Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Health & Wellness

Bush Trying to Kill Child Health Care

By Amy Goodman, King Features Syndicate. Posted July 26, 2007.


Congress is considering bipartisan legislation that will cover poor children in the U.S. The major obstacle? President Bush is vowing to veto the bill.
Advertisement

Deamonte Driver had a toothache. He was 12 years old. He had no insurance, and his mother couldn't afford the $80 to have the decayed tooth removed. He might have gotten it taken care of through Medicaid, but his mother couldn't find a dentist who accepted the low reimbursements.

Instead, Deamonte got some minimal attention from an emergency room, his condition worsened and he died. Deamonte was one of 9 million children in the U.S. without health insurance.

Congress is considering bipartisan legislation that will cover poor children in the U.S.

The major obstacle? President Bush is vowing to veto the bill, even though Republican and Democratic senators reached bipartisan agreement on it. The bill adds $35 billion to the State Children's Health Insurance Program over the next five years by increasing federal taxes on cigarettes.

The conservative Heritage Foundation is against the tobacco tax to fund SCHIP, saying that it "disproportionately burdens low-income smokers" as well as "young adults." No mention is made of any adverse impact on Heritage-funder Altria Group, the cigarette giant formerly known as Philip Morris.

According to the American Association for Respiratory Care, with every 10 percent rise in the cigarette tax, youth smoking drops by 7 percent and overall smoking declines by 4 percent.

Marian Wright Edelman, founder of the Children's Defense Fund, says: "It is a public health good in and of itself and will save lives to increase the tobacco tax. Cigarettes kill and cigarettes provoke lung cancer, and every child and every [other] human being we can, by increasing the cigarette tax, stop from smoking or slow down from smoking is going to have a public health benefit, save taxpayers money from the cost of the effects of smoking and tobacco."

Two programs serve as the health safety net for poor and working-class children: Medicaid and SCHIP (pronounced "s-chip"). SCHIP is a federal grant program that allows states to provide health coverage to children who belong to working families earning too much to be eligible for Medicaid but not enough to afford private health insurance when their employers do not provide it. It's the SCHIP funding that is now being debated in Congress.

The Children's Defense Fund has published scores of stories similar to Deamonte's. Children like Devante Johnson of Houston. At 13, Devante was fighting advanced kidney cancer. His mother tried to renew his Medicaid coverage, but bureaucratic red tape tied up the process. By the time Devante got access to the care he needed, his fate was sealed. He died at the age of 14, in Bush's home state, only miles from the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, one of the world's leading cancer treatment and research facilities.

With children's lives at stake, Edelman has no patience for political gamesmanship: "Why is this country, at this time, the richest in the world, arguing about how few or how many children they can serve? We ought to--this is a no-brainer. The American people want all of its children served. All children deserve health coverage, and I don't know why we're having such a hard time getting our president and our political leaders to get it, that children should have health insurance."

Republican Sen. Gordon Smith originally introduced the SCHIP budget resolution in the Senate. Unlike Bush, who is not up for re-election, Smith is defending his vulnerable Senate seat in 2008, in the blue state of Oregon. He, like other Republicans who are breaking with Bush on the war in Iraq, is sensitive to Bush's domestic policies. Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families just released a poll that says 91 percent of Americans support the expansion of SCHIP to cover more kids.

And the American people are willing to go much further. As demonstrated by the popularity of Michael Moore's latest blockbuster, "SiCKO," the public, across the political spectrum, is ready to fix the U.S. healthcare system. How many more children like Deamonte and Devante have to die before the politicians, all with great health insurance themselves, take action?

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: schip, health care, children

Amy Goodman is the host of the nationally syndicated radio news program, Democracy Now!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Health and Wellness! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Does the veto matter?
Posted by: whoisjoe on Jul 26, 2007 3:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is outrageous indeed. Anyone know if there is enough support for this bill to override a veto?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ah Repugwicans, the keepers of values and other NAZI characteristics
Posted by: james2021 on Jul 26, 2007 6:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is another overiding issue about poor childrens's health. If the government pays to make them healthy, they will grow up to be DEMOCRATS, and vote against the Monarchy, so therefore let them die young. Solves the Voter registration problems for the Repugwicans.

