Thoughts on SCHIP

On Oct 3rd, the President vetoed H.R. 976, an re-authorization and expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Although the bill passed with a big majority in both houses, our Republican Congressman, Michael Burgess and some other Republicans voted against it, and formed a large enough group that a veto override was not possible.

Since the veto, I've been so thoroughly disgusted with these folks, that it has been difficult for me to write without going very negative, very fast. Further, I've just not had the time to do a bunch of research to put out an all-out dissertation on the subject.

Michael Burgess, perhaps knowing that most Americans favor a re-authorization and expansion of SCHIP, and that this issue will haunt him at re-election time, went on the floor of the house and offered a list of disingenuous excuses as to why he voted against it.

Now, while I would like to offer a point-by-point rebuttal - and this pile deserves it, I do have to work for a living. It's 6:30 am as I write this, and I've got to get my kids up in half an hour. I do want to make several points though.

As you may know, SCHIP was meant to cover the near-poor. Medicaid covers folks living below the poverty level. SCHIP can cover children in families from the poverty level to around double the poverty level - about $40k per year for a family of four. The system is not perfect, and some states like Texas screw it up - but, it's something.

As you may have heard, the expansion of the program was going to increase the income limits to 3 or 4 times the poverty level. This angers some people, so the congressman gathered a bunch of misleading statistics based on covering ALL children in those income ranges. It's bogus. In some very limited areas of the country, people making $60 - $80k per year actually do have a very hard time getting by because of the cost of living, and the cost of housing. We're not talking about North Texas here. This is only for a couple of states. Further, not every parent in these income ranges is going to choose SCHIP rather than private coverage, even if it is a financial stretch. Once again, Burgess and the others are playing on fears of "socialism".

Secondly, speaking of playing the fear card, opponents have been whining about SCHIP covering "illegal aliens". Not only is this just false based on the text of the bill, but it is a morally and ethically wrong argument. Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat, voted against the bill specifically because it excluded the children of aliens.

Children, regardless of their parents actions, are not EVER "illegal". We live in a nation of great affluence where we can well afford to provide quality medical care for ALL children. Providing coverage for children does not equate to a giveaway for aliens. The kind of care that these children get now equates to emergency charity care which puts an extremely unfair burden on border states and border areas. Illegal immigration is a federal problem that needs to be fixed by the federal government. As long as the children are here, the federal government needs to take responsibility and pay for their medical insurance.

Lastly, after years of running up a nearly 10 Trillion - oh, let me write that out long-hand: $10,000,000,000,000 national debt, spending almost $9 billion per month in the occupation of Iraq. Republicans like Burgess suddenly decide that $40 billion over 10 years for SCHIP is going to bankrupt us.

Let me put that number in perspective:
- Getting out of Iraq 4 1/2 months early would pay for the program for 10 years.
- With a U.S. population of 300 million people, this costs about $133 for each man, woman, and child over the next ten years - about $13.30 per person, per year.
- This is about 3.6 cents per day per person.

To me, paying $13.30 per year and knowing that my country is doing what it can to ensure health care for children is worth it. As a nation, we can afford it and it's in our best interest to ensure that our children all get a good start. I pay ten times as much to support public radio. The fact that Michael Burgess and John Cornyn, on their $165k per year salaries balk at this amount, even when they have the Congressional health plans for themselves really shows where their hearts aren't.

Congress goes back to the drawing board now to try to get a decent bill to re-authorize SCHIP. Burgess claims that he really wants to re-authorize it, but it just has a few problems. He'll get another chance to have some input, and maybe he can make his amendments in order this time. I just hope for the sake of our nation's children that this doesn't turn into a platform for immigrant-bashing and privatization experiments.

Update: We have started a petition to tell Michael Burgess, John Cornyn, and the other members of Congress that voted against SCHIP that we can afford the cost. Please Sign NOW!