SCHIP increase = dead

[NorthSideSox72]

So, the infamous SCHIP bill is dead. Passed both houses, Bush vetoed, Senate overrode, but the House just couldn't get enough votes, falling 13 short of the necessary number.

 

What will probably be looked back upon with this whole thing, is... here is a President who let Congress (both GOP and Dem led) spend their pants off, without being responsible enough to bring in income to support that spending, refusing to veto anything, and then when he finally breaks it out, what does he veto? A bill to provide more money to more sick children?!

 

The issue is of course much more complex than that. We all know this. But, in the eye of the general public, the above is how it is perceived. Bush managed to blunder himself into another debacle, even though in this case, his actions may have gotten it partly right. How bad is a President, when he can't even look good when he does something sort of right?

 

[Texsox]

I wish I was amazed.

[Rex Kickass]

So, the infamous SCHIP bill is dead. Passed both houses, Bush vetoed, Senate overrode, but the House just couldn't get enough votes, falling 13 short of the necessary number.

 

What will probably be looked back upon with this whole thing, is... here is a President who let Congress (both GOP and Dem led) spend their pants off, without being responsible enough to bring in income to support that spending, refusing to veto anything, and then when he finally breaks it out, what does he veto? A bill to provide more money to more sick children?!

 

The issue is of course much more complex than that. We all know this. But, in the eye of the general public, the above is how it is perceived. Bush managed to blunder himself into another debacle, even though in this case, his actions may have gotten it partly right. How bad is a President, when he can't even look good when he does something sort of right?

 

Except its not right at all. This isn't based on any principle, other than the GOP betting their case on obstructing a lot of good legislation to get through. The Bush administration vetoed this to give cover to the Congressmen in tight reelection districts next year, so this can't be an issue for them.

[southsider2k5]

Interesting USA Today poll. Dispite the inability to get their side of the story out, a majority of Americans seem to agree with the Republicians and Bush on this issue.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/...ppoll16.art.htm

 

•52% agree with Bush that most benefits should go to children in families earning less than 200% of the federal poverty level — about $41,000 for a family of four. Only 40% say benefits should go to such families earning up to $62,000, as the bill written by Democrats and some Republicans would allow.

 

•55% are very or somewhat concerned that the program would create an incentive for families to drop private insurance. Bush and Republican opponents have called that a step toward government-run health care.

[Texsox]

But if they drop their private insurance, they will have more money to spend and that results in billions of tax dollars.

[NorthSideSox72]

Interesting USA Today poll. Dispite the inability to get their side of the story out, a majority of Americans seem to agree with the Republicians and Bush on this issue.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/...ppoll16.art.htm

Which is funny, because the polls asking if the public favored the bill showed over 70% support.

 

There seems to be a 20-30% band in there that are expressing opinions on a bill they know nothing about.

 

[southsider2k5]

Which is funny, because the polls asking if the public favored the bill showed over 70% support.

 

There seems to be a 20-30% band in there that are expressing opinions on a bill they know nothing about.

 

That seems pretty low if you ask me

[mr_genius]

there were problems with the bill, for one thing a 25 year old is not a child. all the dems needed to do was take out some of the worst parts and it would have been passed. but they were more concerned in making a big "GOP hates kids and eats babies" spectacle rather than getting health insurance for poor kids.

[Rex Kickass]

This bill was a bipartisan compromise. It passed with almost 70 votes in the Senate. A lot of work went into making the bill the compromise it was - which if I understand it correctly - merely changed the rules to allow states to run their CHIP programs the way they wanted to run them, within reason. From what I gathered, it seemed more a tacit acknowledgment that a family of four making 50,000 a year in NJ isn't doing as well as a family of four making the same amount in Indiana.

[Rex Kickass]

Interesting USA Today poll. Dispite the inability to get their side of the story out, a majority of Americans seem to agree with the Republicians and Bush on this issue.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/...ppoll16.art.htm

 

Here's the text of the poll questions:

 

As you may know, the Democrats want to allow a family of four earning about $62,000 to qualify for the program. President Bush wants most of the increases to go to families earning less than $41,000. Whose side do you favor?"

 

The wording is kinda weird. And then the other question seems even more loaded.

 

How concerned are you that expanding this program would create an incentive for middle class Americans to drop private health insurance for a public program, which some consider to be a step toward socialized medicine? Are you very concerned, somewhat concerned, not too concerned, or not concerned at all?

 

More simple questions yield a much different response. http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/CBS_news_poll_101707.pdf

 

q67 Currently, a government program provides health insurance for some children in low-income families. Would you favor or oppose expanding this program to include some middle-class uninsured children?

** TOTAL RESPONDENTS **

*** Party ID ***

Total Rep Dem Ind

% % % %

Favor 81 70 90 81

Oppose 15 23 7 15

DK/NA 4 7 3 4

q68 Would you be willing to pay more in taxes in order to fund the expansion of this program?

** AMONG THOSE WHO SAID FAVOR IN Q67 **

Yes 74 68 82 71

No 17 23 13 18

Depends (Vol.) 7 9 4 8

DK/NA 2 0 1 3

[mr_genius]

Here's the text of the poll questions:

The wording is kinda weird. And then the other question seems even more loaded.

 

 

The first question you cited seemed fine to me. But I agree with you on the second one, it did seem loaded.

[Rex Kickass]

The reason I think the first question is weird is it makes it seem like the Democrats were wanting to provide more benefits to people between 40 and 60K a year, and less to people making less.