Bush plans to veto expansion of health progra

[Bob26003]

http://rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=ht...ws%2Fci_6378606

Bush plans to veto expansion of health program for children

BY ROBERT PEAR, The New York Times

Article Last Updated: 07/14/2007 11:04:58 PM PDT

WASHINGTON — The White House said Saturday that President Bush would veto a bipartisan plan to expand the Children's Health Insurance Program, drafted over the last six months by senior members of the Senate Finance Committee.

That puts Bush at odds with the Democratic majority in Congress, with a substantial number of Republican lawmakers and with many governors of both parties, who want to expand the popular program to cover some of the nation's 8 million uninsured children.

Tony Fratto, a White House spokesman, said: "The president's senior advisers will certainly recommend a veto of this proposal. And there is no question that the president would veto it."

The program, which insured 7.4 million people at some time in the last year, is set to expire Sept. 30.

The Finance Committee is expected to approve the Senate plan next week, sending it to the full Senate for action later this month.

Sen. Max Baucus, the Montana Democrat who is chairman of the committee, said he would move ahead despite the veto threat.

"The Senate will not be deterred from helping more kids in need," Baucus said. "The president should stop playing politics and start working with Congress to help kids, through renewal of this

[The Skeptic Eric Raven]

We have systems in place for people that cannot afford health care. Here in Dallas go to any hospital and you will see them. The system is already overloaded with illegals. Cut them off first.

[Guardsman Bass]

We have systems in place for people that cannot afford health care. Here in Dallas go to any hospital and you will see them. The system is already overloaded with illegals. Cut them off first.

Do you have any actual proof that illegals are an issue with regards to this specific program? From what I read of the source article, Bush's main opposition seems to be the inclusion of an expanded tax on cigarettes.

[black dahlia 83]

Health care shouldn't be a privelidge it should be a right, not only available to those who can afford it.

[Bob26003]

We have systems in place for people that cannot afford health care. Here in Dallas go to any hospital and you will see them. The system is already overloaded with illegals. Cut them off first.

This has nothing to do with Illegals, if you are illegal you can't in a program like that. If you are illegal, you dont even have a SS number.

No, this is about Bush spitting in the face of America's youth who chose to be born into unfortunate circumstances.

Edited July 15, 2007 by Bob26003

[The Skeptic Eric Raven]

Health care shouldn't be a privelidge it should be a right, not only available to those who can afford it.

Right my behind.

[Bob26003]

Right my behind.

So let ppl die in the streets?

How come the money that can’t be found to insure all children this year can be found every 2 months for the Iraq war?

Edited July 16, 2007 by Bob26003

[EmpressStarXVII]

Health care shouldn't be a privelidge it should be a right, not only available to those who can afford it.

Ameen !

[Guardsman Bass]

Right my behind.

Let me guess, you fall into one of two categories:

A)You honestly don't give a sh** as to whether or not a large chunk of the population goes without health insurance, since you don't think it affects you (I've found that most people who do hold this position don't generally come forward to say it, but that's pretty common; the vast majority of the American population didn't give a sh** about Rwanda in 1994), or

B)You think that the Almighty Free Market will solve the problem.

[AROCES]

Health care shouldn't be a privelidge it should be a right, not only available to those who can afford it.

Oh yeah, then why don't you and those who agree with you FUND the RIGHT to a health care for those who can't afford it?

I pay taxes, but I am not going to pay more just because there are those like yourself who thinks they have rights to more entitlements.

[AROCES]

So let ppl die in the streets?

How come the money that can’t be found to insure all children this year can be found every 2 months for the Iraq war?

Why not find the parents of those children and make them take care of them instead of finding more programs and fundings?

[Reincarnated]

The Politics of Health Care Policy: The United States in Comparative Perspective

Perspectives in Biology and Medicine - Volume 46, Number 4, Autumn 2003, pp. 592-599

[PDF] The United States, the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world, is the only capitalist democracy without some type of national, public health care system. Over 40 million U.S. residents are currently without access to health care, which translates into nearly one in five families with at least one uninsured member. [/PDF]

Source

[Startraveler]

Right my behind.

I'm going to quote Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which we signed almost 60 years ago:

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

These are principles to which we as a nation have committed ourselves.

[Guardsman Bass]

Why not find the parents of those children and make them take care of them instead of finding more programs and fundings?

Talk about being a bloody idiot. It's precisely because either

A)said kids' parents can't afford health insurance, usually because of such "trivial" expenses such as paying their rent and providing food, and/or

B)said kids' parents are under-insured, meaning that although they technically have insurance, their insurance doesn't mean sh**, so when they get cut off by the insurance company they get to join the crowd of medical bankruptcies, of whom more than three-quarters had insurance when they got the illness that bankrupted them.

