Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, March 30, 2007
Ed Feulner :: Townhall.com Columnist
It's time for a dose of reality in federal health-care spending
by Ed Feulner
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Seven states, however, provide benefits to families earning much more. Four of them (Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri and New Jersey) extend SCHIP coverage to three times the poverty level ($60,000 for a family of four). If these expansions continue, we could soon be at the point where a family is simultaneously eligible for SCHIP and yet subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax. That would be ironic because the AMT was created to make sure the wealthy paid their "fair share" of income taxes.

Meanwhile five states (Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Wisconsin) cover parents and even childless adults. This gets expensive -- and quickly. In fact, the federal General Accountability Office says, in the 14 states that went over budget in 2005, more than half of the SCHIP recipients were adults. This in a program aimed at helping "the children."

Not surprisingly, Washington has been bailing out states that spend too much. Congress spent $283 million to paper over last year's "shortfall," and will almost certainly have to spend more this year. The House already voted to add $750 million in "emergency" SCHIP funds and the Senate will more than likely follow suit.

This needs to change. It's time to bring SCHIP back into line and keep it from turning into another entitlement funded on taxpayers' backs.

Congress created the program to help poor children, not to give states another excuse to shower "free" benefits on middle-class families. By bailing out those states that spend too much, Washington simply encourages more extravagant behavior.

States are aware how much they'll get in SCHIP funding each year, and they should plan to spend only that much or less. If they want to expand their programs and end up going over budget, they should be prepared to pick up the bill, not pass it on to the rest of us.

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | < Previous
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dr. Edwin Feulner is president of The Heritage Foundation, a Townhall.com Gold Partner, and co-author of Getting America Right: The True Conservative Values Our Nation Needs Today .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Ed Feulner's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Was Once Not Possible
The tenth amendment, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." originally would have stopped this kind of largess. It is largess, on the surface meant to help those in need, but underneath to ensure a block grant for a block of votes - it is about keeping power and using the general Treasury to buy it. I think that is what is meant in Article I, "...to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States"; not general welfare to provide just whatever to anyone in need, but not to corrupt the purpose of the Treasury. What happened to the courts when Congrefs started to overstep its authority? Oh, probably on the take like the States, respectively, or the people.

Sick Insurance
Health insurance should be called sick insurance, because you use it when you are sick, not when you are healthy. Life insurance should be called death insurance, because it is used when you die, not when you have life. See how words are twisted to make things sound better? Real health insurance is eating well and exercising regularly. Get it?? Now politicians are calling it sick insurance "healthcare". I thought that was what you went to the doctor for. Another slick change in words. If you don't have "sick insurance" you must be be healthy. I dropped "sick insurance" 15 years ago when the cost got too high. At $300 per month for 15 years I have saved $54,000. I work out three times a week and watch what I eat. Since dropping insurance have seen a doctor maybe once or twice and paid for my medicine and visit. Saved a lot didn't I? Years ago we had no "sick insurance" and paid for our doctors visits and medicine. You bought a "major medical" policy, which was for hospital stays and major illnesses. Why do we not have that now??? Why does everyone want to have every little bill paid for by insurance, while the cost gets higher and higher. Wake up, folks. The original way worked better.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.