How to Override Bush's Child Health Insurance Veto

Much-deserved outrage has met George W. Bush's "heartless" veto of House Resolution 976, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act.

The veto is a powerful attempt by the president to squash a popular bipartisan initiative, in which the government would subsidize health care for children in families of four or more that have an annual household income of $62,000 or less. These millions of families in America are making too much to qualify for Medicaid, but not enough to be able to afford expensive private insurance. Bush sees it as a step towards evil "socialized medicine."

The bill to expand SCHIP (State Child Health Insurance Plan) would cost an additional $35 billion over five years. To say that the Bush administration has spent with abandon would be a titanic understatement (We're $3 trillion in debt), yet now they claim that $35 billion for kids' health care is too pricey. Democrat Rahm Emanuel calculates that $12.2 billion (roughly the cost of 41 days of the U.S. military presence in Iraq) could insure 10 million American children.

Any of Bush's claims to be "fiscally conservative" or "compassionately conservative" have long been smashed to dust. "Just don't get sick, kids," Bush may as well have said at his Lancaster, Pennsylvania announcement of the veto. "Ignore your asthma, too. If things get really bad, just wait it out in the emergency room. If your family is squeezed to afford market-priced private insurance, you're just not living within your means. It's your fault, not mine!"

It may also be worth noting that all 159 representatives--except the Diaz-Balart brothers of Florida-- who voted against expanding SCHIP (which covers millions of minority children) are white.

This anti-child health insurance position is a loser, morally and politically, for Bush and his followers. New York, California, New Jersey, and several other states are suing the Bush administration over blocking SCHIP. The Senate already has enough support for a two-thirds override of the presidential veto.

The House, however, is about 15 votes short of the necessary two-thirds majority. America's struggling children desperately need fifteen members of the House of Representatives to change their minds on this issue over the next two weeks.

Who actually might switch their vote? I've done some checking, and below are eight Democrats and thirty-eight Republicans who have proven themselves not to be straight-down-the-line partisan hacks.

Their names are listed here because they voted AGAINST the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act. However, they voted FOR H.R. 2, which will raise the minimum wage over a two-year period.

If there is an exclamation point (!) next to their name, that representative also voted FOR H.R. 1, a vote to implement many of the remaining recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. Republicans who voted yea on these bills broke ranks with the G.O.P. majority. Their votes to raise minimum wage could indicate empathy for low-income American families. Perhaps their minds can be changed on helping those minimum and near-minimum wage families get health care.

It takes just a few minutes to Google any of them and let them know how you feel about their votes against child health care. They still have an opportunity to change their minds and override Bush's veto. The people on this list are the ones with the power either to turn their backs, or to offer health care to 10 million American children. There is no longer any middle ground.

Democrats

Dan Boren (!)
Kathy Castor (!)
Bob Etheridge (!)
Baron Hill (!)
Dennis Kucinich (!)
Jim Marshall (!)
Mike McIntyre (!)
Gene Taylor (!)

Republicans

Robert Aderholt
Rodney Alexander (!)
Spencer Bachus
Judith Biggert
Gus Bilirakis (!)
Jo Bonner
John Boozman
Ginny Brown-Waite (!)
Ander Crenshaw
Geoff Davis
Lincoln Diaz-Balart (!)
Mario Diaz-Balart (!)
John 'Jimmy' Duncan
Randy Forbes
Rodney Frelinghuysen (!)
Virgil Goode
Bob Goodlatte
Robin Hayes (!)
Kenny Hulshof (!)
Tim Johnson (!)
Walter Jones (!)
Ric Keller (!)
Randy Kuhl (!)
Kenny Marchant
Thad McCotter (!)
John Peterson
Mike Rogers (!)
Hal Rogers
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (!)
Jim Saxton
Jean Schmidt (!)
John Shimkus (!)
Lamar Smith (!)
Cliff Stearns
Greg Walden (!)
Zachary Wamp
Jerry Weller (!)
Ed Whitfield

Comments

[splashy]

I already told Boozeman that I am for him voting for the SCHIP program. Of course, he will most likely send be some BS about how he thinks differently.

I can't wait until he is out and hopefully we can get someone in that is decent. But, since Wallyworld is based in his district, THAT probably won't happen.

[kali4niadazed]

This country is going to hell in a hand basket. Bush's wife is holding the basket for him, keeping it safe. What a crock of sht this country is becoming. impeach impeach impeach the dumb f

[Calico369]

WHY would we want BUSH's veto over-ridden? Because the liberal dems want to cover ILLEGAL ALIENS? NOT!!!!!!!!

