Another SCHIP, Another Veto, Another Failure to Address the Real Problem
Daniel Downs
October 26, 2007
Democrats passed their new State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) bill yesterday. If it passes the Senate, President Bush has already promised to veto it. The following is a summary of his reasons:
"The Democrats' new legislation continues to cover children in families earning more than $62,000 per year (300 percent of the Federal poverty level)."
"The Democrats' new legislation continues to allow States to avoid covering poor children first."
"The Democrats' new legislation continues to raise taxes to move 2 million children covered by private health insurance onto government-run programs with fewer choices and longer lines."
"The Democrats' new legislation continues to allow SCHIP to cover ineligible individuals." According to the House Republican Conference analysis, the new legislation also raises the age of eligibility from 19 to 21. It still fails to prevent adults including those without children. Democrats claimed the new bill would prevent illegal aliens from receiving benefits, but no citizenship test is actually required.
"The Democrats' new legislation shifts more responsibility to the Federal government."
According to the House Republican Conference, SCHIP also employs a budget gimmick in order to comply with pay-as-you-go. From 2008-2012, funding levels will increase to more than $8.4 billion a year, then after 2012, the funding level will drop off to only $600 million in 2013. CBO previously reported that this type of budget gimmick will cause 6.5 million children to lose their SCHIP coverage by 2017. In addition, CBO indicated it will cost an extra $40 billion to allow these children to continue on SCHIP.
The House Republican Conference also claims the bill “increases the rate of excise taxes … on tobacco products and cigarette papers and tubes."
This increases the tax on:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said polls show over 80% of Americans favor SCHIP. It is true most Americans believe SCHIP is a good idea, but do they really favor the Democrat’s version?
Earlier in October just after President Bush vetoed the previous SCHIP bill, a survey was conducted by the joint efforts of NPR, Kaiser Family Foundation, and Harvard School of Public Health. That survey showed 70% of Americans support the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Although 67% said government is not doing enough alleviate the many children without health insurance, over 52% said they had heard very little about the debate on the issue. An additional 28% said they had heard only some. This means 80% of Americans actually know very little about the issue. Apparently, the media is not doing a very good job informing the American people, and I suspect what they are reporting is biased.
When asked about whether SCHIP was a step toward government-run health care, 52% of Americans said they it was not while 40% said it was. According to half of Americans, universal health care would be good, but to 44% it was regarded negatively. As indicated above, most Americans do not actually know the details of SCHIP, nor have they been told that people eligible for SCHIP will be the ones who will pay for the increased tobacco taxes.
As mentioned above, the new SCHIP bill would allow households with incomes $62,000 or more to receive benefits. According to the survey, 92% of Americans said that was unacceptable. To about 68% of Americans, the most acceptable income level was around $30,000 or 150% above the poverty line. The current 200% level or $40,000 was unacceptable to 63%.
What Americans are really saying is that they want children of poor families to have adequate health care coverage. Many of the tricks of the liberal trade would not likely be acceptable if Americans knew about them.
What is not being addressed is whether SCHIP is right for America? It is presumed that it is, but is it? The answer is yes and no. Under the current welfare economy, yes, it is good for those whose parents actually cannot afford health care for their children. That seems to be the view portrayed by the survey responses. That was why in 1997 Republicans created and fully funded SCHIP.
However, when one looks beyond the surface of the issue, the answer is no. The welfare program was sold to America as the solution to increasing poverty. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt sold America on their presumed economic rights, it was tied to post-war needs and a declining economy. The federal government’s manipulation of the economy did not improve the recession then occurring; it was made worse. It is true; the lifestyle of the poor did improve over time, but it did not alleviate poverty. Instead, economic socialism has kept millions of Americans poor economic dependents of the federal government. It has maintained poverty for political benefits. After all, who would not vote for their beneficiaries?
Why didn’t liberals want welfare dollars channeled through businesses? Why didn't they devise a program to empower businesses to hire, to train, and to pay the poor a livable wage? That would have increased employment, helped business grow, and created many more economically independent Americans.
The answer to those questions may be found in the fact that no welfare legislation can be justified by the Constitution. No such powers are mentioned. Any lawmaking authority concerning the poor belongs to the states. They are more than capable of raising taxes for the same purpose, which makes the federal-state partnership not really necessary.
Besides, religious institutions are still more capable and effective than state or federal bureaucracies.
