A Heartless “Philosophy”
After six-and-a-half miserable years, it is hard to tally up the worst abuses of the Bush administration.Narrow the field, and focus only on abuses related to the economy. That’s the universe of all the favors that the Bush-Cheney cabal has done for Big Business, so it is still a very competitive contest.
A case can be made that the administration’s effort to block expansion of the State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) should top the list.
SCHIP is a complement to Medicaid, and provides health insurance to uninsured children from low-income families, typically those making up to 200 percent of the poverty line ($34,000). It has had enormous success in its 10 years of existence. Four million children receive health insurance through SCHIP. It has reduced the number of children in families at or slightly above the poverty line who are uninsured by about a quarter.
This has very real and concrete meaning. As the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities has shown, children with insurance get more preventative care, get better treatment for chronic conditions like asthma, have far fewer unmet medical needs, and get better dental treatment.
SCHIP is now up for reauthorization. Because of medical inflation, the program needs more money to provide insurance to the same number of kids. Because the program has been a clear winner, members of Congress from both parties want to provide this needed funding, and to expand the program further.
But President Bush says no.
He has a “philosophical” objection to expanding SCHIP.
“I believe government cannot provide affordable health care,” Bush said at a media event last week. “I believe it would cause the quality of care to diminish. I believe there would be lines and rationing over time. If Congress continues to insist upon expanding health care through the SCHIP program — which, by the way, would entail a huge tax increase for the American people — I’ll veto the bill.”
Here’s what is most remarkable about this philosophical objection from the White House: It isn’t shared by the for-profit insurance industry.
Last week, the Senate Finance Committee, by a 17-4 vote, approved a reauthorization of SCHIP that would enable the program to cover an additional 4 million children without insurance. Most of these children — 85 percent — would already be eligible under existing standards, but would not be covered for lack of funds. The Senate proposal is funded by a 61-cent-a-pack cigarette tax increase, which would have health benefits of its own: deterring almost two million children from taking up smoking, encouraging more than a million adult smokers to quit.
America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the trade association for the health insurance industry, “supports the Senate package,” says Mohit Ghose, AHIP Vice President of Public Affairs.
“Kids coverage come first” in the effort to get all Americans covered, he says.
Isn’t it strange that the administration is trying to protect the industry, but your position is supportive of the Senate approach?
It’s about a “philosophical point,” not protecting the industry, says Ghose.
“I defer to the White House on what is government-run healthcare.”
The Bush administration’s position is that an expansion of SCHIP will mean that some covered children otherwise would have received private insurance, and that the government program will therefore “crowd out” private insurance.
It is true that, under the Senate program, about a third of kids newly covered would otherwise have had private insurance. But as the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities emphasizes, this is unavoidable (if you are in fact trying to avoid it): the patchwork nature of U.S. private health insurance makes it impossible to cover any group outside of the very poorest and not also provide coverage to some who would otherwise have some private insurance. Moreover, says the group’s Matthew Broaddus, any parent switching their child from private insurance to a public program is doing so either because they have to pay too much out-of-pocket, or because they think they can get better care from the public program.
Where the private insurance industry does line up with the administration is in opposing a bolder plan moving forward in the House of Representatives. The House plan would cover more uninsured children, which does start to worry AHIP, and it would pay for the expansion both with a cigarette tax and by collecting excess payments to private insurers in the misnamed Medicare Advantage program. Medicare Advantage lets seniors opt for a private insurance plan in lieu of traditional Medicare. These private plans are collecting at least 12 percent more per covered person than it costs to treat a person under Medicare. The industry is adamantly opposed to efforts to stop these overpayments.
As against expanding SCHIP, the administration proposes a preposterous tax credit to help pay for individual insurance coverage. Because individual insurance coverage is both the least efficient component of the health insurance market and the one most rife with abuse, it is a certainty that the administration plan would be a failure.
One benefit of having already suffered through the long reign of President Bush is that he no longer commands the authority he once did. The vast majority of people in the United States oppose his position and — in a change — a strong majority in Congress oppose him, as well.
But will Bush veto SCHIP expansion? Will enough Republicans break from the administration to override (or prevent) a veto? That depends on how loudly the public insists its elected officials choose healthcare for kids over twisted philosophies.
Take action now via the Families USA website.
Robert Weissman is co-director of Essential Action, a corporate accountability group based in Washington, D.C. that focuses especially on international issues and has been very involved in the access to medicines campaign. He is also editor of Multinational Monitor magazine. With Russell Mokhiber, he is editor of a weekly column, Focus on the Corporation, archived at http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/corp-focus.
