Why is Bush Denying Healthcare to Kids?

August 22, 2007 at 7:02 am 6 comments

What possible reason could President Bush have for wanting to deny kids access to healthcare?

The Bush administration, continuing its fight to stop states from expanding the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program, has adopted new standards that would make it much more difficult for New York, California and others to extend coverage to children in middle-income families.

Administration officials outlined the new standards in a letter sent to state health officials on Friday evening, in the middle of a monthlong Congressional recess. In interviews, they said the changes were intended to return the Children’s Health Insurance Program to its original focus on low-income children and to make sure the program did not become a substitute for private health coverage.

Emphasis added.

Before members of Congress left for its current recess, they passed a bill reauthorizing and expanding the State Children’s Health Insurance Program to increase the number of kids who are able to get the medical care that they need. The program allows states to craft systems that will work best for providing health insurance to children in their states. Now Bush has not only threatened to veto this bill, but has issued severe restrictions on the program that will force states to cut children from working class families from the program thereby adding more kids to the ranks of the uninsured.


Families USA and SEIU have teamed up on a petition urging Congress to take action to ensure that the 9 million uninsured kids get the health care that they deserve. You can sign the petition here.

For more on this story including statements from horrified state health officials, click here.


Entry filed under: Advocacy, Congress, Conservatives, George Bush, Health, Politics, Republicans.

White House Turns Attack Ads on Republicans Fox Attacks: Iran

6 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Brian  |  August 22, 2007 at 9:46 am

    Bush is NOT a compassionate conservative. He cares nothing about the poor and disadvantaged in our country.

  • 2. Dangerous Dave  |  August 22, 2007 at 1:50 pm

    The SCHIP program renewal is getting vetoed because the Demos want to add people up to age 25 and families making up to 85k a year. This veto has nothing to do with “poor kids”. It has everything to do with the Demo party wanting to expand socialistic programs. Let’s say Bush doesn’t veto it. So, for SCHIP’s next renewal, will it cover millionaires and “kids” up to 50 years old? You ladies need to do some research before you start attacking the president when he actually upholds his duty. I know it’s rare, but you are too knee-jerk. Get the facts first.

  • 3. Bloggernista  |  August 22, 2007 at 3:32 pm

    Dave, your disinformation efforts won’t work here. Bush has been very clear that he opposes the reauthorization of SCHIP that passed Congress with bi-partisan support because he is more concerned with protecting the profits of private insurance companies than he is with making sure that kids get healthcare.

    You can jump up and down screaming socialism all you want to try to scare people, but the reality is that the U.S. is the only industrial nation that does not guarantee universal access to healthcare for its citizens. That’s a disgrace.

  • 4. Dangerous Dave  |  August 22, 2007 at 3:46 pm

    All US citizens have access to healthcare. Even non-citizens don’t. The veto isn’t about socialism, it’s about calling this a program that is aimed to help low income kids, yet it covers some of the top wage earners in America up to 25 years old.

    I don’t make $85k a year, and I have “access to healthcare”.

    What you have here is the Demos purposely trying to get Bush to veto this pig so they can cry “Bush doesn’t want kids to have healthcare”.

    If you think “universal”, or “single payer”, or whatever nom du jour for socializing health care you want to go by is the cat’s crack, either move to Canada or call your local politicians to get “public” (another name for it that is losing fashion… soon it’ll be labeled as a “scare” word) healthcare in your county or state. That way, when it tanks, it’ll only tank in your state and not take the rest of the nation’s healthcare system with it.

    Don’t look to Washington to solve all of your “problems” or you may end up on your rooftop waiting for a helicopter.

  • 5. Bloggernista  |  August 22, 2007 at 4:09 pm

    Dave, the program does not and will not cover “some of the top wage earners in America up to 25 years old.” It will cover the kids of poor and working class families. I am not sure what you and Bush have against insuring that kids are able to get the medical care that they may need.

    I am guessing that your statement that all Americans have access to healthcare is akin to Bush’s statement that if people need medical care they should just go to the emergency room. Never mind that that is more expensive than increasing availability of preventive medicine.

    Your comment about SCHIP covering people making $85,000 a year is misleading. First of the accurate figure is $82,600 for a family of four and that’s only in New York State which is one of the most expensive states to live in because people have to pay more for housing, food, and other basics including healthcare. Its cost of living is not the same there as it is in places Mississippi, Indiana and Kansas.

    The U.S spends a greater percentage of its GDP than any other industrial nation and we get less for it. There is no reason that in the richest nation in the history of the world that we cannot provide healthcare for everyone who needs it.

  • 6. Dangerous Dave  |  August 22, 2007 at 5:16 pm

    It’s also misleading to imply that Bush is denying health care to kids. He’s not standing in front of the door to the clinic and telling them to leave. C’mon.

    It’s also a right to bear arms in this country. If the government isn’t supplying me with a revolver and ammunition, am I being “denied” my rights?

    let me reiterate my previous statement. If you want “free” health care, petition your local government. The beauty of federalism is the fact that one state’s screw up won’t effect the others. That’s the way it was meant to be. If liberals REALLY believe that everyone should mind their own business, and not only when it suits them, they would be more on board with federalism.

    To me, that should be all encompassing. Abortion, gay rights, healthcare, gun rights, etc. etc. etc. are all better taken care of close to home.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

AddThis Feed Button
Political Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory

Blog Stats

  • 834,234 hits


%d bloggers like this: