"For the children"....INCOMING
Whenever you hear a government program glowingly described as “for the children,” hit the dirt and hold onto your wallet. Using kids as pawns is a tried and true political gimmick. You can hide all sorts of government “sneaky sneaky” under the guise of “we have to do it for the children”. SCHIP is the latest example of feeding misinformation to the American public by the do-gooders of this country, those who know what is best for you.
SCHIP, the federally mandated State Children’s Health Insurance Program, is a truly needed and valiant effort on the part of Congress to provide health insurance to the kids of what are described as the nation’s working poor. Enacted in 1997, it was directed at those families who made too much money to qualify for Medicaid, but whose income was as such that it would put an “undue” financial burden on the family to purchase health insurance privately if not provided by an employer.
As originally designed, it covered those families whose income was under 200% of the federal poverty level (approximately $21,000.00) or $42,000.00. But that has creeped up. Depending on the state in which the family lives, a family of four could make up to $60,000.00/ year and still qualify for the program. The Bush administration recently capped the amount to 2.5 times the poverty level, or $50,000.00.
This past week, Congress sent an increase in SCHIP benefits package to President Bush for signature. He vetoed it, and the media and Congress have been having a circus over Bush vetoing health care benefits “for the children.” We have money for war, but not the children-n-n-n-n-n. How cold!!! How disgraceful!!!
Here are the facts. When SCHIP was first passed in 1997, it covered 5 million children at a cost of $24 billion matching federal dollars. By 2006, program creep had it covering 6.9 million children with $40 billion in matching federal dollars. The new legislation would have increased SCHIP spending by an additional $35 billion dollars to cover 10 million children. Wait a minute, do we have 10 million poor children in America?
Here is the problem. Nobody is quite sure who this is supposed to cover, or why. It definitely does one thing: it raises the income of a family of four back to $60,000.00 to qualify for the program. On its face, it actually appears to raise the income limit for the proverbial family of four to $80,000.00 while still being able to qualify. In effect, a family of 4 with an $80,000.00/year income is now defined as “working poor.” The bigger problem is that if one of the parents carries health care benefits at his/her place of employment, and is paying a premium for the family coverage, they are able to opt out of the private policy, pocket the premium money, and enroll their children into the SCHIP program. Of course, we all will be paying for it, or will we?
How is this to be paid for? With a cigarette tax of 60-80 cents per pack. Given that most smokers are members of the so called working poor, indeed, the just plain poor, it is a regressive tax on those that can least afford it. Of course, the government do-gooders want you to stop smoking. If you want the benefit without paying for it, just do what government tells you to do.
That, my friends, is socialized medicine. And you wonder why W vetoed the bill.
SCHIP, the federally mandated State Children’s Health Insurance Program, is a truly needed and valiant effort on the part of Congress to provide health insurance to the kids of what are described as the nation’s working poor. Enacted in 1997, it was directed at those families who made too much money to qualify for Medicaid, but whose income was as such that it would put an “undue” financial burden on the family to purchase health insurance privately if not provided by an employer.
As originally designed, it covered those families whose income was under 200% of the federal poverty level (approximately $21,000.00) or $42,000.00. But that has creeped up. Depending on the state in which the family lives, a family of four could make up to $60,000.00/ year and still qualify for the program. The Bush administration recently capped the amount to 2.5 times the poverty level, or $50,000.00.
This past week, Congress sent an increase in SCHIP benefits package to President Bush for signature. He vetoed it, and the media and Congress have been having a circus over Bush vetoing health care benefits “for the children.” We have money for war, but not the children-n-n-n-n-n. How cold!!! How disgraceful!!!
Here are the facts. When SCHIP was first passed in 1997, it covered 5 million children at a cost of $24 billion matching federal dollars. By 2006, program creep had it covering 6.9 million children with $40 billion in matching federal dollars. The new legislation would have increased SCHIP spending by an additional $35 billion dollars to cover 10 million children. Wait a minute, do we have 10 million poor children in America?
Here is the problem. Nobody is quite sure who this is supposed to cover, or why. It definitely does one thing: it raises the income of a family of four back to $60,000.00 to qualify for the program. On its face, it actually appears to raise the income limit for the proverbial family of four to $80,000.00 while still being able to qualify. In effect, a family of 4 with an $80,000.00/year income is now defined as “working poor.” The bigger problem is that if one of the parents carries health care benefits at his/her place of employment, and is paying a premium for the family coverage, they are able to opt out of the private policy, pocket the premium money, and enroll their children into the SCHIP program. Of course, we all will be paying for it, or will we?
How is this to be paid for? With a cigarette tax of 60-80 cents per pack. Given that most smokers are members of the so called working poor, indeed, the just plain poor, it is a regressive tax on those that can least afford it. Of course, the government do-gooders want you to stop smoking. If you want the benefit without paying for it, just do what government tells you to do.
That, my friends, is socialized medicine. And you wonder why W vetoed the bill.
Comments