Editorials, Opinion Pieces Discuss Veto Of SCHIP Expansion Bill

Main Category: Medicare / Medicaid / SCHIP
Article Date: 19 Oct 2007 - 11:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

Summaries of several recent editorials and opinion pieces that examine the recent presidential veto of legislation to reauthorize and expand SCHIP appear below.

Editorials

• Akron Beacon Journal: "Extending coverage to 5.8 million more children, the majority of whom would otherwise have no health insurance, certainly justifies the spirited effort to overcome the White House" veto of the SCHIP bill, a Beacon Journal editorial states. "That's not to say the debate on either side in this showdown has been beyond reproach," but the legislation "has the merit of providing affordable health care for millions more children," the editorial states, concluding, "If any veto deserved an override, it is the SCHIP veto" (Akron Beacon Journal, 10/17).
  
  
• Los Angeles Times: "This bears repeating: President Bush's bullheaded insistence on sabotaging reauthorization" of SCHIP "will hurt the very people -- poor and middle-class Americans -- he claims he wants to protect," a Times editorial states. The editorial calls on Republican members of the California congressional delegation to "join the House majority in attempting to reauthorize SCHIP." The editorial concludes, "If they don't, voters should remember their failure to act while at the polls next year" (Los Angeles Times, 10/18).
  
  
• New York Times: Bush has said that he vetoed the SCHIP bill because "he wants to 'put poor children first' rather than extend coverage to middle-class children," but, on "far too many occasions, the president has sacrificed the interests of poor children to what he deems higher budgetary or ideological priorities," a Times editorial states. "For the past several years, the Bush administration has been squeezing federal support for Medicaid, the primary program to help the poorest families and their children," according to the editorial. The editorial concludes, "House members should vote today to override the president's veto. It is the best way to protect America's low-income children" (New York Times, 10/18).
  

Opinion Pieces

• Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Chicago Tribune: The SCHIP bill would return the program "to its roots -- providing health insurance coverage for low-income kids" -- and would provide a "three-year transition period that removes all adults," Durbin writes in a Tribune opinion piece. He adds, "Most important, this bill accomplishes its goals in a fiscally responsible way." Durbin concludes, "I hope that all of the members of the Illinois congressional delegation who voted 'no' ... will carefully study this bipartisan bill and vote to give 150,000 more needy Illinois children the health insurance they need by overriding the president's veto" (Durbin, Chicago Tribune, 10/16).
  
  
• Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D), Detroit News: The SCHIP bill is "supported by governors from both parties and was passed" in the House and Senate "with overwhelming bipartisan majorities," Granholm writes in a News opinion piece. "Despite this, President Bush vetoed children's health insurance legislation," she writes, adding, "On behalf of Michigan's 158,000 uninsured children, I urge the six Michigan Republicans who opposed SCHIP ... to vote 'yes' and override the president's veto" (Granholm, Detroit News, 10/18).
  
  
• Erik Olsen, Indianapolis Star: "Overriding President Bush's veto" of the SCHIP bill offers a "unique ... opportunity for everyone involved in making public policy to do the right thing," AARP President Olsen writes in a Star opinion piece. "The American people" contributed by "banding together behind the bill," and Congress "did its part by sending" the legislation to Bush, Olsen writes, adding, "But [Bush] chose not to do his part, opting to veto the legislation for reasons that have been roundly dismissed as baseless by leaders in both parties." According to Olsen, "Choosing children's health care is doing the right thing, period" (Olsen, Indianapolis Star, 10/17).
  
  
• Peter Pitts, New York Times: A "little-known provision of the original" House version of the SCHIP bill that would have allocated $300 million to establish a Center for Comparative Effectiveness to "test whether newer, more expensive drugs work better than their older and cheaper counterparts" could "be revived" in the event that Congress overrides the presidential veto, Pitts, president of the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest, writes in a Times opinion piece. According to Pitts, although the provision "sounds reasonable," the measure likely would "result in Medicare covering fewer breakthrough medicines, which would, in turn, force doctors to prescribe only the drugs that Medicare will pay for -- not the ones that are best for the patient" (Pitts, New York Times, 10/18).
  
  
• Monique Yeager, Orlando Sentinel: The U.S. has an "excellent opportunity to make great progress" in efforts to provide all pregnant women and children with health insurance that "allows them to get the medical care they need" with the enactment of the SCHIP bill, Yeager, former chair of the board of the March of Dimes, writes in a Sentinel opinion piece. The legislation would provide states with the "option to enroll pregnant women who meet the program's income guidelines," Yeager writes, adding, "Numerous studies have shown that health insurance coverage is essential for access to maternity care critical to the health of both mother and baby." She writes that Congress should do the "right thing by those who can't help themselves" and override the presidential veto of the bill (Yeager, Orlando Sentinel, 10/17).
  
  
• Maine Gov. John Baldacci (D), Portland Press Herald: SCHIP "extends a vital safety net," and, although Bush vetoed the bill, "a fierce effort continues in Washington to find a way to ensure children don't lose their health insurance," Baldacci writes in a Press Herald opinion piece. Baldacci continues, "Funding for SCHIP is one of the best investments we can make to ensure that our children grow and develop healthy, reduce chronic disease instances and costs, and attend school better equipped to learn," adding, "We have an opportunity ... to fund this program fully into the future. We must get it done" (Baldacci, Portland Press Herald, 10/16).
  
  
• Froma Harrop, Providence Journal: Republicans have opposed the SCHIP bill because they "know that, once government health coverage seeps up into the middle class, there's no stopping it," Harrop, a syndicated columnist, writes in a Journal opinion piece. However, "Republicans can't possibly believe that today's expensive and chaotic mess of a health care 'system' is a 'conservative' approach," she writes, adding, "America needs a universal health care plan that puts the rich and poor, young and old, sick and well into one big insurance pool." Harrop concludes, "Right-wingers, give it up! You're fighting a battle you shouldn't want to win. A country without universal coverage isn't conservative. It's primitive" (Harrop, Providence Journal, 10/17).
  
  
• Grace-Marie Turner, Wall Street Journal: "Demagoguing health care -- especially for poor children -- is easy," but "this debate is not over whether to give poor kids health care, or even over whether this program should continue," Turner, president of the Galen Institute, writes in a Journal opinion piece. "Rather, it's over who should be covered and whether to extend benefits to middle-income children," she writes, adding, Bush "believes this bill expands taxpayer-funded health coverage too far up the income ladder." Turner concludes, "When Congress considers overriding the president's veto, the real question should be this: Is putting millions more children on taxpayer-supported coverage, including many who have private insurance, really the right choice to make?" (Turner, Wall Street Journal, 10/18).

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