Bush Vetoes SCHIP Again

Mr. Compassionate Conservative once again vetoed a bill that would make possible the inclusion of 5 million children to obtain health insurance.

Bush issued his veto on Wednesday, saying "our nation's goal should be to move children who have no health insurance to private coverage - not to move children who already have private health insurance to government coverage."

This statement of course has no basis in fact. The State Children's Health Insurance Plan is available to those who make too high an annual income to receive Medicaid but not enough income to afford to pay for a private insurance policy. SCHIP is not free. It is a discounted plan, with participants paying low cost premiums. But President Bush would have you believe that it is a substitute for private insurance and that the Congress is trying to expand a program to those who already have private coverage as a step toward that evil concept we call socialism. Of course, Bush and the rest of the elected members of government already receive government funded health care. If it's so bad for the rest of us, why doesn't he switch to private insurance? He can certainly afford it.

Mr. No Child Left Behind would also try to make you think that the $35 billion that Congress allocated over five years is fiscally irresponsible and that his economic conservatism was a main reason for rejecting the bill. This is a strange reason when you consider that $7 billion pays for approximately 2-3 weeks for the occupation in Iraq.

The fact is that at the current funding levels, some participants currently covered by SCHIP would have to be dropped.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said the House will take up the extension question Thursday in a bill that also will make adjustments to Medicare.

"We'll obviously need to put additional money" into the children's health insurance program, Hoyer said, because several states say they will have to remove recipients from their rolls if the current funding level continues into next year.

As far as raising taxes is concerned, "What a sad day that the president would say that rather than insuring [millions of] children, 'I don't want to raise the cigarette tax,' " said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

In 2006, an estimated 20.8% (45.3 million) of U.S. adults were current cigarette smokers; of these, 80.1% (36.3 million) smoked every day according to the Center for Disease Control. I, for one, would not be affected by this tobacco tax increase, and neither would 80% of the US population. If a 61 cent per pack tax deters people from smoking and become healthier in the process, so be it.

Why do cigarette smokers feel discrimiated against for a tobacco tax? Do drinkers feel discrimination on an alcohol tax? Or drivers on a gas tax? If you don't drink or don't drive, there is an automatic savings. Should I feel angry that the non-drinker doesn't pay tax on my glass of wine or bottle of beer? Is Bush is worried about the smoker that is against a tobacco tax , or is it the tobacco lobby?

One more question: if Bush was so proud of this veto, why did he sign it in private?

...such votes are uncomfortable for GOP lawmakers. It is a popular program with the public, making some Republicans wary of sticking with Bush on such an issue with the 2008 elections looming. Of the 43 million people nationwide who lack health insurance, more than 6 million are under 18 years old. That's more than 9 percent of all children.

Bush said the bill "moves our country's health care system in the wrong direction." If we aren't currently moving in the wrong direction, what the hell does Mensa Man have in store for us?