SCHIP: 41 Days, 10 million Reasons, and President Bush's Priorities
Last week, I came to the Huffington Post to speak about what I called "one of the most important actions of this new Congress" when the House voted with overwhelming bipartisian support to renew and improve the State Children's Health Insurance Plan (SCHIP).
Today, in a move that surprised no one, President Bush unceremoniously used his dusty veto pen on SCHIP. And while the president's veto may have been expected, it should not diminish the gravity of his decision to rip away health insurance from the 6 million American children already covered by SCHIP and to prevent another 4 million from being insured.
Numerous governors from both parties stand in united support of SCHIP. You may have seen New York's own Governor Spitzer's post here at the Huffington Post earlier this week about the devastating effect this veto will have on the children of New York and America.
SCHIP currently provides health care coverage to six million children that otherwise would not. Nearly 400,000 children are enrolled in New York alone, the second highest number in the nation. The bill we passed last week with the support of more than 45 Republican Members of Congress adds coverage for more than four million children, to insure ten million.
SCHIP is a program both enormously popular with the public and already proven enormously successful. It is the reason why President Bush pledged on the campaign trail in 2004 that "America's children must also have a healthy start in life. ... we will lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of poor children who are eligible but not signed up for the government's health insurance programs. We will not allow a lack of attention, or information, to stand between these children and the health care they need."
Perhaps the most stunning fact is that the entire cost of the SCHIP program to insure 10 million American children is equivalent to the price of about 41 days of the president's War in Iraq. 41 days in Iraq. There has perhaps never been a more stark contrast between the president's priorities.
Now that the president has chosen to ignore the 10 million reasons to support SCHIP, the battle returns to Congress where I will be leading the fight to override the president's veto because the health of millions of children the president deems unimportant are literally on the line.
Comments for this post are now closed
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Louise,
Thank you for taking a stand for our children. I am a fellow New Yorker, however, you are not my representative. Regardless, I wanted to let you know that I am proud to have you as a representative from New York, and I wish all of your House colleagues could see this issue as the no-brainer that it is. It is appalling that in this day and age any of our children go without healthcare, food, and quality education. For those out there whose circumstances have been fortunate and have never needed help, shame on your for having no compassion and no common decency regarding your fellow man. You should be grateful that you've never needed any assistance, and that you and/or your family could afford quality health insurance and food, and were able to obtain quality public or afford private educations.
The bottom line:
Everyone should learn to fend for ones self, to be productive, to be self reliant, contribute constructively to the world as a whole. If you want to voluntarily help your neighbor that is your personal choice.
The SCHIP legislation is a welfare program plain and simple.
This isn't a cost issue. This is a national security issue. Just as educating our children and maintaining a strong manufacturing base are national security issues. The man in the White House has framed every disgusting, criminal and immoral thing he has done as a national security issue. It's about time we start talking about real national security issues. A strong, secure America means a healthy, well educated America that still has the ability and the knowledge to make its own stuff. But, what do I know? I'm just a voter who thinks in terms of common sense, not in terms of how to get the most money for the next campaign.
Some do, some don't want social medical coverage, others want private for profit insurance coverage.
Can't we have both?
A basic Social coverage plan for family's and singles encouraging patients to stay healthy and seek early diagnosis and treatment. There would be a premium just like any insurance today.
Competing Plan would be the private insurance providers, with their competing plans, options and pricing.
This would give the system real competition over coverage options and pricing.
PS: Social Security Insurance is not a government entitlement program. SIS is paid out of payroll with holdings contributed half by employer the other half by the worker.
This is socialized insurance and it is minimal at best. Without this compulsory insurance
coverage tens of million of citizens would be where ? Do you hear the flushing sound?
There is room for more than just A versus B thinking.
Stay gutsy, Louise.
The paid hyenas who trash your views here put that macho dimwit in the White House, but some of us have kids ourselves and have led working lives without cash subsidies from our parents, and we treasure your eloquence and your courage in this dark hour of the Republican twilight of the selfish.
Bush sublimates his guilt about dodging the draft into what he seems to think is military courage, and, duped by his own mental and psychological limitations, he treats our children as though they were the Iraqis he inflates his ego by demonizing.
Your common sense and clarity of vision and voice are much appreciated here. Let's end this con-game and clean out the White House.
I support the program but NOT how you want to fund it. Why not a luxury tax or a tax on the rich?
Stop it with the "sin" taxes. I cannot believe I support bush on something he has done.
As usual, this bill AGAIN punishes responsible parents and rewards irresponsible ones.