And besides that the Tobacco lobby has paid it's protection money to the Repugwicans, and now want protection.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You gotta hate bush
Posted by: Cruella on Jul 26, 2007 6:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was reading an article yesterday about the poverty divide in the US and it talked about "homeless children". We have out problems in the UK but I've more or less never heard about children living on the streets. There are options for parents who ca't find accommodation. For us the poverty gap is still failing women pretty substantially but children are kept for the most part out of extreme poverty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» ???? Posted by: gellero
The compassionate conservative strikes again.
Posted by: wmGreybeard on Jul 26, 2007 7:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We must have those funds for democracy in Iraq.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's get this done together
Posted by: willymack on Jul 26, 2007 7:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, we all the bushies are greedy scumbags, along with most members of Congress. Anyone who's watched "Sicko" with the aim of getting informed and not just entertained has learned that in Europe the government is afraid of the people, and not the other way around as it is here. That's why they have such good healthcare systems-not perfect-but infinitely better than ours. What we need to do is to communicate to our elected representitaves and senators that we want universal health care, NOW, and not half-assed measures like health care for children only, and if they don't support our desires, we definately will not support them. We should further stipulate that insurance companies, the pharmacutical industries, and the HMOs should have NO SAY in any if this, and the government should run it. If communication by telephone, fax, or email doesn't work, then let's talk about a general strike. Remember what the Englishman said would happen if the government tried to take away the British healthcare system? "A revolution" is what he said, and meant it. I don't think we have to go that far here; a general strike would work just fine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What kind of a sick, twisted, maniacal world do we live in
Posted by: Trazom on Jul 26, 2007 9:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The conservative Heritage Foundation is against the tobacco tax to fund SCHIP, saying that it "disproportionately burdens low-income smokers" as well as "young adults."

Hmmm. Conservative, against helping children, for smoking. Do I have that right? So it's better to deny children the money they need to seek adequate healthcare so that more people can afford the cancer sticks that kill them anyway! Total f***in hippocrates. Only in the US of A.

President Bush is vowing to veto the bill, even though Republican and Democratic senators reached bipartisan agreement on it.

I think by now everyone knows his capacity to do exactly the opposite of what is right and reasonable just so that he can fulfill his legacy of 100% vetoing (or using the threat of a veto - he is good at that) of anything that is actually good for people.

SCHIP is a federal grant program that allows states to provide health coverage to children who belong to working families earning too much to be eligible for Medicaid but not enough to afford private health insurance when their employers do not provide it.

And what about a program to help families who can't afford insurance when their employers do offer it? Left to rot? What are the income levels to qualify for SCHIP?

All children deserve health coverage, and I don't know why we're having such a hard time getting our president and our political leaders to get it, that children should have health insurance.

Could it be because our president and leader are too entrenched in an endless war in a desert thousands of miles away to the tune of almost $600 billion? No Child Left Behind My Ass.

Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families just released a poll that says 91 percent of Americans support the expansion of SCHIP to cover more kids.

This is a death sentence. Whenever the majority of Americans support something the Decider surely vetoes it, or threatens to do so, whether it be stem cell research, Iraq withdrawal timetable, or something else. It is his legacy (see above). He must protect it at all costs.

How many more children like Deamonte and Devante have to die before the politicians, all with great health insurance themselves, take action?

Untold thousands. No one's going to do anything anytime soon.

Lastly, the author does not explain Bush's reasons for vowing to veto this legislation. Is it because he trusts the Heritage Foundation with his life? Does he own stock in the Altria Group? How much money have they given to the Republican party? Inquring minds want to know.

Seems Bush would rather perpetuate the smoking industry and exacerbate the already burgeoning healthcare system than getting sick underpriviledged kids the medical attention they require RIGHT NOW. I have long since said he is a cancer on this country and the world, and how fitting that statement is at this moment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush's "family values"
Posted by: duck-lady on Jul 26, 2007 9:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Republicans' "family values" strike again. It is difficult to understand how people (especially Christians) still think that Republicans have better values and are more compassionate than Democrats.

What I don't fully understand, is why our country can only muster enough compassion to provide health care for the children of these poor families. Why not cover the whole family? If mom or dad get sick, how will they care for the children and how will they work? Seems like it is important to have the caregivers who are providing the home and food for the children to also be healthy. If they die, then no amount of health care in the world will help the children get their parents back.

It just reinforces the short-sightedness of our lack of universal health care for all Americans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bush's "family values" Posted by: Maryanne
Who Paid for the President's Polyps?
Posted by: joonmoon on Jul 26, 2007 10:02 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Isn't he, like the nation's highest paid civil servant, meaning he had his cancer treatment on the taxpayer's dime...? Can we get that back?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stalinist-Like "Free Market" Ideology
Posted by: CatDad on Jul 26, 2007 10:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Conservatives will not admit that their "free market" ideology is wrong under ANY circumstances. They'd rather deny millions of children access to health care than allow for the the creation of another successful government-run program like Medicare to fill the gap where the private market has failed.

The free market approach to health care in America has been given every conceivable opportunity to succeed. They've had decades to make it right. Even HMO's, once touted as the savior of the private insurance model in the 80s, have failed to lower costs or to provide further access to health care for those who've been shut out of the system.

