DEMOCRAT: Are needy children at the core of the CHIP debate?
Clipper Editorial Opinion 24.JUL.07
By Davis County Democratic Chair, Richard Watson
Nine-and-a-half years ago, Governor Mike Leavitt presented the first Childr
en’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) card to a family from Sevier County. Since then, thousands of uninsured Utah children have benefited from the federal and state funded children’s insurance program. CHIP, was created in 1997 by a Democratic President and Republican Congress. Because of the millions of children that have been insured, Congress is looking to reauthorize and expand CHIP past the September 2007 expiration date.
However, President Bush has threatened a veto if the extension of CHIP is passed. And to lobby for Bush’s veto, Mike Leavitt, Secretary of Health and Human Services, has met some Republican opposition from the threat, including Senator Hatch. Hatch, in an unusual agreement with Democratic Senators, insists that a 61¢ increase in tobacco taxes would help fund the CHIP expansion. This fund will add over 3 million new children to the program while keeping almost 7 million in CHIP.
Locally, CHIP has seen some amount of success in covering the uninsured children of Utah. But over the past few years, our Republican controlled Legislature has resisted in expanding CHIP in Utah by capping enrollment, even though most Utahn’s (about 87%) feel that CHIP is important. Even if Congress does extend CHIP, our legislators still have to fund the state portion of the insurance. But, over the years, Utah Republican Legislators have had a disappointing record of helping children.
In Utah, one out of eight children (about 71,000) has no access to health care. It is interesting to note that the majority of these children live in households where the parents work. Sadly, these parents are working in jobs without health insurance coverage. The question then, is why do we have lawmakers in Utah that campaign on “family” values, yet every year they fail to properly address the needs of Utah’s children to be healthy and educated?
The answer is found in the often used slogans of “socialism” will take over or they believe in the “free-market” system. Of course, none of these slogans have ever produced any solutions to our health care crisis. I have a hard time believing that our country will turn into some “communist dictatorship” just because we want to take care of the medical needs of low-income families. Of all the social programs that have passed in this country, I have yet to see any “black U.N. helicopters” flying around. Furthermore, it is hypocritical for those elected leaders to claim themselves as “Pro-Life” and then neglect the child after birth. It is disturbing to see this lack of compassion for children. The time is now to free ourselves from the nonsensical and fearful rhetoric of “burdening our government” and keep our moral obligation of helping the neediest, especially the children. Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, “We cannot always build the future for our youth, but we can build our youth for the future”.
Hopefully, our congressmen and our legislators will do the right thing by taking care of our future with healthy children.
REPUBLICAN: Are needy children at the core of the CHIP debate?
Clipper Editorial Opinion 24.JUL.07
By Utah State Republican Vice Chair, Todd Weiler
Last week featured a standoff between Senator Orrin Hatch and Housing
Secretary Mike Leavitt over the renewal of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (“CHIP”). The standoff is especially intriguing in light of the fact that Leavitt will be out of a job in January 2009, and many believe he has his eye on a seat in the U.S. Senate.
CHIP was designed to assist children of the working poor, whose parents make too much for Medicaid but not enough to afford private insurance. It has been successful for 10 years and covers 6.6 million children. Hatch claims he wants to put kids first, and doesn’t want to put low-income kids at risk by using CHIP to cover adults. He claims Leavitt plans to increase CHIP’s cost by adding adult waivers. Some states cover more adults through their CHIP program than children, which results in funding shortfalls.
The new investment in CHIP will be paid for with a 61 cent increase in the federal tax on cigarettes, and would add 3.2 million children over the next five years. Hatch admits that adding children will cost a lot more per child than the existing program because the new children are harder to find.
Leavitt believes the use of tax increases to fund spending increases is undesirable. Leavitt claims that the bill is nothing more than a massive expansion of government-run health care and will result in higher taxes. He contends it will move a million people off private insurance and onto public assistance. The bill reduces outlays in five years, which will squander any temporary gains.
Leavitt is resisting what he perceives to be a gradual government take-over of health care. Leavitt claims that Hatch and others are putting millions of needy children at risk by trying to expand the program in light of a threatened presidential veto. He wants to reauthorize CHIP for only the low-income children it was intended to serve, and to allow the economy to make private health insurance more affordable.
Both sides are claiming the high ground here. Hatch claims he is just trying to help needy children. (And who could possibly be opposed to that?) Leavitt maintains the bill is short-sighted, and is a blatant attempt to federalize medicine. Leavitt seems to be striking a common Republican theme against raising taxes to expand federal programs. Hatch is not up for reelection until 2012 – the same time that Gov. Huntsman will likely complete his second term as governor. One can only wonder if Leavitt is preparing for a Senate bid in 2010 – when Senator Bennett’s seat is up. Stay tuned for a compromise on CHIP that will result in maintaining coverage for existing recipients with a limited expansion.