When economists correctly pointed out that there are millions of kids out there ALREADY being insured by their middle class parents, and that this bill would cause many of them to STOP paying for that insurance and instead hopping onto SCHIP, what do the libs say?
Do they say "Well, they may not need it, but it will help them nonetheles
Do they say "SCHIP is better than their insurance anyway." No.
They say "Well, we will make sure that anyone currently paying for insurance is DENIED this benefit." This, of course, punishes them financially for being responsible. IF ONLY they had let their children go uninsured like other irresponsible parents, they too would be able to ride the government gravy train...
Where is the condemnation of the parents of these children? Why don't they take responibility for of their own children?
Not including those few that have extraordinary situations beyond their own control, these people should be held accountable for their actions.
For those of you are are so concerned, feel free to go to any of a number of charities and make a donation for the children of these selfish parents. that is what charities are for, not the government.
You libs are so predictable.
Every story is just a road bump on your segue to Iraq....
The money spent in Iraq has been spent, and respent, and respent at least 7 bajillion times over in the liberal mind.
Our national debt just recently surpassed 9 trillion dollars. Our Social Security system is going into deficits in 7 years. Our medicare system is a multitrillion dollar ponzi scheme waiting to implode. Now is not the time to be fantasizing about how to spend more money.
THANKS FOR THE VETO, PRESIDENT BUSH!!
I do not want my taxes paying for 18-20 year olds and for families making up to $80,000 TO GET FREE LUNCHES (NEW SCHIP)!
THEY SHOULD GET A JOB!
DO YOU WANT TO PAY MORE for adult day care 18-25 year olds and RATIONED health care? (Excuse me Mr. Patient with the painful hip, but you need to get in the long line for your hip replacement. Bear the pain for another 6-12 months, sir/madam.
This is just a sneaky inroad (you aint seen nothing yet) to Socialistic Queen Hillary controlling rationed health care meaning more taxes paid by both liberals and conservatives, not just the rich making $200,000 and up.
Thanks again, Mr,. President!
Poor Liberal & Conservative Tax Payer
Thank you for your diligent work, Representative Slaughter. I have admired your intelligence and hard-driving determination to do the right thing time and again. You make me proud to be a woman and a Democrat.
My son goes to a school for kids with special needs. Some of the kids in the school will be booted off of CHIP because of the President's veto. These families don't have the resources to get health insurance. These children will suffer because of this veto, some have health situations that could deteriorate if they don't have access to health care. Anyone who supports the President and this veto cannot be considered "pro-life.
That is a lie! The president vetoed the legislation because it adds children from families above the poverty level, which is the same as welfare for the underserving. If a family of four (with parents making $80,000 per year) has a special needs child, there are already programs in existence to help them.
Enough is enough. This bill was poisoned by the democrats playing their same old tricks of attempting to make conservatives look heartless. It's shameless. And it's b.s.!
President Bush:
"The policies of the government ought to be to help people find private insurance, not federal coverage."
He's right.
President Bush:
"The policies of the government ought to be to help people find private insurance, not federal coverage."
He's right.
"Bush vetoed because it would allow children already covered under private insurance to leave private insurance and get under the government-run system."
That's right! Children would get off the private health care system because PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE IS UNAFFORDABLE! It's no coincidence that the second highest number of children enrolled in the program live in New York. Because New York (as well as New Jersey, Maine, and some other states) have private health insurance rates so high that even high-income families can't afford it. We're talking rates of $1,500 a month and MORE. The only way these children would be covered is through SCHIP.
Oh, I forgot. Iraq is far more important than "entitling" our children to health insurance. What was I thinking?
THANKS FOR THE VETO, PRESIDENT BUSH!!
I do not want my taxes paying for 18-20 year olds and for families making up to $80,000 TO GET FREE LUNCHES (NEW SCHIP)!
THEY SHOULD GET A JOB!
DO YOU WANT TO PAY MORE for adult day care 18-25 year olds and RATIONED health care? (Excuse me Mr. Patient with the painful hip, but you need to get in the long line for your hip replacement. Bear the pain for another 6-12 months, sir/madam.
This is just a sneaky inroad (you aint seen nothing yet) to Socialistic Queen Hillary controlling rationed health care meaning more taxes paid by both liberals and conservatives, not just the rich making $200,000 and up.
Thanks again, Mr,. President!
Poor Liberal & Conservative Tax Payer
We could give children in this country healthcare for the same amount of money that 2months in Iraq has cost us. The President's agenda is himself and only that. Judge a country on how it treats it's children. This is shameful.
Loading comments…
Posted October 3, 2007 | 11:47 AM (EST)