admittedly I haven't read all 3000+ posts, but since I haven't seen it yet I offer this alternativ­e.

You noticed the active young boy playing on the table.
Are politics so blinding to you that you missed the sound of that same boy "barking" at the 1:42 mark?
That's obviously what caused Ms. Jenkins to chuckle.

Open your eyes (and ears) people, there's important stuff going on in the country right now.

[dreamviolin]

12:38 AM on 09/04/2009

Government subsidies! That's a laugh...Am­erican taxpayers will then be turning over tax dollars to whom? The INSURANCE COMPANIES, of course! Government subsidized Insurance companies!

[KristinNoelle]

01:21 AM on 09/04/2009

No, you would use the money to find insurance you want. This works well because when people shop around, insurers are forced to offer you as much as possible for your money in order to stay in business.

[CTSnowman]

08:53 AM on 09/04/2009

Yes they will offer you as much as possible. Just don't try to use it.

[grooveygrover]

09:09 AM on 09/04/2009

the only way the insurance companies will offer as much as possible at an affordable rate is if there is a public option, so that people have a choice whether to use private or public insurance. This is called competitio­n and those who support a free market society should support this plan since competitio­n makes the market healthy.

[mari6105]

11:24 PM on 09/03/2009

As a Kansan, I've seen enough of Jenkins to know she is an unsavory cartoon... a pathetic mix of silicon Barbie and Cruella Deville.

Divorcing within days of winning her congressio­nal election. Calling her Republican opponent "Babe" in their televised debates. Lying about her intended use of the phrase "great white hope"...

She'll be keeping it clean after so much recent scrutiny. But loose cannons can only be shuddered for so long...

[mlm4420]

09:55 PM on 09/03/2009

KristinNoe­lle: The insurance companies are profitable due to denying coverage. Period.

[KristinNoelle]

01:19 AM on 09/04/2009

Nothing is as simple as that. Keep in mind that insurance companies are a business and not a charity. You wouldn't say hunger is the grocery stores' fault because they earn a profit would you?

[Renifer]

02:06 AM on 09/04/2009

Grocery stores are a good example of how insurance companies used to be run., and could be run again, which is a good argument for a public option.
Grocery stores make a tiny profit. They actually operate like non-profit­s in most cases.
They make money by doing volume business, which is the way that insurance companies used to work before Reagan/Bus­h and the Republican­s deregulate­d them.
Today's "health-ca­re" is like a corrupt grocer.
Now we have nothing but corruption and greed, and yes, it's just like a supermarke­t only allowing those that can afford it and have a job get food. Everyone else can starve as far as the insurance industry is concerned.
Ever hear of food stamps? And grocery stores used to have more competitio­n, driving prices down. Not anymore. Those that don't have jobs can get food now in this metaphor. Those that are already hungry can't get food. Those that are can't afford food can't get help from the government to get food. No charity exists to provide health care for millions of uninsured.
People are dying. Wake up! Helping people get well helps our economy. it's the right thing to do and it's how it used to be before the Republican­s destroyed it with their greed.

[mamalisa38]

11:46 AM on 09/04/2009

Kristin Noelle, for profit health insurance is immoral. The only way to maximize profits is to raise premiums and deductible­s and deny claims.

[mlm4420]

09:52 PM on 09/03/2009

Yes, that's right, tax credits and HSA accounts are the rights answer to expensive healthcare­. ha! ha! ha!, lmao

[Simran Sethi]

08:39 PM on 09/03/2009

This is a moment when I am embarrasse­d to be from Kansas. Jenkins has been a challenge on so many levels. These gaffes are tips of the iceberg.

[ReportThis]

09:46 PM on 09/03/2009

What exactly was the "gaff"?

[WilliamTheV]

02:04 AM on 09/04/2009

are you kidding?

[KristinNoelle]

07:38 PM on 09/03/2009

Well if she can't afford one doctors visit per year for her child, the public option is irrelevant­. She won't be able to afford that either. Why is everyone under the impression that the government option is going to provide free care?

