Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report Highlights Editorials, Op-Eds About SCHIP Veto

Main Category: Medicare / Medicaid / SCHIP
Article Date: 16 Oct 2007 - 5:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

Summaries of editorials and opinion pieces addressing President Bush's veto of legislation that would have reauthorized and expanded SCHIP appear below.

Editorials

• Akron Beacon Journal: SCHIP is a "key block to building a healthier future for children," a Beacon Journal editorial states. Lawmakers need to "ensure that children are not the losers in this high-stakes policy battle by voting to override the veto," the editorial adds (Akron Beacon Journal, 10/12).
  
  
• Augusta Chronicle: The "big picture" about the SCHIP bill is that it is "simply ... bad legislation, for so many reasons: It doesn't make poor children a priority because it also covers adults; it undermines private insurance; it sets the nation on the path to socialized medicine; and it feeds yet further an already-bloated government," a Chronicle editorial states. The editorial concludes that a "better way to take care of future generations would be to stop robbing them now to pay for overinflated vote-buying programs" (Augusta Chronicle, 10/12).
  
  
• Sioux Falls Argus Leader: The SCHIP debate "was not over" with President Bush's veto because an override vote "still looms," an Argus Leader editorial states. The editorial adds that although there are "flaws" in the legislation, the "millions of children who have no insurance and little hope of getting any outweigh" the concerns (Sioux Falls Argus Leader, 10/11).
  
  
• Wall Street Journal: Democrats have criticized Bush for his veto of the SCHIP bill and have "spurned" his offer to "compromise and spend more than the $5 billion he would prefer to pump" into the program, but they should support his proposal for a "modest expansion," a Wall Street Journal editorial states. According to the editorial, Democrats and Bush agree that "it is hard for some lower-income families ... to find affordable private health coverage," but they disagree about "what the government should do about it." The "Democratic position is clear: Expand a government program and all will be cured," the editorial states, adding, "Bush's position recognizes that a subsidy like SCHIP is necessary in some cases because of government mandates and overregulation," as "Congress and the states consistently enact health care policies that make insurance coverage more expensive" (Wall Street Journal, 10/13).
  

Opinion Pieces

• Stuart Butler, Akron Beacon Journal: "Congress could do three things to craft a bipartisan compromise" for SCHIP -- "reauthorize SCHIP by focusing on enrolling all the kids it was intended for," give states "more latitude to use existing federal programs and money in more innovative ways to expand coverage, especially for children," and "provide a tax credit of $1,200 for health insurance for each child between 200% and 300%" of the poverty level, Butler, vice president for domestic and economic policy at the Heritage Foundation, writes in a Beacon Journal opinion piece. Butler adds that it is "time to skip the recriminations and get busy crafting a compromise that actually works" (Butler, Akron Beacon Journal, 10/12).
  
  
• Martin Schram, Boston Herald: "Bush's mishandling" of the SCHIP bill has "angered two groups: Republicans and Democrats," columnist Schram writes in a Herald opinion piece. He suggests that Democrats could achieve a "simple compromise" that would give them "one big bold action they can tell voters their Congress achieved," but they might "want to avoid a compromise so they can tell voters that Bush and the GOP are to blame for the fact that children remain uninsured." Schram concludes that the "health of children is at stake and that makes Pin the Tale on the Elephant an unconscionably dangerous game to play" (Schram, Boston Herald, 10/12).
  
  
• Sen. Tom Fiebiger (D-N.D.), Fargo Forum: "It is incomprehensible and unconscionable how this president can demand almost $200 billion for the war in Iraq and then refuse to spend an additional $35 billion over five years to provide for the health care needs of poor children," Fiebiger writes in a Forum opinion piece. He adds, "We are the richest country in the world," yet "we continue to nickel and dime our children on a basic human rights issue such as health care" (Fiebiger, Fargo Forum, 10/11).
  
  
• David Lazarus, Los Angeles Times: The SCHIP bill represents an "incremental step toward government-run insurance for every American," and "with 47 million people now uninsured, I'm having a hard time seeing how this would be such a bad thing," columnist Lazarus writes in a Times opinion piece. According to Lazarus, a single-payer health insurance system would ensure access to coverage and reduce costs for most U.S. residents, as well as "create enormous savings by standardizing clerical procedures" (Lazarus, Los Angeles Times, 10/14).
  
  
• Grace-Marie Turner, San Jose Mercury News: The SCHIP bill would expand the program to middle-income families, and the "president is absolutely right in insisting that SCHIP focus on its core mission of needy children," Turner, president of the Galen Institute, writes in a Mercury News opinion piece. "No one doubts that SCHIP is a vitally important program for needy children and that our nation needs to do a better job of helping working families afford health insurance," she writes, adding, "But giving the states incentives to add middle-income kids to their SCHIP rolls will prompt families to replace private insurance with taxpayer-provided coverage" (Turner, San Jose Mercury News, 10/14).
  
  
• Michelle Malkin, Washington Times: As Democrats "push for an override of the president's veto," they "shamelessly invoke the Absolute Moral Authority kiddie card to attack their critics for 'attacking the children,'" syndicated columnists Malkin writes in a Times opinion piece. She cites the recent delivery of the Democratic radio address by 12-year-old Graeme Frost, an SCHIP beneficiary who was injured in a car accident three years ago and whose SCHIP enrollment has come under scrutiny from certain sectors. She continues that in light of the fact that "conservatives ... across the Internet" are now beginning to ask the "questions that mainstream media wouldn't," Democrats "sorely resent that they can no longer" continue using "human shields to deflect any tough scrutiny" (Malkin, Washington Times, 10/12).

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