People who make idiotic statements like the above, essentially saying "Screw these kids; I don't want another entitlement!" make my blood boil, as you can see in this thread. Usually it's because either they're a bunch of callous *******s who think that, well, since they have insurance, the rest of the world can screw itself, or they're simply too ignorant to actually look at what the data suggests, buying into a bunch of free-market, Republitard nonsense.

[Guardsman Bass]

Oh yeah, then why don't you and those who agree with you FUND the RIGHT to a health care for those who can't afford it?

I pay taxes, but I am not going to pay more just because there are those like yourself who thinks they have rights to more entitlements.

Gee, I don't know, maybe because the Right Wing has so demonized the notion of Single-Payer Insurance in the United States that even none of the Democrats can even get a Single Payer proposal into serious debate in either the House and Senate, up until the point where the only Democratic Presidential candidate promising a Single Payer System is Dennis Kucinich? Frankly, if the option to fund a Canadian-style Single Payer System (or a Swedish Style System), I would vote to fund it in a second.

[Dusty Digital]

Why not find the parents of those children and make them take care of them instead of finding more programs and fundings?

And if they can't/won't?

[Clocker]

This really shows a complete lack of long-term thinking. Already the US education system has gone through a serious decline in the last 30 years, now this too? I'm just saying, it really is essentially the children/youth that will make the America of tomorrow. In other words, screwing the kids now for some short-term financial gain will have a serious negative impact in the future, in all likelihood.

[AROCES]

Talk about being a bloody idiot. It's precisely because either

A)said kids' parents can't afford health insurance, usually because of such "trivial" expenses such as paying their rent and providing food, and/or

Oh really, it is idiotic then to have kids you can't afford and who is to say what ones can't afford? Then you pay for their insurance if you so much care about their financial difficulty, instead of flapping your wings about being concern and then using other peoples money(taxes) so you will look good.

B)said kids' parents are under-insured, meaning that although they technically have insurance, their insurance doesn't mean sh**, so when they get cut off by the insurance company they get to join the crowd of medical bankruptcies, of whom more than three-quarters had insurance when they got the illness that bankrupted them.

People who make idiotic statements like the above, essentially saying "Screw these kids; I don't want another entitlement!" make my blood boil, as you can see in this thread. Usually it's because either they're a bunch of callous *******s who think that, well, since they have insurance, the rest of the world can screw itself, or they're simply too ignorant to actually look at what the data suggests, buying into a bunch of free-market, Republitard nonsense.

I tell you what, when you file your taxes, why don't you pay a lot more than what you are suppsoe to and then suggest it to the other who are so caring for other peoples financial difficulty. Don't be all talk and keep using other peoples resources(tax) to make it look like you are a saint.

You Socialist Democrats and your crowd of we are the caring crap need to start putting some food on the plate that comes from yourself. You are nothing but collect TAX so you can be the hero.

Edited July 16, 2007 by AROCES

[AROCES]

And if they can't/won't?

Then you make them, instead of insisting it on others.

[AROCES]

I'm going to quote Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which we signed almost 60 years ago:

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

These are principles to which we as a nation have committed ourselves.

Who actually signed this Maoist declaration?

[Cradle of Fish]

This really shows a complete lack of long-term thinking. Already the US education system has gone through a serious decline in the last 30 years, now this too? I'm just saying, it really is essentially the children/youth that will make the America of tomorrow. In other words, screwing the kids now for some short-term financial gain will have a serious negative impact in the future, in all likelihood.

The problem as I see it is that most people in the US are too patriotic to believe that there is something wrong with their country, including some of the leaders, so nothing is done about it.

Who actually signed this Maoist declaration?

Everyone in the UN I believe. It's hardly Maoist, thats really old style thinking if anything that you dont agree with you is related to Communism.

[Dusty Digital]

Then you make them, instead of insisting it on others.

How can you make them?

It's not the kids' fault their parents are disabled/lazy/crackheads or anything else for that matter. In my mind making them suffer for it goes against equal opportunity.

[AROCES]

The problem as I see it is that most people in the US are too patriotic to believe that there is something wrong with their country, including some of the leaders, so nothing is done about it.

Everyone in the UN I believe. It's hardly Maoist, thats really old style thinking if anything that you dont agree with you is related to Communism.

It is related to Communist thinking no matter how you try to camouflage it. Social programs, entitlements, priviledge all from a central goverment.

[Startraveler]

In my mind making them suffer for it goes against equal opportunity.

Equal opportunity is for communists. A right to adequate food, clothing, and health care is for communists. Only when a significant portion of our population is ill-housed, ill-clothed, and ill-nourished will we have beaten those pinkos.

I guess this is a bit superfluous, considering the statements of those who subscribe to this point of view practically mock themselves.

[AROCES]

How can you make them?

It's not the kids' fault their parents are disabled/lazy/crackheads or anything else for that matter. In my mind making them suffer for it goes against equal opportunity.

How? By using the same effort of persistence you use on forcing the burden on those who are already paying enough taxes.