Bush Threatens to Veto Children's Health Insurance Bill

[MAGICBULLET]

Source: AP

LANDOVER, Md. (AP) - President Bush on Wednesday reiterated his threat to veto Senate legislation that would substantially increase funds for children's health insurance by levying a 61-cent-a-pack increase in the federal excise tax on cigarettes.

-snip-

On Friday, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the Senate signaled their support for a $35 billion increase, bringing total funding to $60 billion over five years. The Senate proposal would provide health insurance coverage to current participants as well as an additional 3.3 million uninsured children, according to estimates from the Congressional Budget Office.

The American Hospital Association, the American Medical Association and the American Cancer Society support the increase. But the administration, which has consistently refers to SCHIP as government-run health care, says billions of dollars in insurance costs will be shifted from the private sector to the federal government under the Senate proposal.

Bush spoke after attending a round-table discussion at Man & Machine Inc. here with small business leaders the president said feel pinched by high health care costs. "They don't like the idea of having to make the decision between providing health care for their employees and not expanding their businesses," he said.


Read more: http://www.katv.com/news/stories/0707/440374.html

[AndyA]

1. But government-run health care is good enough for Bush, and Congress, right?

I mean, isn't that what THEY have?

We should cut their health care, and make them use whatever all the rest of America gets, which is nothing. Hypocritical assholes.

When in the hell are we going to get our country back from these crooks?

[DemoTex]

2. Come, now. That comparison is unfair to crooks.

These bastards are murderers. Child murderers.

[MAGICBULLET]

3. this quote is what I'm having a difficult time grasping

"They don't like the idea of having to make the decision between providing health care for their employees and not expanding their businesses"

Shouldn't he make that decision for them??

[xxqqqzme]

8. single payer here in CA in opposed by my rethug

state senator. He had a big op-ed in the 'local' paper recently, attacking Sicko. A good friend who leads the 'One Care' fight locally, had a stunning pint by point rebuke published. My response, on-line, was just as you state - WHO pays for their health insurance? Are they willing to withdraw from their publically funded plan and seek ther own private coverage?

I'll not hold my breath.

[thetaoofterri]

12. 551 days, 7 hours, 51 minutes. . .

And counting!!

[maddezmom]

4. MAGICBULLET please edit you subject line to reflect actual title of the article

Thanks in advance :)

[wakeme2008]

5. THIS IS PAID FOR BY A TAX ON CIRARETTES

what does this have to do with BUSINESS and them not expanding.

[seriousstan]

15. Where does the money come from as more people stop smoking.

Certainly 63 cent tax will reduce smoking. Where does the money come from then? After all, the VAST majority of the cigarette lawsuit money never went to health and prevention like it was supposed to. The overwhelming majority of it was simply put into the states general funds.

[ProudDad]

17. That was those smokers in State Government

"The overwhelming majority of it was simply put into the states general funds."

:evilgrin:

[Forrest Greene]

6. Dueling Quotes

"They don't like the idea of having to make the decision between providing health care for their employees and not expanding their businesses."

— G.W. Bush


"Growth at any cost is the ideology of the cancer cell."

— E.P. Abbey

[onethatcares]

7. if I read this correctly, we can smoke in restaraunts and anywhere else

because people will expand their businesses and not have to fork out anything for employee healthcare due to second hand smomke. How hypocritical can a government be? Making people not smoke in their establishments due to health concerns then support federal subsidies for the growth of tobacco.

[Eugene]

9. Bush veto threat on health bill draws criticism

Source: Reuters

Bush veto threat on health bill draws criticism
Wed Jul 18, 2007 4:12PM EDT

By Stephanie Beasley

LANDOVER, Md., July 18 (Reuters) - A veto threat by
President George W. Bush over a measure to expand a
government health program for children triggered
outrage on Wednesday from congressional Democrats
and advocacy groups.

-snip-

Former Sen. John Edwards, a Democratic presidential
candidate, called Bush's veto threat "heartless and
shortsighted."

-snip-

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. John Kerry, who lost
to Bush in the 2004 election, accused him of clinging
to "unworkable proposals" for health care and a "wrong-
headed tax scheme" and urged him not to veto the
children's health legislation.

-snip-

"Unfortunately, the biggest threat to the health and
well being of our nation's children is the Administration's
own budget proposals and veto threats," Lesly said in
a statement.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN18316179

[0007]

10. I certainly don't understand why junior is doing this....

Amounts of SCHIP funds receive annually is determined according to a formula based on the number of uninsured, low-income children in the state and a geographic health care cost factor. Participating states use most of their SCHIP funding to provide health insurance to uninsured children who could not otherwise be covered under the state's plan alone.

What is the parameters or junior's idea of small business?

"They don't like the idea of having to make the decision between providing health care for their employees and not expanding their businesses".....this statement makes no sense to me what-so-ever!!

[DrDan]

11. so let him veto it

that should take him to single-digits

[RushIsRot]

13. Hey, the hypocritical asshole got 'em born! After that, they are

on their own!

[Seashell Eyes]

23. Exactly

Who cares? They're not fetuses. :sarcasm:

[rpannier]

14. What disgusts me the most about this is, a spokesman for the white wash...er...house

said they were concerned that if this bill passed it might encourage people to drop private insurance for their children in favor of this health insurance plan.

GOD FORBID the private insurance industry should possibly lose a client that they don't drop themselves.