The anti-public, pro-corporate mantra is the ideological basis of the right and the repugs are fundamentalists who can’t see beyond that failing delusion. Very few Dims dare question it either. That “heartless Philosophy” has lived beyond it’s time and has nothing left to offer. We must put it in the dustbin of history.
What did you expect from a useless mutt who has been handed everything on a silver platter?
None of the children of privilege can have any concept of what it is like to see your children suffer for lack of care. Having always had everything they cannot grasp the idea of others not having equal privilege.
Welcome to conservative “Christianity” 101… fight for the unborn - screw those already born.
Heartless is as heartless does…
How unfortunate is this Bush figure on any level let alone an international level.
Special thanks to Joe and Jane Chickenshit for this long nightmare that has yet to end…
So, the esteemed commander guy, who ran on a platform of “compassionate conservatism” doesn’t care about sick children. Is this a shock? From now on, until I die (nope I don’t have health care, so far so good though)I will ONLY vote for “bleeding heart liberals”. No conservative will ever get my vote, and I hope Bush has put a stake in the heart of that movement
Bush plsns to veto this bill for “philosophical” reasons. I wonder what his favorite philosopher - Jesus - would say about that?
Stange that we can subsidize corporations but we can not subsudize the health and well fare of America’s future. Perhaps children should become legal corporations with off-shore accounts, just as corporations can be legal individual persons. Strange that they want to protect every microscopic human life, but have no intentions of following through with any protection after they are born. None of the fundamentals of compassionate converatism adds up or makes sense. Appears there is a total lack of Reason.
It should be clear to most by now that Bush’s philosophy, and that of his mentor Cheney, is that only the economic elites and their children have a right to live. The rest of us are only here to serve them, and there is no reason for the government to do anything to preserve or improve our lives. That’s been clear to me since about February 1995, a month after he began his first term as governor (and I think it was clear to Molly Ivins and Jim Hightower even before that).
As comments before highlight, this “philosophy” is elitist, immoral, heartless, and without reason. I’d add un-American.
This president must be stopped by congress and religious leaders.
i’m all for insuring the bambinos (all of ‘em) but
LEAVE MY CIGARETTES ALONE!!!
i’ll go into my tirade against you anti-smoking fascists now, b/c the subject so rarely comes up on C-D:
the anti-smoking campaign of the US is part of american puritanical individualistic morality and not reflective of a genuine public health concern. and this is easily demonstrable: most other advanced industrialized countries (france, japan, etc.) smoke MORE and drink MORE than amurikuns. and they live longer. something besides cigarettes is killing americans, like our food, water, stress, environment, etc. but the american way is to bitch about private morality as a way to avoid doing something about public health.
there was a time not too long ago when about 90% of americans smoked. now, less than 30% do. have incidents of lung cancer, heart disease, etc., decreased in proportion? i think not. somethings in our environment are to blame, and it ain’t cigarette smoke, of the 1st or 2nd hand variety. look at asthma rates amoung kids, thru the roof. i’m sure they’ll figure out a way to blame cigarettes for that too.
btw, i smoke additive free cigs, cuz like every other natural item out there, corporate amerikkka screws it up big time.
Such pre 9/11 thinking. Nowadays, the “signing statement” is the law of the homeland. Even if the Loonitary Executive signed an expansion of the State Child Health Insurance Program (which he might do to help his doomed incumbent loyalists,)he’d surely add a disclaimer advising “his” government to ignore said legislation.
Until checks and balances return strong and solid, nothing the Congress says or does can be considered relevant.
JONJOE and ANNABELLE: Right on!
Kivals: You mean you didn’t notice what this smug chimp was about given his record as governor of Texas??????
Bush’s views on health care make me sick.
First off, on July 10th, our Decider/Inquisitor/Commander Guy/Corporate and Religious Right Mouthpiece-in-chief made the incredibly callous and clueless remark that “people have access to health care in America. After all, you just go to an emergency room.”
Sure, and the rich and poor alike are free to sleep under bridges, too.
WTF? Was Bush’s line ad libbed, or did somebody actually write that line for him? My guess is the latter. The idea that “there is plenty of free health care in emergency rooms” has been tested, pushed, and refined by right-wing think tanks for several years. It finally percolated its way to the top, and blew out through Bush’s ignorant mouth.
Now I don’t want to go around seizin’ on every misquote or mistake that POTUS makes, for that would make for a whole lot of seizin’ (to everything there is a seizin’, so to speak), and I simply haven’t got that kind of time.