[author1]

Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is mounting a campaign to override Bush's veto on SCHIP. I urge everyone to congratulate Grassley on his efforts because hearing from all of us will inspire him to maintain the fight and it may also encourage other Republicans to hop aboard.

[drblack]

I cannot believe it but I actually support this veto because we should all pay for it...not just tobacco users.
It should be redesigned to put a tax on everyone and especially on luxuries.

[wrabbitt]

has this not gone far enough? try this on The ACLU has decided that lethal injection is cruel and inhuman treatment. well heres a way to fix that We enrole all death row inmates in HMO's then when their benefits are denied they die as do 18000 every year. the difference being it is not cruel and inhuman to deny heath care but, it is to hurt some on who has been given a death sentence. SHAME ON US

[blankmw]

I agree that in principle we should all pay, but, even as an ex-smoker who had a lung removed due to lung cancer, I still think that we should INSIST that children get their health care NOW, and argue about finessing the funding later. We can always expand the sources of funding to make it more equitable later.

[BoulderSue]

blankmw: you are right-everyone should contribute. I am an ex-smoker, fortunately no lung problems as of now, but I agree with you. Get this passed as is now and find other funding means-maybe some sort of luxury tax or other "sin" tax?-later. The kids can't wait and anyway, a high tax on cigarets (is other tobacco included?) might make a lot of people stop smoking or cut down: definitely a bonus, but would shrink the funding base. I spend more money on little luxuries that I can now afford since I don't smoke and would gladly endure a small value-added tax or "luxury" tax. It all adds up...

[Dansden]

Dan Boren from Oklahoma is a 'CLOSET REPUBLICAN' LIKE HIS DADDY, DAVE BOREN....
YOU CANNOT RUN OKLAHOMA UNIVERSITY unless the REPUBLICAN PARTY endorses you in Oklahoma!
Oklahomans made a serious mistake when they elected Dan Boren over the much smarter, harder-working and more dedicated public servant, DR. KALYN FREE!

Dr. Kalyn Free has been instrumental in training, encouraging and electing MORE NATIVE AMERICANS TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND STATE AND NATIONAL LEGISLATURES THAN ANYONE IN THE NATION! Her website: www.indnslist.org
reflects more integrity than Dan Boren's 'closet Republican' votes in ULTRA RIGHT-WING Southeast Oklahoma. That is DR. KALYN FREE, OKALHOMA SETTLED FOR THE LIKES OF DAN BOREN, JIM INHOFE, TOM COBURN....OWNED AND PIMPED BY THE REPUBLICAN MACHINE OF THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN.

[Galt907]

taxing cigarettes is the same as taxing blacks? You mean we are capable of choosing our skin color/origin, but not our vices? Good argument if you are making it to the carpet. Yes, if raising the tax on cigarettes makes people stop smoking, we will have to (eventually) seek other sources of financing health care for our children. In the meantime, how many children will be saved? As far as the states paying for their own plan . . .Why? Should we make people decide where to reside based upon the benefits offered by the state? The lack of care for our children is a national disgrace, and should be resolved by national action. Apparently, as someone enamored by your daily dose of "cancer sticks" (also referred to lovingly as "coffin nails") you would prefer to balance your chosen vice on the shoulders of children . . .now that's a generous offer.

[dora rice]

America needs health insurance for ALL. Get it. We don't need health insurance for children, women , men, and what other creatures. We need to follow finally into the rest of the civilized world's foostep and have Universal health insurance.

[wrabbitt]

we need to vote out those who oppose universal health care or at least the lobbyists. is it not illegal to give someone money for a favorable vote???

[TheBlues]

Since obesity causes health problems I propose extra taxes on all candy, junk food and fast food including soda pop. Alcohol causes health problems, accidents and domestic violence so extra tax on alcohol plus the taxes on candy, junk food and fast food. I also propose fines for all employers who refuse to comply with OSHA. Add it all up - and there you go - enough money for universal single-provider health care. That will give Americans the edge to compete against healthier better-educated foreigners in the "global economy".

[Bridwell]

Someone PLEASE help me!!! I've tried googling Baron Hill to email him to try and tell him to vote for this children's heatlthact, tried going to multiple sites, ad yet i still cannot find any way to do it!. if anyone could help me oout on this, feel free to post a respose or email me with link at [e-mail]...Thank you very much!


p.s. I'm a smoker who KEEPS getting the prices of ciggarettes raised and am VERY mad about it but if it'll save just 1 childs life by rasing the price 100%, then DO IT!!!