SCHIP is not good for Americans because welfare is obviously not the solution to poverty. The long-term solution to SCHIP or any part of the socialist economy is a return to moral principles of law and economic independence of capitalism that make people more important than political power and corporate profits.
A hand up is always more humane than a hand out.
According to the House Republican Conference, SCHIP also employs a budget gimmick in order to comply with pay-as-you-go. From 2008-2012, funding levels will increase to more than $8.4 billion a year, then after 2012, the funding level will drop off to only $600 million in 2013. CBO previously reported that this type of budget gimmick will cause 6.5 million children to lose their SCHIP coverage by 2017. In addition, CBO indicated it will cost an extra $40 billion to allow these children to continue on SCHIP.
The House Republican Conference also claims the bill “increases the rate of excise taxes … on tobacco products and cigarette papers and tubes."
This increases the tax on:
- Cigars from 20.719% to 53% with a $3 per cigar cap;
- Cigarettes from 39 cents to $1;
- Cigarette papers from 1.22 cents to 3.13 cents;
- Cigarette tubes from 2.44 cents to 6.26 cents;
- Snuff from 58.5 cents to $1.50;
- Chewing tobacco from 19.5 cents to 50 cents;
- Pipe tobacco from $1.0969 to $2.8126; and
- Roll-your-own tobacco from $1.0969 to $8.8889
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said polls show over 80% of Americans favor SCHIP. It is true most Americans believe SCHIP is a good idea, but do they really favor the Democrat’s version?
Earlier in October just after President Bush vetoed the previous SCHIP bill, a survey was conducted by the joint efforts of NPR, Kaiser Family Foundation, and Harvard School of Public Health. That survey showed 70% of Americans support the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Although 67% said government is not doing enough alleviate the many children without health insurance, over 52% said they had heard very little about the debate on the issue. An additional 28% said they had heard only some. This means 80% of Americans actually know very little about the issue. Apparently, the media is not doing a very good job informing the American people, and I suspect what they are reporting is biased.
When asked about whether SCHIP was a step toward government-run health care, 52% of Americans said they it was not while 40% said it was. According to half of Americans, universal health care would be good, but to 44% it was regarded negatively. As indicated above, most Americans do not actually know the details of SCHIP, nor have they been told that people eligible for SCHIP will be the ones who will pay for the increased tobacco taxes.
As mentioned above, the new SCHIP bill would allow households with incomes $62,000 or more to receive benefits. According to the survey, 92% of Americans said that was unacceptable. To about 68% of Americans, the most acceptable income level was around $30,000 or 150% above the poverty line. The current 200% level or $40,000 was unacceptable to 63%.
What Americans are really saying is that they want children of poor families to have adequate health care coverage. Many of the tricks of the liberal trade would not likely be acceptable if Americans knew about them.
What is not being addressed is whether SCHIP is right for America? It is presumed that it is, but is it? The answer is yes and no. Under the current welfare economy, yes, it is good for those whose parents actually cannot afford health care for their children. That seems to be the view portrayed by the survey responses. That was why in 1997 Republicans created and fully funded SCHIP.
However, when one looks beyond the surface of the issue, the answer is no. The welfare program was sold to America as the solution to increasing poverty. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt sold America on their presumed economic rights, it was tied to post-war needs and a declining economy. The federal government’s manipulation of the economy did not improve the recession then occurring; it was made worse. It is true; the lifestyle of the poor did improve over time, but it did not alleviate poverty. Instead, economic socialism has kept millions of Americans poor economic dependents of the federal government. It has maintained poverty for political benefits. After all, who would not vote for their beneficiaries?
Why didn’t liberals want welfare dollars channeled through businesses? Why didn't they devise a program to empower businesses to hire, to train, and to pay the poor a livable wage? That would have increased employment, helped business grow, and created many more economically independent Americans.
The answer to those questions may be found in the fact that no welfare legislation can be justified by the Constitution. No such powers are mentioned. Any lawmaking authority concerning the poor belongs to the states. They are more than capable of raising taxes for the same purpose, which makes the federal-state partnership not really necessary.
Besides, religious institutions are still more capable and effective than state or federal bureaucracies.
SCHIP is not good for Americans because welfare is obviously not the solution to poverty. The long-term solution to SCHIP or any part of the socialist economy is a return to moral principles of law and economic independence of capitalism that make people more important than political power and corporate profits.
A hand up is always more humane than a hand out.
(See also the text of the new SCHIP bill HR 3963.)
Print
Email