But our Compassionate Conservative-in-chief has gotten my dander up again by objecting on philosophical grounds to a bipartisan Senate proposal to boost the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) by $35 billion over five years by levying a 61-cent-a-pack increase in the federal excise tax on cigarettes.
By threatening to veto the proposed legislation, Bush has essentially told the 6.6 million children currently covered by SCHIP, and the 3.3 million presently uninsured American children for whom these additional funds would be used to provide medical care, to “Go to the emergency room.”
Mr. Bush apparently has no philosophical objections to the number of children equivalent to the entire population of the state of Oregon going without health care. Why should he? We all know that he also has no philosophical objections to the number of Iraqis he’s killed equivalent to the entire population of Austin, Texas.
After all, it has been made eminently clear these past six years that the ability of Mr. Bush and his ilk to care about life is inversely proportional to the number of cells something has. If we were raising the excise tax on cigarettes to protect one-hundred-celled blastocysts, well, then, that would be different.
We need a peaceful economic revolution: the House should start selectively to deny funding for salaries and projects, e.g., on all presidential expenses, from salary to living costs. And if that doesn’t work, include the Vice President and his office and his aides. The President is mad (pyschological definition) and his supporters are enablers. Something drastic must be enacted to stop him.
“Go to the emergency room” can now take its place beside the notorious “Let them eat cake”.
What a brainless, heartless, selfish bastard.
His mother must be so proud!
Why are so many Americans so much against nationalized, vis a vis privatized health care over there? I am just curious. Prevention of illness is key, but if an individual has genetic mutations it is imperative that the nation where that child lives should be helped! To not do all is possible to provide care for cancer-stricken babies and toddlers? That is… a MORAL WRONG!
There is this guy who is on primetime TV in the USA named Glenn Beck. Why is this man allowed air time if he is not a journalist? Americans put down countries in which the Government controls the media (opposite in the USA as we all should know) but the USA allows someone without jounalist credentials on a news channel? Please explain THAT one to me! If an individual is not a college educated, without a degree in Journalism, he should not be on a news channel. Mr. Glenn Beck insults France as well as most countries in Europe for how they handle their health care systems while the truth is that most nations in Europe have a more humane health care system than you do! Cuba does as well. How does that make Americans feel?
The USA Government is unwilling to take care of their own children without conditions. What message does this convey across the world? Well…it does not look good for Americans that’s for sure. Americans went through a media blitz on USA superiority to every nation on Earth in regards to how they conduct their health care. How does it feel, Americans, that Cuba provides more humane health care to its people and are proportionately more educated than you greedy American Idol fans are?
Callous quotations of history and literature:
“Are there no prisons? And the Union workhouses, are they still in operation?” asked Ebeneezer Scrooge, who was “very glad” to learn that they were.
“Let them eat cake”, attributed to Marie Antionette, though this attribution carries significant historical doubt.
“People have access to health care in America. After all, you just go to an emergency room”, said George W. Bush, on July 10th. This attribution carries no historical doubt whatsoever.
“People have access to shelter in America. After all, you just go to an underpass. Are there no cardboard boxes? And the subway stations, are they still in operation?, said George W. Bush.
Well, no, not really. But he may as well have.
$35 billion?
That’s what - 3 months of Iraq spending?
Gotta have your priorities, I guess. /snark
“Culture of life” my ass.
And more people in other countries smoke but are healthier? Well, i’d wait to see the evidence on that, but if so, y’think maybe it’s because they get more preventative health care?
GREAT article.how can anyone still hope that there is some humanity in this sorry administration,after its threatened veto of the long overdue proposed expansion of the schip program on philosophical grounds?since jesus is the boy king’s favorite “philosopher”,perhaps the ancient church father tertullian can be of some assistance.he said,concerning another matter,”credo quia absurdum”.when tertullian trod the sod,let alone jesus,social justice as we understand it,was not possible.its especially shameful to permit suffering which could be ended with the stroke of a pen.to veto this legislation is the equivalent of modern day infanticide.
George W Bush has no connection to his soul. He is singularily managed by a warped and damaged ego, which emits feeble sounds that appear human, but are indeed the eminations of a spoiled child, smirking and joking his way along in life while the office he holds demands a man.
GW is a child, dressed to look like a man, but look at his darting, evasive eyes.
There is no one home.
JJPETER: You flatter Bush with your innocent description! He is part of a cabal that is far more calculating than a child. Dishonesty is a better explanation for the evasive looks.
