The fight over children’s health — Round II

Even before the president vetoed the bipartisan bill to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP), Democratic leaders said this legislation wouldn’t quietly fade away. They would bring the bill back up, over and over again.

Apparently, that starts today, with another vote on the $35 billion plan. The bill isn’t exactly the same — it costs the same amount, and it covers the same amount of kids, but it’s been tailored to address the Republicans’ excuses for opposing the measure.

The new version will underscore that illegal immigrants will not have access to the expanded program. It will ease adults off the program in one year, rather than the two in the vetoed version. And it establishes a firmer eligibility cap at 300 percent of the federal poverty line, just more than $60,000 for a family of four. […]

The new bill seeks to allay concerns laid out by 38 Republicans seeking to vote for the next version. Perhaps most important, it stipulates that applicants must have their Social Security numbers checked by the Social Security Administration. If Social Security cannot confirm citizenship, applicants will be required to provide states with documentation proving eligibility.

It stipulates that no funds will be available to states to cover children in families with incomes exceeding 300 percent of the poverty level. Performance bonuses will be offered to states only for enrolling additional children in Medicaid, the program for the truly poor.

To answer criticism that the bill would encourage families with private health insurance onto government-funded health care, the new version adds performance bonuses for states that provide funding to employed parents to cover the additional cost of enrolling their children in their existing private policies.

If reality has any meaning at all, this should make it at least a little tougher for some of these Republicans to oppose healthcare for low-income kids. As Speaker Pelosi put it, “The bill addresses all of the concerns that were expressed by our colleagues and by the president. We hope the Republicans will take yes for an answer.”

Indeed, it appears that GOP obstinacy is starting to wane.

On the Hill, Republican lawmakers quietly concede they’re feeling nervous…

At a contentious House GOP meeting with Leavitt on Tuesday night, wavering Republicans pledged that they would stand with the president. But others quietly voiced concerns that the SCHIP showdown is taking a toll on their political prospects.

…while Republicans in the Bush administration are suddenly willing to invest quite a bit more in the S-CHIP program than the president has previously acknowledged.

Bush administration officials yesterday voiced conciliation, suggesting the president could accept legislation that would expand the program by about $20 billion over five years, far bigger than the $5 billion expansion that Bush initially proposed.

Stay tuned.

Good summary of new bill, and concerns of wavering Republicans, here:

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2007/10/dems_pressure_biggert_gop_on_s.html

  • 60 grand for a family of 4?
    That’s still going to be pretty good fodder for conservatives.
    Sure it isn’t much in New York city, but in 90% of the country 60k is very good cheese and many voters won’t see these families as “needy”.

    The GOP did a pretty crummy job of defending their side last time though, so it’ll fly, I think.

  • The let-’em-use-the-Emergency-Room Decider may eventually sign a bill (with or without a signing statement) rather than face his first veto override. His handlers will spin it as a win-win on whatever contrived basis they eventually conjure up. A decisive veto override would essentially finish Bush. Rethugs might finally feel empowered enough to oppose him on other issues as well in their in own narrow reelection interests.

  • Sure it isn’t much in New York city, but in 90% of the country 60k is very good cheese and many voters won’t see these families as “needy”.

    Needy? No.

    In need of help getting health care for their kids due to the ridiculous costs of private plans? Yes.

    Although it will be interesting to see if the GOP still goes around calling this “socialized medicine.” Since the other issues have been addressed, that’s all they got left.

  • at my place of employment, private insurance (group plan) for a family costs $15,000 per year. that is 25% of the $60,000 wage limit mentioned above. is there anyone who thinks that spending 25% of your gross income (not take home – gross income) is reasonable? how about putting a roof over your head? or feeding your kids? or providing clothes for your kids? never mind trying to save something for your retirement…………..i see nothing wrong with these children being on s-chip instead of private insurance.

  • Bush and his leadership-lemmings on the Hill are going to see this as a back-down by Dems; they’ll play the “we-can-still-beat-this-socialist-crap” card all the way to the bitter end. But in the end, it’ll be interesting to see Dubya try and spin a major policy defeat into a positive for his administration.

    I just want to see Boehner’s head explode. It’ll be interesting….

  • In support of what Just Bill said, a single major medical event could easily cost half or more of that princely $60k income, which in real terms is probably closer to $40k or less these days after taxes and deductions.

    Doesn’t sound so princely when looked at through the lens of reality, does it?

  • Let the republicans lose their souls on this issue. They tighten their belt to choking on children’s health issues but can’t keep their pants up on defense spending which should accurately be labeled war funding.

    Bush will claim he is doing all the compromising on SCHIP but will insist congress compromise on war funding as he adds billions more in supplemental war funding requests.

  • The other thing is – this isn’t a bill for people who are in poverty. That’s what Medicaid is for. The GOP has been trying to spin this as an anti-poverty measure that’s ballooning – it’s never been that. This is SUPPOSED to be covering the people who aren’t in poverty but also aren’t exactly rich and can’t get health insurance for their kids for a variety of reasons (like the kids have pre-existing conditions, or the parents are entrepreneurs with small businesses who don’t have bargaining power to negotiate with insurance companies for decent family rates, or they just work at “crappy” jobs that don’t provide health insurance but do pay a living wage otherwise).

    This is not an anti-poverty program, no matter how much the GOP wants to spin it as an anti-poverty program spun out of control. This is firmly a middle-class assistance program designed to SHORE UP the failing insurance industry and keep it limping along for a few more years. The government is covering high risk kids that the insurance companies don’t want to cover – it’s a way of keeping the current system working without having to make major changes. This is a measure to address a market failure that is causing a humanitarian problem in this country, and the fact that the ideologues can’t even understand that there IS a market failure that needs to be corrected is the only reason there’s a fight about this in the first place.

  • We are at the time in our history when someone should give Mr. Bush a modest proposal; for his folly in Iraq is equal to or greater than England’s miserable history of occupying Ireland for two centuries. In fact, I’d bet if Mr. Bush had his druthers, he’d like to see us in Iraq into the next century. -Kevo

  • Comments are closed.