Reproduced with permission from the Davis County Clipper
en’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) card to a family from Sevier County. Since then, thousands of uninsured Utah children have benefited from the federal and state funded children’s insurance program. CHIP, was created in 1997 by a Democratic President and Republican Congress. Because of the millions of children that have been insured, Congress is looking to reauthorize and expand CHIP past the September 2007 expiration date.However, President Bush has threatened a veto if the extension of CHIP is passed. And to lobby for Bush’s veto, Mike Leavitt, Secretary of Health and Human Services, has met some Republican opposition from the threat, including Senator Hatch. Hatch, in an unusual agreement with Democratic Senators, insists that a 61¢ increase in tobacco taxes would help fund the CHIP expansion. This fund will add over 3 million new children to the program while keeping almost 7 million in CHIP.
Locally, CHIP has seen some amount of success in covering the uninsured children of Utah. But over the past few years, our Republican controlled Legislature has resisted in expanding CHIP in Utah by capping enrollment, even though most Utahn’s (about 87%) feel that CHIP is important. Even if Congress does extend CHIP, our legislators still have to fund the state portion of the insurance. But, over the years, Utah Republican Legislators have had a disappointing record of helping children.
In Utah, one out of eight children (about 71,000) has no access to health care. It is interesting to note that the majority of these children live in households where the parents work. Sadly, these parents are working in jobs without health insurance coverage. The question then, is why do we have lawmakers in Utah that campaign on “family” values, yet every year they fail to properly address the needs of Utah’s children to be healthy and educated?
The answer is found in the often used slogans of “socialism” will take over or they believe in the “free-market” system. Of course, none of these slogans have ever produced any solutions to our health care crisis. I have a hard time believing that our country will turn into some “communist dictatorship” just because we want to take care of the medical needs of low-income families. Of all the social programs that have passed in this country, I have yet to see any “black U.N. helicopters” flying around. Furthermore, it is hypocritical for those elected leaders to claim themselves as “Pro-Life” and then neglect the child after birth. It is disturbing to see this lack of compassion for children. The time is now to free ourselves from the nonsensical and fearful rhetoric of “burdening our government” and keep our moral obligation of helping the neediest, especially the children. Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, “We cannot always build the future for our youth, but we can build our youth for the future”.
Hopefully, our congressmen and our legislators will do the right thing by taking care of our future with healthy children.
REPUBLICAN: Are needy children at the core of the CHIP debate?
Clipper Editorial Opinion 24.JUL.07
By Utah State Republican Vice Chair, Todd Weiler
Last week featured a standoff between Senator Orrin Hatch and Housing
Secretary Mike Leavitt over the renewal of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (“CHIP”). The standoff is especially intriguing in light of the fact that Leavitt will be out of a job in January 2009, and many believe he has his eye on a seat in the U.S. Senate.CHIP was designed to assist children of the working poor, whose parents make too much for Medicaid but not enough to afford private insurance. It has been successful for 10 years and covers 6.6 million children. Hatch claims he wants to put kids first, and doesn’t want to put low-income kids at risk by using CHIP to cover adults. He claims Leavitt plans to increase CHIP’s cost by adding adult waivers. Some states cover more adults through their CHIP program than children, which results in funding shortfalls.
The new investment in CHIP will be paid for with a 61 cent increase in the federal tax on cigarettes, and would add 3.2 million children over the next five years. Hatch admits that adding children will cost a lot more per child than the existing program because the new children are harder to find.
Leavitt believes the use of tax increases to fund spending increases is undesirable. Leavitt claims that the bill is nothing more than a massive expansion of government-run health care and will result in higher taxes. He contends it will move a million people off private insurance and onto public assistance. The bill reduces outlays in five years, which will squander any temporary gains.
Leavitt is resisting what he perceives to be a gradual government take-over of health care. Leavitt claims that Hatch and others are putting millions of needy children at risk by trying to expand the program in light of a threatened presidential veto. He wants to reauthorize CHIP for only the low-income children it was intended to serve, and to allow the economy to make private health insurance more affordable.
Both sides are claiming the high ground here. Hatch claims he is just trying to help needy children. (And who could possibly be opposed to that?) Leavitt maintains the bill is short-sighted, and is a blatant attempt to federalize medicine. Leavitt seems to be striking a common Republican theme against raising taxes to expand federal programs. Hatch is not up for reelection until 2012 – the same time that Gov. Huntsman will likely complete his second term as governor. One can only wonder if Leavitt is preparing for a Senate bid in 2010 – when Senator Bennett’s seat is up. Stay tuned for a compromise on CHIP that will result in maintaining coverage for existing recipients with a limited expansion.
Reproduced with permission from the Davis County Clipper
3 comments:
:)
I'm not expecting Rob to ever voice any displeasure but I'm disappointed with the "new" Congress.
"House Democrats voted on Friday to approve a farm bill that would continue generous farmers’ subsidies at a time of record crop prices."
Way to go Nancy!!!
my parents never needed the govt for help..why should others?
Post a Comment