Editorials, Opinion Pieces Address SCHIP Reauthorization, Enrollment Guidelines

Main Category: Medicare / Medicaid / SCHIP
Article Date: 06 Sep 2007 - 17:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

Several newspapers recently featured editorials, opinion pieces and a letter to the editor addressing SCHIP reauthorization and new enrollment guidelines. Summaries appear below.

Editorials

• Akron Beacon Journal: Data released by the U.S. Census Bureau last week "should be push enough for Congress to get on with the unfinished business of authorizing an expansion of" SCHIP, according to a Beacon Journal editorial. In passing SCHIP bills that would expand the program, the House and Senate "recognize the need to take care of the children while the nation remains deadlocked on the question of how best to ensure an affordable health care system" (Akron Beacon Journal, 9/3).
  
  
• Hartford Courant: The Bush administration's new guidelines for SCHIP enrollment "tighten income eligibility levels to an unreasonable point" when the "goal should be to reduce the number of uninsured children," the Courant writes in an editorial. It continues, "It makes no sense to penalize states like Connecticut that have been at the forefront of creative ways to make affordable health care available to working families" (Hartford Courant, 9/2).
  
  
• Long Island Newsday: The Census data, which found that 8.7 million children in 2006 were uninsured, "has framed in sharp relief the debate in Washington over whether to expand" SCHIP, according to a Newsday editorial. President Bush, who has threatened to veto SCHIP legislation, "comes off looking downright churlish," and "Congress has to find a way to block his ideological attack on its practical answer for uninsured kids," the editorial states (Long Island Newsday, 9/4).
  
  
• New York Post: The Bush administration "is trying to put the brakes on a health-cartel gravy train that states are increasingly exploiting to achieve their own agendas," the New York Post writes in an editorial. The editorial continues, "The fact is that the state initiatives are barely disguised plans to inch toward universal government-run health coverage -- 'universal health care,' as the advocates have it -- via the back door." It concludes, "The administration is right to put the brakes on this train before it goes completely off the tracks" (New York Post, 9/2).
  
  
• New York Times: The Bush administration's new guidelines for SCHIP that make it difficult to expand eligibility beyond 250% of the federal poverty level seem "too stringent" because a "compelling case can be made for raising the limit to at least 300%, and there are plausible reasons in some states for going higher," a New York Times editorial states. "The sad fact is that health care costs and insurance premiums have soared far above levels that existed when SCHIP was created. What used to be a problem for low-income families has become a problem for the middle class as well," the New York Times concludes, adding, SCHIP "needs to reflect that" (New York Times, 9/2).
  
  
• Orlando Sentinel: "America's fractured health care system desperately needs attention and, so far, Congress and ... Bush have been content to play partisan politics while more and more families join the ranks of the uninsured," according to a Sentinel editorial. Congress and Bush "need to end the election-year games and compromise to save" SCHIP -- "one of the few government successes in a litany of failures," the editorial continues. The editorial asks, "If Congress and Mr. Bush can't find common ground for America's children, what hope is there for the other problems in the health care system?" (Orlando Sentinel, 9/3).
  
  
• Philadelphia Inquirer: The increasing number of uninsured children "is a clear call to action" that Bush might "be able to sidestep, but certainly not his successor," according to an Inquirer editorial. "There is no excuse whatsoever for Bush administration policies designed to thwart an expansion of children's health insurance," the editorial continues, adding that "states need to keep pushing the envelope on expanding access to affordable health care," which "means doing more to reach out to families that might be eligible for Medicaid" (Philadelphia Inquirer, 9/3).
  
  
• Washington Times: SCHIP "is already being stretched beyond its intended parameters," and Democrats "would like to extend that boundary even further," a Washington Times editorial states. According to the Washington Times, "While Democrats might be eager to facilitate" a shift from private to government-sponsored health insurance "as a precursor to introducing a more sweeping transition to government-run health care in 2008," the U.S. taxpayer "certainly isn't." The editorial concludes, "Bush has vowed to veto the costly expansions passed by both the House and the Senate, and he has good reason to do so" (Washington Times, 9/4).
  
  
• Wichita Eagle: Critics "should recognize that SCHIP is not a big-government behemoth so much as a proven 50-state partnership with the federal government that has comparatively low overhead and a market-friendly network of private health-care providers," an Eagle editorial states. The editorial continues, "States want to expand it because it works." According to the Eagle, "Some Republicans have valid concerns about an SCHIP expansion, especially how to pay for it, how to keep it from chipping away at employer-based coverage and how to keep states from adding adults to their plans." The editorial adds that these concerns "all ... can be addressed as lawmakers reconcile differing House and Senate bills this month" (Wichita Eagle, 9/4).
  

Opinion Pieces, Letter to the Editor

• Keith Dveirin, Arizona Daily Star: The provision of the new SCHIP enrollment guidelines that mandate children be uninsured for at least one year before being eligible for SCHIP "should be met with outrage by all," Dveirin, a pediatrician and president of the Arizona chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, writes in a Daily Star opinion piece. Dveirin continues, "It is a draconian measure (conveniently announced while Congress was not in session), and it benefits no one except the health insurance industry." The administration's new rules "are short on compassion" and "place the multibillion-dollar profits of the health insurance industry ahead of the health of our children. This is a shame we should not accept," Dveirin writes (Dveirin, Arizona Daily Star, 9/3).
  
  
• Andrew Grossman and Robert Moffit, McClatchy/Minneapolis Star Tribune: It is "clear that expanding SCHIP isn't so much about helping poor, uninsured children get the coverage they need" but "an effort to chip away at private health coverage and move more and more people into a government-controlled health program," Grossman, a research editor at the Heritage Foundation, and Moffit, director of the foundation's Center for Health Policy Studies, write in a McClatchy/Star Tribune opinion piece. Grossman and Moffit write that SCHIP "expansion advocates ... consistently voted down amendments designed to keep the program's focus on serving uninsured poor kids." They conclude, "The needy children, one fears, are just heart-rending props, meant to distract attention from the fact that Congress is moving ever closer to creating a government monopoly over health care" (Grossman/Moffit, McClatchy/Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/4).
  
  
• Karen Ignagni, Washington Post: An Aug. 21 editorial that "apparently agrees" with cuts to Medicare Advantage plans found in the House SCHIP bill "distorts the facts," Ignagni, president and CEO of America's Health Insurance Plans, writes in a Post letter to the editor. Ignagni continues, "The push to cut reimbursements ignores the value not only of the added benefits but also of bringing coverage choices to more areas, as Congress mandated in 2000." She concludes, "There's no justification for pitting children against seniors. The Senate would fund SCHIP by raising the tobacco tax -- a fair and balanced approach" (Ignagni, Washington Post, 9/2).
  
  
• Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio), Washington Times: Democrats "have proven to be one-trick ponies" on taxes, who "rather than pursuing real spending reform" have "singled-out tax increases as a 'silver bullet' solution to any and every problem facing our nation," House Minority Leader Boehner writes in a Times opinion piece. Boehner asks: Did Democrats "attempt to forge a bipartisan consensus as Republicans did 10 years ago, when we established" SCHIP? "No," Boehner writes, adding that instead, Democrats "merely voted to levy an unprecedented new tax on every American who has a private health insurance plan and an incredible 115% to 2,200% tax increase on tobacco" (Boehner, Washington Times, 9/4).
  

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.

• Additional
• References
• Citations