[ProudDad]

16. I suspect that if any of the pukes

who are standing for re-election next year actually want to get re-elected, they'd better vote to override this veto.

For another take:

Health Care vs. the Profit Principle
by Barbara Ehrenreich; Huffington Post; July 14, 2007

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barbara-ehrenreich/health-care-vs-the-profi_b_55941.html

"It's always nice to see the President take a principled stand on something. The man formerly known as "43," and now perhaps better named "29" for his record-breaking approval rating, is promising to battle any expansion of government health insurance for children -- and not because he hates children or refuses to cough up the funds. No, this is a battle over principle: private health care vs. government-provided health care. Speaking in Cleveland this week, Bush boldly asserted:"

"I strongly object to the government providing incentives for people to leave private medicine, private health care to the public sector. And I think it's wrong and I think it's a mistake. And therefore, I will resist Congress's attempt ... to federalize medicine...In my judgment that would be -- it would lead to not better medicine, but worse medicine. It would lead to not more innovation, but less innovation." <<CROCK OF SHIT -- ProudDad>>

"Now you don't have to have seen SiCKO to know that if there is one area of human endeavor where private enterprise doesn't work, it's health care. Consider the private, profit-making, insurance industry that Bush is so determined to defend. What "innovations" has it produced? The deductible, the co-pay, and the pre-existing condition are the only ones that leap to mind. In general, the great accomplishment of the private health insurance industry has been to overturn the very meaning of "insurance," which is risk-sharing: We all put in some money, though only some of us will need to draw on the common pool by using expensive health care. And the insurance companies have overturned it by refusing to insure the people who need care the most -- those who are already, or are likely to become, sick."



Have I told you lately how much I loath this person, his handlers and owners and their WHOLE fucked up philosophy???

Profits over Children's Health...way to go shithead...

[Tracer]

18. And guess what else the moron said >>>>>

(word for word from this morning's Boston Globe editorial page, print edition)

--------

Bush has made another curious argument: "People have access to healthcare in America," he said last week in Cleveland. "After all, you just go to the emergency room.'

But these treatment center of last resort are expensive and unnecessry for routine care. It's far healthier – and more cost-effective – when patients get preventive care or early treatment at a doctor's office. That the kind of care encouraged by S-Chip.

-----

[happyslug]

19. Could this go back to his days as GOVERNOR? And his opposition to CHIP at that time?

Molly Ivins reported in her book on Bush that he opposed the CHIP program while governor of Texas for the simple reason the number one reason people who applied for CHIP were denied CHIP was they were eligible for Welfare Medical Assistance (i.e to poor for CHIP). Know CHIP was 100& Federally Funded, but Welfare Medical Assistance (Like all welfare) was 50% Federal, 50% State funded. Thus most states under the CHIP program saw an increase in WELFARE medical payments (as did Texas as people found out they were eligible for Welfare Medical Assistance). Bush did everything he could think of to stop this. For example he tried to make it a rule that if you applied for CHIP and was denied for you were eligible for Welfare Medical Assistance, you had to make a different Application on a different day (Hoping people would NOT come back, this option was DENIED by the Federal Government under Clinton). Bush hated CHIP for it reversed his policy of reducing State Welfare costs (The cost reduction was caused by stating eligible was DOWN so that people would not apply, but the CHIP program was advertised and caused people to apply for it and the find out they were eligible for Welfare Medical assistance).

Furthermore, many Governors may still fear the CHIP program, i.e. increase CHIP funding would lead to more people applying for CHIP and finding out they eligible for Welfare Medical Assistance instead. Many Governors (a lot of them Republicans) HATE this for it would increase their state costs (do to the 50-50 funding of welfare). I fully suspect Bush's opposition to CHIP is related to his time as Governor BUT also his belief that CHIP funding will hurt Republicans Governors and Republican controlled Legislature in that the states would have to increase taxes to pay for all the people denied CHIP for they are eligible for Welfare Medical Assistance. I also believe Bush fears that if CHIP is improved, the Democrats will get the Credit and help the Democrats win in 2008 and 2010. Thus Bush opposes CHIP.

[Dulcinea]

20. Let me get this straight:

SCHIP is for poor kids whose families can't afford private insurance. So how would these families choose private insurance that they can't afford?

The mind reels. :banghead:

[divinecommands]

21. Purpose of SCHIP

The original aim of SCHIP was to provide health care for children in families earning two times the poverty level or less: too poor to afford private insurance, not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid. At that income level, there is no substitution effect. If you raise that threshold -- directing money to children in families earning 3 or 4 times the poverty level, as some have suggested -- then private-for-public substitution is more likely to occur.

Moreover, every dollar spent providing health care for middle class families who might otherwise be able to afford private insurance is a dollar not spent providing health care for truly poor children. Imho, the funding for SCHIP should be increased, but not the eligibility threshold.

[radfringe]

22. words of wisdom dribble from the butt of bush

Won't somebody PLEEAASE think of the insurance companies?

[flaminbats]

24. if marijuana was legal, Bush wouldn't tax it!

after all..higher taxes on joints of pot would only reduce hurt investments badly needed to stimulate weed production, thus reducing employment among drug pushers!

we can't stop people from smoking weed just by taxing it, if people want to smoke it they will! healthcare for kids?? what about the poor taxpayers who already pay too much for every joint they smoke? :smoke: