* The House and Senate sent a hugely expanded version of the SCHIP
program to the President and the President, as promised, vetoed
the bill.
* First things first. SCHIP is not pronounced "ship." It is
pronounced "ESS-chip."
* Now for the dead lock bar bet: SCHIP stands for  State Children's
Health Insurance Program.
* Which, of course, it is not. It is a FEDERAL children's health
insurance program but "EFF-chip" wasn't ever going to fly if only
because it sounds too much like F-Troop.
* According to PBS, the original CHIP (no S) program was adopted in
1997 having been supported by President Bill Clinton.
* The idea behind this program is a worthy one: To provide health
insurance to children whose families are too poor to afford the
premiums on their own, but make too much to qualify for coverage
under Medicaid.
* The program which has been in effect covers young Americans up to
the age of 18 with a family income of not more than twice the
official poverty level.
* According to the Department of Health & Human Services web site,
in 2007 a family of four was deemed living at the poverty level if
it had an annual income of not more than $20,650. That level of
income for a family of four would qualify as poverty in 2007 under
any fair assessment.
* A child in that family qualifies for health care through Medicaid
but a family making a total income of $30,000 would not. Under the
existing SCHIP guidelines a child with a family income of up to
$40,000 would qualify.
* But, the Democrats' re-do has upped the income level for a child
to qualify to $83,000 - FOUR times the poverty level (at least in
New York) which is an income stretching the definition of
"poverty" to the point of snapping.
* Not only that, but the Democrats' bill redefines a "child" as
someone up to age 25, stretching the definition of "child" to Â
well, you know.
* There may be people who believe that if you can't afford health
insurance for your kids, that's just too bad, but I am not one of
them. The kids didn't ask to be born - and they certainly did not
ask to be born into a family earning just 200% of the poverty
level.
* Of course, the Popular Press has joined with its allies in the
Democratic Party to portray President Bush as being anti-child.
The Washington Post's Michael Abramowitz and Jonathan Weisman led
their piece thus: Continued... |