Re: Socialized medicine for children
- From: "OldGoat" <oldgoatmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 20:45:41 GMT
Dear MJ,
75 billion dollars. That's a lot of money. Maybe if we all move to Iraq in
10 years, we can get all the poor and even regular folks covered by health
insurance.
I want to send this guy a box full of vomit, since he make me want to puke.
$160 billion dollars sent to a country to wage a war that cost invaluable
lives every day (even an average Iraqi life is beyond price, though no one
seems to care about that or the fact this war is killing as many as Saddam
did) not to mention the little pork entitlements attached to every bill. It
doesn't sound like it's too much money to send to keep the occupation going,
but to spend 85 billion to a country that wants to eradicate us, makes much
more sense than helping internal issues.
Makes perfect sense to me.
NOT--og
"Juba" <juba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:11toee.912.17.1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Novak is a right-wing scumbag and he's doing his Chicken Little routine
here, but I hope everything he says is true.
ROBERT D. NOVAK THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
Socialized medicine for children
June 28, 2007
There is no need to wait until a new president is elected next year for
the great national health care debate. It is under way right now,
disguised as a routine extension of an immensely popular, noncontroversial
10-year-old program of providing coverage to poor children. In fact, this
proposal is the thin edge of the wedge to achieve the longtime goal of
government-supplied universal health insurance and the suffocation of the
private system.
The Senate Finance Committee was scheduled to mark up this portentous
legislation expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program
(SCHIP) today, but disagreement over the size of the program and how to
pay for it forced postponement. Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller's version
would triple SCHIP's current five-year cost of $25 billion to a level of
$75 billion. That would grant federal largesse to more than just poor
"kids" (as politicians endearingly call children). An estimated 71 percent
of all American children in families of four making as much as $82,000 a
year would become eligible, with states also continuing current coverage
of adults under SCHIP.
But where to find money to cover the massive cost? Senators of both
parties want to raise tobacco taxes, but that well is not bottomless, as
existing taxes have reduced cigarette smoking. Instead, House Democrats
want to take money from private elements of Medicare instituted by the
Bush administration. The overall effect would make three out of four
American children accustomed to relying on government care no matter what
course their parents take. In sum, SCHIP turns out to be socialized
medicine for "kids" (and many adults).
A principal sponsor of the $75 billion program is Sen. Hillary Rodham
Clinton, whose hand is detected in health care struggles the past 15
years. After the Clinton administration's sweeping "Hillarycare" failed in
1994 and contributed to that year's Republican takeover of Congress, the
first lady miniaturized her goals by limiting coverage to poor children.
Republicans, led by Sen. Orrin Hatch in one of his several collaborations
with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, had lost their revolutionary zeal after the
government shutdown of 1995 and accepted SCHIP as a fallback position at a
beginning outlay of $4 billion a year. It was the bargaining chip given
President Bill Clinton in return for him signing the Deficit Reduction Act
of 1997.
SCHIP over the past decade has been a beloved "kids" program whose faults
were overlooked, much like the Head Start school program. The federal
government has consistently granted waivers to permit 14 states to cover
adults under SCHIP, which now cost $5 billion a year. Minnesota led the
way, with 92 percent of money spent under the program going to adults.
The massive expansion was proposed by Sen. Clinton this year, furthering
her promise of "step by step" advancement toward universal health care.
Her proposal extends SCHIP to families at 400 percent of poverty (or
$82,000 annually). Hatch after 10 years is back again supporting a
Democratic program along with Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Finance Committee's
ranking Republican. But they want a mere $55 billion (a $30 billion
increase), compared with Rockefeller's $75 billion, causing the
postponement of today's markup.
The Democratic congressional majority now faces the consequence of its
"pay-go" mandate to account for higher spending. The Senate's preference
for tobacco taxes runs into current overall cigarette taxes of more than
one dollar a pack, lower legal cigarette purchases and reduced smoking
typified by a 19 percent decline in New York City. More creative funding
comes with Rep. Pete Stark's scheme in the House Ways and Means Committee
for slashing the popular private Medicare program. That not only would
fund an expanded SCHIP but move toward government monopoly over all health
insurance.
An indirect but pervasive impact of Sen. Clinton's grand design would be
the impact in the same family of children who are insured by the
government while their parents are covered privately. Would the children
become accustomed to Washington taking care of them? Would the adults drop
private insurance? The future is now for universal health care coverage,
and President George W. Bush may soon face the decision of whether to veto
it going into the election year.
--
Juba
www.masterjuba.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Socialized medicine for children
- From: Juba
- Re: Socialized medicine for children
- References:
- Socialized medicine for children
- From: Juba
- Socialized medicine for children
- Prev by Date: Chronic-Pain and Canes
- Next by Date: Re: This may be goodbye..
- Previous by thread: Re: Socialized medicine for children
- Next by thread: Re: Socialized medicine for children
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