For any interested, I received a very interesting personal email today that is supposed to be CHANNELED from some very enlightened souls, and it explains the Illuminati and Bush and many of his clan. If anyone would like me to email this material to them, just post your email if you are comfortable doing so.
siouxrose:
I would be interested in seeing the email you mentioned. i am at tama677@yahoo.com
Re; jedediah zachariah jedediah
jedediah zachariah jedediah most of us believe you have the right to smoke. Period! We also have the right to not smoke, and are due the consideration from those who have chosen to, not to be effected by their actions. Unfortunately there seems to be little if any real consideration from Smokers, there by diminishing support for your right to smoke.
The costs to Society from the effects of smoking is substantial and needs to be addressed fairly to all.
Additional taxes on tobacco products is one way to do this, though it is troublesome on some levels as we don’t tax other poor personal choices that effect health and add additional financial burdens to society. My feeling is that they are on the short list to be addressed in a similar fashion in the near future.
I don’t like to think of a society that controls all of our behavior so we need to move very carefully in this regard, and Universal health care could reduce Health care costs across the board and ameliorate control of behavior through focused and divisive taxation.
And yes, there are a lot of reasons for cancers from airborne pollutants. Smoking simple exacerbates already unhealthy conditions. Radon gas is one heavy hitter with an estimated 15.000 to 20.000+ Deaths a year, some think more.
A KNESAL … ‘Liberal Warrior’ … “Little Beirut”
I went to a wake of a six month old baby boy about a month ago. I have been to many wakes in my lifetime but this one was my absolute worse.
For the last two years our non-profit organization has been having a fundraising charity for St. Jude Children Research Hospital that actually helps children with serious health issues and they also give the same quality to those who are NOT covered by insurance.
I made a vow to myself after I left that funeral home that I was going to raise as much money as I could for children in memory of that child.
Our event is taking place September 9, 2007. We are raising funds by asking the public to sponsor a target sign which will have the name of a person, club, organization or buisness for $100.00 which is placed along a archery course at our charity event.If anyone is interested please see: www.nipmucrodandgun.com .
I have been feeling pretty helpless with all that has been taken place these last few years. This actually gives me a feeling like I am accomplishing something for the greater good.
I was just thinking perhaps we all better start praying to St. Jude, maybe Danny Thomas was on to something!
Perhaps it would be easier to fund SCHIP if it was not being used by Illegal Immigrant Adults for pre-natal care. It was after all meant only for children and only for American Citizens
“Perhaps it would be easier to fund SCHIP if it was not being used by Illegal Immigrant Adults for pre-natal care”
…aaaaaand your proof of this assertion would be - ?
Remember when Bush expanded the Medicare Drug Program for seniors. They vote. For kids it will be another 10-17 years before they do and this will be all blackwater under the bridge.
jedediah zachariah jedediah springfield:
I too acknowledge your right to smoke AS LONG AS you’re willing to pay the $41 per pack cost up-front.
“Study: Cigarettes cost families, society $41 per pack
DURHAM, N.C. (AP) — Cigarettes may cost smokers more then they believe. A study by a team of health economists finds the combined price paid by their families and society is about $41 per pack of cigarettes.
Posted 11/26/2004 9:29 AM
The figure is based on costs for a 24-year-old smoker over 60 years for cigarettes, taxes, insurance, medical care and lost earnings because of smoking-related disabilities, researchers said.”
“’I believe government cannot provide affordable health care,’ Bush said at a media event last week. ‘I believe it would cause the quality of care to diminish.’”
That’s really funny — Bush didn’t seem to mind the quality of the taxpayer-funded government health care that recently found his rectal polyps weren’t cancerous. Why don’t Bush, Cheney, et al, and the anti-’socialized medicine’ Republicans in Congress enroll themselves in a private HMO that they pay for themselves instead of spending our money to keep them healthy — after all, it doesn’t work, does it? Or does it just not work for the peasants?
What do you expect from a man who probably thinks “philosophy” has something to do with how football is played.
Pere Ubu July 26th, 2007 8:35 am
“Perhaps it would be easier to fund SCHIP if it was not being used by Illegal Immigrant Adults for pre-natal care”
…aaaaaand your proof of this assertion would be - ?
In Texas a pregnant illegal immigrant mother is enrolled in SCHIPS on the basis that her unborn child will be a citizen. Its called CHIPS Perinatal. She gets free healthcare up to the time of birth and the goes to the Hospital and is admitted under Perinatal as an “emergency” This is common practice here in Texas and I’d be surprised if its not in other States, but I can only speak for certain of Texas. Its a very large problem as we have about 2 million illegals here, its eating up badly needed funds for our own kids.
