View Full Version : Speedy, can you explain SCHIP again?
It got lost in the multitude of other interesting posts.
Can you explain again who covers children in families with incomes too great for Medicaid eligibility, but not enough to afford private insurance?
I will answer my own question, which interestingly is not exactly what Speedy explained in another thread. (Which I have been unable to locate so far).
As you can see, the extra money will come from a 61-cent-per-pack increase in the federal tax on cigarettes.
I fail to see why this would be a bad thing to do, considering what cigarettes do to your health.
"The SCHIP program covers about 6 million children whose parents earn too much to qualify for Medicaid, the federally funded program providing health care for the poor, but can't afford private health insurance.
The bill the House and Senate passed in September would extend eligibility for the program to about 4 million more, paying for the expansion with a 61-cent-per-pack increase in the federal tax on cigarettes."
House Democrats will keep fighting to expand the state-run Children's Health Insurance Program even if they fail Thursday to override President Bush's veto, the speaker of the House said.
Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, vowed Thursday that they would not let up. "There will be no compromise on 10 million children's health care," Emanuel told CNN. "We won't go above it, but we ain't going below it.
"The American people support this issue because kids do not need to suffer for what is basically a broken health care system, and this provides those children with that health care," Emanuel said.
/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif
The Bush administration on Monday asked for an additional $42.3 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, bringing the 2008 request for total war funding to $189.3 billion.
/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif
/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif
The request comes on top of $147 billion already sought for in the wars. Most of the money goes to Iraq, which is costing the Pentagon an estimated $2 billion a week.
No wonder the US economy is going down!
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAH
Now that I come to think of it, it might have been cheaper, easier and cost way less lives if they would have purchased Iraq from Saddam instead of invading it. I am sure 2 Billion a week for the past 5 years and counting would have been seen as a very nice cash flow...
DoubleXL
10-24-2007, 11:23 AM
Sounds like socialized WAR to me. Seems like the government is not only financing the war, but the money is also being used to pay for services in Iraq, including healthcare.
In America though, children are not important enough to survive. If you are a sick poor child, you may as well hang up your sneakers now...cuz your gonna die!
House Democrats on Thursday failed to override President Bush's veto of a children's health insurance bill that opponents said was too expensive.
Bush was "pleased," the statement said, that the "misguided legislation" was defeated.
The issue has ignited an intense two-week struggle on Capitol Hill after Bush vetoed the proposed five-year expansion and $35 billion spending increase. Bush proposes increasing the program by $5 billion.
Before the vote, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spoke of a middle-class family caring for a child with a birth defect, asking lawmakers: "So when the president wants to have 4 or $5 billion for children in this initiative, is he the one, the decider, who wants to go to that family and say, 'Your child is out'?"
"We're lobbying for all of the children," said the California Democrat.
The SCHIP program covers about 6 million children whose parents earn too much to qualify for Medicaid, the federally funded program providing health care for the poor, but can't afford private health insurance.
The bill the House and Senate passed in September would extend eligibility for the program to about 4 million more, paying for the expansion with a 61-cent-per-pack increase in the federal tax on cigarettes.
The Bush administration on Monday asked for an additional $42.3 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, bringing the 2008 request for total war funding to $189.3 billion.
The request comes on top of $147 billion already sought for in the wars. Most of the money goes to Iraq, which is costing the Pentagon an estimated $2 billion a week.
Solution : 3 days of stopping the war can insure 4 million US children.
The US health care system at it's best.
President Bush and other critics of a $35 billion spending increase for children's health insurance say they'll support expanding coverage to families of four making as much as $62,000 a year, but they want to limit states' ability to go beyond that level.
About three dozen states ignore certain income when determining who can get government-subsidized health coverage. For example, many states exclude child support payments. Others deduct expenses for child care when determining who qualifies for the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
Congress is considering the renewal of SCHIP for an additional five years, but differences remain over who the program should cover and how much money should be spent. The flexibility that states have in defining income is one of the differences that will probably need to be resolved for Democrats to override a promised veto from Bush.
So far, the issue of "income disregards" has received little attention, but that started to change in last week's debate on the House floor.
"You leave it up to the states to say you can't have an income level over 300 percent (of poverty), but you can deduct $20,000 for a housing allowance or you can deduct $15,000 for shelter or whatever," said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas. "So, what you've got here is the classic bait and switch."
Rep. John Dingell, D-Michigan, said that allowing states to exempt some income helps to ensure that low-income families don't have to resort to welfare to get health care for their children.
Another disagreement over the program's future is over the coverage of adults, even though the Bush administration approved most of the waivers that allowed adults into the SCHIP program. Now, the administration wants to remove those adults from the SCHIP rolls more quickly than called for in the bill that passed the House last week.
Under that bill, states would have to move an estimated 200,000 childless adults off SCHIP within one year. Also, by 2010, waivers covering about 500,000 parents would be paid from a separate fund. States that perform well on covering low-income children could continue covering parents through that fund, which would get a lower federal matching rate than under current policy, Dingell said.
Just last year, administration officials testified during congressional hearings that extending SCHIP coverage to parents increased the likelihood that their children would get health insurance too. But Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt now calls the coverage of parents an experiment that took resources away from poor kids. About a dozen states received waivers to cover parents through SCHIP.
"All adults should be moved off SCHIP when their state waivers come up for renewal or within one year, whichever comes sooner," said a policy statement issued by the White House last week.
The administration remains adamant that it won't support a tobacco tax increase to pay for SCHIP's expansion. Instead, it's calling on lawmakers to pick from $96 billion worth of new fees or spending cuts that were part of the president's budget this fiscal year. However, most of those proposals generated little support in Congress.
Among those recommendations were higher co-payments at the pharmacy for some veterans who are not disabled. Their copays would increase from $8 to $15 under the president's budget, saving about $1.6 billion over five years.
Bush also wants to make higher-income Medicare recipients pay more for their drug coverage as well as for their insurance for doctors' visits. Higher premiums for the drug benefit and doctors' services would generate more than $10 billion over five years, according to his budget.
The bill to expand SCHIP relies on a 156 percent increase in the federal cigarette tax, taking it to $1 per pack from the current 39 cents.
Supporters of the tax increase cite high public support for a tobacco tax. The Kaiser Family Foundation released a poll Friday showing that about 70 percent of those polled supported expanding SCHIP by $35 billion through higher tobacco taxes.
Tobacco tax supporters say higher prices for cigarettes deter smoking and save lives.
"The health benefits of higher cigarette taxes are substantial," says a 1990 report from the surgeon general. "By reducing smoking, particularly among youth and young adults, past tax increases have significantly reduced smoking-related morbidity and mortality."
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/29/childrens.health.ap/index.html
How come Speedy hasn't defended this?
Huggy85
10-29-2007, 08:43 PM
Because once speedy can no longer find some way to justify ending his posts with "I win", he loses interest.
Winning is only a mindset. It isn't as concrete as being right. So maybe he does win all the time but that does not make him right.
Trick or treat!
The Senate passed a new bill Thursday expanding a popular children's health insurance program, despite the lingering threat of a veto from President Bush.
The bill -- which boosts the number of low-income children covered by the State Children's Health Insurance Program -- was recently passed by the House, but without the veto-proof margin it received in the Senate.
Bush vetoed the first SCHIP bill and is expected to veto this one.
"There's a bill moving through Congress that's disguised as a bill to help children, but I think it's really a trick on the American people," the president said Wednesday.
Speedy, which trick is your President talking about?
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.7 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.