Anyone following my posts knows that I am profoundly pessimistic about any changes to our heath care system taking place. Hillary has been bought off by the health insurance lobby...and if she gets in she'll bring with her painful memories about the previous health reform attempt...but, she'll gladly take the votes of those of us who do want health care reform anyway...then if she gets in...the issue will immediately go to the back burner...No comments necessary if Slick Mitt or Rudy get in....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

America's twisted president
Posted by: HughScott on Jul 26, 2007 10:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Iraq War aside, George W. has demonstrated many times his lack of compassion towards unfortunate human beings.

We all know about Bush going on vacation during Hurricane Katrina while hundreds of fellow Americans drowned in New Orleans. But how many of us remember his reaction to the 2005 tsunami catastrophe in Southeast Asia that killed over 200,000 people?

Our country is one of the richest on Earth. Yet incredibly to me, in response to the horrific disaster, Bush initially offered a miniscule $15 million in relief to help the beleaguered nations recover.

I learned about his humiliating handout while watching CNN. At first, I couldn’t believe it. After months of research for my second book about Bush, “LIAR-in-CHIEF,” I knew he was a heartless hypocrite who had no qualms about killing innocent women and children in Iraq. But his unsympathetic reaction to the tidal wave tragedy soared off the Richter scale of callous indifference, insulting Muslims and other so-called “nonbelievers” worldwide.

Blogged one political pundit on the Internet that day, “Bush’s generosity towards the tsunami victims is like tipping the waiter of a $100 meal ten cents.”

Commented a more cynical web surfer, “Bush would have donated $15 billion had white-skinned Christians died in Southeast Asia instead of brown-skinned Hindus, Muslims and Buddhists.”

The next afternoon, December 29, bowing to charges of being a cheapskate, Shrub raised the promised aid to $35 million, less than the amount budgeted for his January 2005 coronation (inauguration). Not surprisingly, the anti-Bush criticism continued.

Complained Jan Egelund, U.N. emergency relief coordinator and former head of the Norwegian Red Cross, in regards to Planet Earth’s wealthiest nations, “It is beyond me why we are so stingy. Christmas time should remind Western countries how rich we have become.”

Irked by Egelund’s remarks, George W. told reporters at his Crawford, Texas, ranch, “I felt like the person who made that statement was misguided and ill-informed.”

Shrub was the misguided and ill-informed individual, not Egelund. In 2003, when expressed as a portion of gross national product (GNP), the world’s richest 22 countries made charitable donations of less than 1 percent. Norway was highest contributor at 0.92 percent of GNP. Dead last on the list was the United States at 0.15 percent.

Back to the tsunami calamity. On December 30, Bush surrendered to public pressure again and increased the promised relief to $350 million -- chump change compared to the billions spent each month in Iraq.

And then, there is Shrub's record-setting 152 executions while the governor of Texas.

In the defunct magazine, Talk , he reportedly discussed one of his execution victims, Karla Faye Tucker, a convicted murderess who became a sincere and devoted Christian on death row.

George W. apparently didn’t believe Karla had changed because during the Talk interview, he imitated her failed appeal for mercy by pursing his lips, squinting his eyes and saying in a squeaky voice, “Please don’t kill me.”

How sick is that, America?

Hugh E. Scott, Vietnam veteran and the author of George Dub-ya Bush, THE PHONY FIGHTER PILOT . To read a synoposis and sample chapter, visit PhonyFighterPilot.com.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush
Posted by: bob t on Jul 26, 2007 10:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush and his enablers have the gall to call themselves pro-life. This is truly what they are, NOT. They are pro-death and pro GREED for money and political power. The Bush religious enablers, the Catholic Church, my church, and their brethern the evangelical fundies are not in the least pro-life. They are only pro money and pro political power.
If they were really pro-life they would stop all the killing of the living that they are so dedicated to. Wake up EWTN ( the Catholic cable channel, a bunch of hypocrites and phonies) and stop your pro-life BS. You are nothing but a cabal of horrors dedicated to political power for yourselves and death to others. If you and the pope were truly pro-life than you would not be supporting yet another Holocaust as your predecessors supported the last Holocaust. Nazism is alive and well among the religious right wing nutjobs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

George W. Bush...
Posted by: jmooney on Jul 26, 2007 12:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is a VERY bad man.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: George W. Bush... Posted by: CatDad
» RE: George W. Bush... Posted by: mcartri
Government Health care
Posted by: Kodiak44 on Jul 26, 2007 1:27 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I will try to be the first in line for government health care, because these are the same people that run the DMV, well maybe I want to be last in line, because these are also the same people that run the VA.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Government Health care Posted by: CatDad
» RE: Government Health care Posted by: Kodiak44
» RE: Government Health care Posted by: CatDad
» Just wanted to thank you Posted by: Kodiak44
The democrates "poisen pilled" their own bill.
Posted by: wishninja on Jul 26, 2007 4:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Prohibitionists Democrats are hiding behind sick children and gambling innocent lives to push their prohibition forward. Its the war on drugs with a liberal spin. A black market in tobacco has already started because of these insane morality taxes.