Thomas More, I might point out that the reason you have a shortage of funds for these health programs is directly realetd to the last 12 years of the Republicans running Texas into debt to give tax cuts to its wealthiest residents and corporations, exactly as Bush has done with the nation since he was installed as president. This is the GOP strategy — have Americans blame foreign workers for shortages rather than those who truly caused the crisis — the Republican Party. It’s as old as divide and conquer.
As far as ‘illegal aliens’ are concerned, I suppose that we, as a compassionate civilized country, should tell those immigrant mothers to squat over a ditch and have their children. Of course, once the kids are born, they are American citizens, but the GOP is working on changing that.
BTW, I hope you’re prepared to pay much higher prices for everything from fruits and vegetables to meat and hotel rooms because, once the Rove-created wedge-issue ’scourge of the illegal immigrants’ is resolved and all of those hard-working Mexicans are sent home to stay, that’s just what you’ll be doing.
RSJ July 26th, 2007 5:15 pm
“directly realetd to the last 12 years of the Republicans running Texas into debt to give tax cuts to its wealthiest residents and corporations, exactly as Bush has done with the nation since he was installed as president.”
You certainly have that right! And they are still in charge of Texas till 08. We are planning a change then!
As far as ‘illegal aliens’ are concerned, I suppose that we, as a compassionate civilized country, should tell those immigrant mothers to squat over a ditch and have their children.
Thats the far left line of course. Come one come all. American citizenship ia free to whoever wants to pick it up from the ditch where some people want to put it.
If this illegal alien is back in Mexico she won’t have to squat in a ditch and we won’t have to pay for her. Frankly we can’t afford any more unfunded “compassion”. They are costing Texans over a billion dollars more than any taxes they pay or any other benefits they generate. This is not Federal money, its our tax money you are in favor of giving away.
“Rove-created wedge-issue ’scourge of the illegal immigrants’ is resolved and all of those hard-working Mexicans are sent home to stay, that’s just what you’ll be doing.”
This isn’t a generated wedge issue, its a real problem for the border States and very soon for the rest of the country. Each illegal immigrant family that is here takes one college educated family’s taxes to support them. And we have appox. 2 million and more coming.
Also the propaganda about “just hard working Mexicans” is Balderdash. We’ve got Mexicans, people from all over South America, East Euopeans, Asians, you name it. Mexico has just sent the bulk. But in any case, they are not all “hard working.”
“BTW, I hope you’re prepared to pay much higher prices for everything from fruits and vegetables to meat and hotel rooms because.”
I would certainly be willing to pay more to stop the shameful exploitation of these people and at the same time, save money that could certainly be better used for our own citizens. Some of the Ranchers here bring these people over, cram them into shacks and in the end don’t even pay them the pitiful amount. They just bring in a new bunch. And they have nothing to fear from their abuse. Makes the Bracero program look like a picnic.
As you can tell, you touched a nerve there! The thing I can’t get a handle on is where do you advocate drawing the line? Which person do you say…OK thats all we can afford. At 30 million? 40 million? All the arguments from big business,the racist organizations argue for open borders, if that is what you want we will always be on opposite sides.
But at least in America we can still hold opposing views, disagree totally on a course of action, hold opposing political positions andin the end, I still believe we will get it right . We will reach agreement on the fair and just thing to do. BTW….I do apologize for letting George get out of Texas.
As Stephen Colbert would say, “apology accepted” re Bush.
Seriously, I understand your concerns, Mr. More, and appreciate your thoughtful reply, but I think the best and most cost-effective way to handle this is to crack down on the employers of illegal immigrants, such as the ranchers you mentioned, rather than the immigrants themselves. A few corporate CEOs or division vice presidents put behind bars would go a long way toward curtailing the problem, much more so than expensive border walls and other costly military solutions.
Another part of my solution would be to put pressure on Mexican President Felipe Calderon to provide decent-paying jobs for his people rather than sending them to El Norte. (Ironically, the number of immigrants coming north would have lessened had his progressive opponent Andres Obrador won the election.)
I have had the experience of working with illegal immigrants from Mexico, and meeting others from various parts of Latin America; of course there are always low-lifes in any large group of humanity, but the people I’ve met were all reliable and hard-working and wouldn’t have thought of applying for welfare or even going to a hospital ER — they were too afraid of being sent back home. Perhaps things have changed in the past 30 years since I had this experience.
At any rate, my short answer is to crack down on business to lessen undocumented workers and to make sure, as much as possible, that the immigrants sent back home are not sent home to starve.