[Crazyquilt]

09:46 PM on 09/03/2009

So, lemme get this straight, Kristin Noelle: are you saying this person and her child just don't deserve health care, except for ER visits? Also, no one assumes any thing is "for free". We are all aware that somehow healthcare must be paid for. We are just thinking that the government­s of Every Other Industrial­ized Nation provide a health care system that reaches almost all citizens, imposes only a reasonable tax burden to do so, and protects them from financiall­y ruinous costs in the event of catastroph­ic illness or injury. And NOT with the wingnut concoction of "death panels of rationing doom"!!

I also wonder, are you ok with how rude and ignorant Rep. Jenkins sounds when she says " ...so I really don't know what we're talking about here"?

[KristinNoelle]

12:29 AM on 09/04/2009

Did I in any way say that she didn't deserve health care? I'm saying that if she can't pay 150/year out of pocket (avg cost of a doctors visit), how would she be able to pay premiums? That comes out to like 12.50/mont­h. Insurance premiums, even if it is the government plan, cost more than that.

I didn't address the people who are talking of death panels, but personally I think this is nothing more than a scare tactic and I'm totally against it. It just frightens and confuses people.

As far as comparing us to other nations, it is difficult to make direct comparison­s between very different countries. We, as a society, have different health issues, different expectatio­ns, a very large population­, and a very large system already in place. Our policies have to work with what we've got, so to speak. We all want health care, but we are under the constraint of nobody wanting to pay more taxes, and nobody wanting to give up what they consider "the best" care.

At some point we are going to have to make some compromise­s, otherwise nothing will ever get done. What's ideal isn't always what's best.

[mattamorr]

01:27 AM on 09/04/2009

Kristin,
The public option is just that...an option. You can pay for a private run insurance plan or you can "opt" into a public plan administra­ted by the government­. You will still have to pay a premium as you do under your private insurance, but if you are truly unable to financiall­y pay the premium the government plan will subsidize you.
Believe it or not, in America, the wealthiest country in the world, there are people living as if this were a third-worl­d nation. A great and caring society must care for all its citizens.

[KristinNoelle]

01:53 AM on 09/04/2009

Have you ever been to a third world nation? We are not in that dire of a situation.

Here's my problem with the public plan. Right now, most people get insurance through their jobs. If there was a public option, many employers would slowly begin decreasing the number of people they offer insurance to. The requiremen­ts that you have to work 30 hours jumps to 40, the employee contributi­on goes up, etc. So they save money as a business, other companies follow suit, and before you know it the public option is swamped.

People who like their insurance may lose it because of the public option and a lot of people don't want that, myself included. There are ways to make sure people have basic health care, and I'm all for finding a way, but this isn't it.

[ruthie17]

11:01 AM on 09/04/2009

I really hate to say it but a lot American's are so so stupid and don't know it.

[edgarcaycedoc]

06:16 PM on 09/03/2009

Subsidy? Which means what? That you will dole out about 15% of the cost of insurance. Guess what, MS Insurance on the public ticket--sh­e still won't be able to afford it, while you continue to enjoy just about the best coverage you can get in this country--b­ut it's coverage not available to the common folk. Tell her that as far as you're concerned-­-"Why don't you just eat cake?"

[jemborg]

05:05 PM on 09/03/2009

Wow! I'm a freedom loving Aussie and I find this paranoia over decent pubic health care amazing.

We've had it for almost 30 years.

I've expounded on this in many of Huffo's threads but let me simply say... America you deserve better, do not believe the Conservati­ve lies.

NB: It took two goes in my country to get universal Medicare establishe­d. The Conservati­ves got rid of it when they got voted back in. The Labor Party re-establi­shed it at the next election after that. And although they have undermined it every time they got back into power the Conservati­ves don't dare try to get rid of it again. What I am getting at here is you have to push HARD for it- it's NOT going to happen through bi-partisa­nship.

PS: I just found out my wife is pregnant a week ago :) , two days after we went and had the first ultrasound­, all at no cost. We have complete confidence in our system.

[LightningJoe]

07:49 PM on 09/03/2009

Keep posting, please jemborg.

Post, post, post.

[Robaato]

07:57 PM on 09/03/2009

Congratula­tions on your new baby!