I mean come on haven't we had enough prohibition and enough "reefer" madness with tobacco already? If they really wanted to pass the law instead of just creating political stand on the shoulders of children they would have passed a spending bill that doesn't seek to target a specific group of helplessly addicted tobacco users most of which have a habit they are having trouble kicking. A high percentage of poverty stricken children have parents that are hopelessly addicted and are using the money to fund their habit instead of the health care their family needs already. Its bad enough the prohibitionists have taxed these children's health care they want to tax away their food and shelter also? Sick and sad I'm glad the bill is dead. Stop the drug war now! Tobacco is the new front in the war on drugs see it for what it is. Stop the prohibitionists!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nothing but talk, talk and talk
Posted by: Ingarose on Jul 26, 2007 7:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article and most of the comments actually make me sick.It is simply nothing more than talk and more talk. The truth is that neither the president nor the republicans nor the democtrats care one iota.

What is needed is an ecconomic meltdown with a crash on wall street where the rich will have to fuffer some as well. In the meantime nothing much will happen, Bush will spend billions on his Iraq war with the democrats blessings. What on earth does it matter to all of them if two American children die, after all this is a small statistic compared to all the Iraqi children who die daily. But what do we all do? We write stupid comments to stupid articles (I am not saying that the article was stupid, just useless).
As a senior citizen with a few rotten teeth left and failing eyesight I just wish 'medicare' would cover teeth and eyes, but I suppose they believe that teeth and eyes are nonessential. Some idiotic Bush supporter will probably tell me that I am trying to sponge off the government. My husband and I have worked and payed our taxes but now we are expandable just like all those young men and women who are being used as cannon fodder. When they don't die and come back broken, tough luck.
Once again, nothing much will change unless there is a major natural disaster or an ecconomic total meltdown.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He's already killed healthcare against everyone.
Posted by: maxpayne on Jul 26, 2007 7:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So much for the Bush/Limbaugh "pro-life" nonsense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Witness
Posted by: Erik1968 on Jul 26, 2007 11:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've seen homeless children! I see them every day. I work at a homeless shelter in affluent Portsmouth, New Hampshire. No, you don't generally see kids on the street. They're sleeping in cars, or shuttling from relative to relative, "couch surfing," as the kids say.

Lots of times, if the shelters are full (and they usually are) towns will put up homeless families in motels on a short term basis.

In England, as well as all the other first-world countries, there's something called "public housing." America chose to end this program, for all intents and purposes, in the early eighties.

But don't worry. Even though a record number of American children will sleep in a shelter, or on someone's floor tonight, they will sleep soundly in the knowledge that this great freeing of capital has led America to a new gilded age. These sweet little cherubs know they don't have to be as lazy as their parents.
If they can survive childhood poverty and malnutrition, work hard in school and earn a scholarship, and become fabulously wealthy, they can one day look forward to a life almost completely free of taxes.

Isn't that what's important? Thousands of homeless children are a small price to pay to allow the rich to enjoy the spoils of their hard work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Time for
Posted by: mountainmama on Jul 27, 2007 8:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
another revolution. It's truely reaching this point. Maybe that is the only way we can get rid of Bush/Cheney and these greed-mongers and war-mongers. People really, really need to get on their high horse and really let their congress people know in huge numbers and not quietly either! Then if that doesn't do anything...and I'm not holding my breath that it will...then we need a revolution of sorts. It will simply reach that point if it keeps going the way it is. Just by the nature of things, it is bound to happen.

I've been saying for months now that we will see a change in the percentages of those voting Independent or Green Party over the other two parties...bigger number then every before in this next election. Far too many are fed up with both parties!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Children's Health and the Commonwealth
Posted by: Betsy L. Angert on Jul 28, 2007 8:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear Amy Goodman . . .

I thank you so much for speaking on this issue. I find this entire affair extremely distressing. Our children are dependent on us. We teach them more by not caring for them than we might realize.

When we do not provide health care for the littlest people, we demonstrate that the progeny are not important. We may state the young are our future; however, if we do not work to ensure [insure] their good health, how will the children interpret our actions.

I was not aware of how this might impact the Heritage Foundation, or more accurately affect their association with Altria Group. Yikes! For me, this truth only hurts my heart more.

When I wrote of this situation my focus was on the Commonwealth and how our fore fathers perceived our obligation to our offspring. Thomas Paine penned his thoughts on the difference between government and society. We as a culture must care for our young. However, it seems that a compassionate conservative or two differ with this view.

I invite you to read.
Congress and Bush Clash; Children's Health and the Commonwealth
I welcome your comments.

Betsy L. Angert
BeThink.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]