[Kendo Nagasaki]

Mr Bridwell, you might want to consider stopping smoking to save your own life and cut your future medical bills.

[Pete Ross]

Use this link for his House of Reps webpage.
There's a link (button) to email him on it.

http://baronhill.house.gov/

[twillercat]

You sound like you've bought into the slave mentality..."I'm a smoker, beat me some more, I deserve it". Nonsense. Have a little pride. You do not deserve to be taxed unfairly. What's going on sounds like something the Republicans would have cooked up, not the Democrats. I mean, my income is about half the amount of some of the people who'll be getting help from SCHIP!!! There's something terribly wrong with that!

[AxelDC]

Dennis Kucinich voted against this? I was aghast to find the 8 Democrats voted against this bill, but Dennis Kucinich?? How could he ever expect to represent the part in the White House by supporting George Bush on this?

Of course Bush is evil and Republicans are his minions, but if 8 Democrats all vote for this, the only need 7 Republicans. But Dennis Kucinich???

[Susanholmes]

Did he vote against it or was he just not there?

[edpaz]

I just wrote a blistering e-mail to Dennis Kucinich. You can do so by going to the Kucinich for President web site at http://www.dennis4president.com/ He needs to be deluged with citizens protesting his stand on SCHIP.

I too find it unbelievable that he would not support overriding the veto.

[twillercat]

Dennis Kucinich has enough sense to analyze beyond the superficial press releases. Not only does SCHIP's funding structure rely on a reverse-Robin-Hood taxation scheme (I'm a smoker whose income is way under that of some of the folks who'll be helped by SCHIP. SCHIP is also a boondoggle for insurance companies, who'll get most of the bucks.

The whole thing sounds more like a Republican plan than a Democratic one.

[areacode631]

I just e-mailed him to thank him. It's the first sensible thing he has ever done...after that, he's just a nut!

[janellrcarter]

Are the folks who opposed this legislation -- including Alfred E. Bush -- the same ones who championed the pharmaceutical mogel-enriching Medicare drug-coverage bill? Isn't that entitlement far closer to "S"-word medicine than this SCHIP bill -- especially considering that it covers Medicare-eligibles regardless of their ability to pay? What are these white-privileged, "I got mine, screw you" good-old boys (and girls)scared of? Having a healthy, economically secure populace is far more vital to national security and the future viability of this country than any pre-emptive tar-baby war.

[janmB]

Some of the argument is that some kids will get the free stuff when their parents earn what they consider too much money.
Our gov't employees i.e. like our lawmakers--administration get FED paid healthcare and they make over $80,000 a year I'm sure and that comes under a bit of "socialism" that nasty word used to insult entitlements that is unless it is for certain people.

[lpe397]

What W. fails to recognize is that while $80,000 a year in the middle of the country might be great it's just above the poverty line in NYC. If he's going to be a prick about who and who does not qualify on some of these numbers then he should suggest a viable alternative... such as indexing the salary cap for obtaining benefits based on the cost of living/inflation rate in the location the children live. That is... instead of spewing the party line.

[TankerRat]

So move somewhere else. So Sorry about you're inflated "cost of living" in the Big Apple.

[rmirman]

SCHIP only helps children not insurance companies so why should Bush be for it? There is more to the issue. See
randomabsurdities.wordpress.com

[caseyblab]

Why isn't Bush on board with health care for poor kids- does he think that the children of the rich will be out there fighting wars that neocons think are necessary for the rest of us?

[DRaymond]

The letter I e-mailed to my congressman:

Why do Republicans hate children so much?

As you prepare to saddle them with yet another 190 billion dollars of war debt what would be so tough about spending a little bit already completely funded by a tobacco tax to see that they all get good medical care? Good care as children is already known to improve their health and productivity as adults, and they are certainly going to need it.

And I'm not buying any platitudes about 'socialized medicine'. There is plenty of knowledge of how care is cheaper and lifespans longer in nearly every other industrialized country not to be scared of that old rhetorical strawman anymore. Until we can fix it for everyone at least we should fix it for our children.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to really understand what drives political issues. Who really has a reason to be against an this bill? Big Tobacco, because they are the ones who will have their profits cut into by this tax.

I know enough not to expect an answer to this, but how much have you and your colleagues been promised for killing this bill? Oh maybe not directly, but in 'independent expenditure issue ads'?

You've sold out children's health for some tobacco industry cash. I hope your'e proud of yourself, because I'm not.

[Kendo Nagasaki]

For Bush the right to life ends at birth.