Even before the impact of the current recession, the last government measurement in 2007 found that nearly 9 million American children are uninsured.
Last year the Democratic Congress passed, and President Bush vetoed, a major expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program that would have covered 3.8 million of these children by 2012 for about 1 percent of the cost of the recent government financial rescue plan. Since that time, the need has grown as 1.2 million additional Americans have lost their jobs.
It is critical that the federal government provide additional assistance to struggling families and states. We shouldn’t make any family have to choose between basic expenses and health care coverage for their kids.
- Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, D-N.Y.
The new Congress is poised to act on President-elect Barack Obama’s campaign promise to provide universal coverage for children. That would be a mistake. When a “free” government plan is offered, it’s nearly impossible to resist. Poorer children would be left behind as states focus on enrolling higher-income kids.
Expanding the program would “crowd out” the private insurance many higher-income kids already have. Putting many millions of children on a government program will quickly lead to restrictions on access to care. Lower- and moderate-income uninsured families, not just children, need help in purchasing policies, and that help could be provided through refundable tax credits.
- Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute
33 Comments
I don’t think “free” healthcare is the answer, but we do need some sort of nationalized plan so that every American has access to healthcare. Right now it’s only a privilege for those who are very poor or those who have a good job or enough money to buy their own…which leaves a large segment of Americans out in the cold. We need to restructure the whole system, but don’t hold your breath..there are too many middle men making a killing off the present system, who have the money to employ all the lobbyists they need to keep things as they are.
We could be the model of how a nationalized system can work, but when there is so much money being made by the drug companies, insurance industries, and large hospital corporations, it will take an act of God to get things to change significantly. If Obama and his team can accomplish this feat, my faith in miracles will be restored.
Mary,
Everyone already has “access” to health care. Some choose not to afford it and others simply can’t.
“free” is exactly what the liberals are pushing for.
True…not some, but many, simply can’t afford it…and that’s what needs to change.
Do you have proof that liberals are wanting health care to be “free”?
Credible sources only, please.
Just in case you were wondering, Nathan:
The Obama-Biden Plan
On health care reform, the American people are too often offered two extremes — government-run health care with higher taxes or letting the insurance companies operate without rules. Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe both of these extremes are wrong, and that’s why they’ve proposed a plan that strengthens employer coverage, makes insurance companies accountable and ensures patient choice of doctor and care without government interference.
The Obama-Biden plan provides affordable, accessible health care for all Americans, builds on the existing health care system, and uses existing providers, doctors, and plans. Under the Obama-Biden plan, patients will be able to make health care decisions with their doctors, instead of being blocked by insurance company bureaucrats.
Under the plan, if you like your current health insurance, nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year. If you don’t have health insurance, you will have a choice of new, affordable health insurance options.
The key word here is “AFFORDABLE”
“If Obama and his team can accomplish this feat, my faith in miracles will be restored.” — Mary_Caruso
—–
I agree, Mary!
With affordable quality health care being available to all Americans I hope to see the numbers of nonviolent prisoners reduced, manufacturing jobs return, obesity treated as a disease of addiction, more who suffer from mental and emotional get help and become the productive members of society they should be, the stigma of being poor reduced… Many benefits to society!
With the obstructionists in Congress reduced SCHIP benefits can and will be expanded, but my hopes are for even more than that!
And, I missed the last couple of days here but did read the Merry Christmas thread. Dog, my thoughts are with you and yours! Wish you didn’t have so many burdens and I hoe you know many care!
I still have a houseful but they’re off for an early morning game of golf and I’m enjoying the quiet. ;-)
I’m in favor of a single-payer universal healthcare coverage for everyone. The insurance industry is the root cause of the mess we’re in now and ought to be relieved of the burden of providing healthcare coverage. It’s not free, of course, but will be funded with tax money instead of premiums. This is one demonstrated area where government can provide the service cheaper and more efficiently than private industry has done, and it has the advantage of covering everybody before they have a catastrophic illness, meaning that it will likely be caught sooner and treated before it gets expensive. In case you hadn’t heard, yes, everybody is currently covered, but too many are only covered in the most expensive way possible, and you are footing the bill.
Congress can not do health care right, like anything else. I think it would lead to universal health care insurance, which I oppose. I think Hawaii just had to withdraw a program which covered more children and had to withdraw it; because of hugh cost overruns.
“Should Congress expand health insurance to cover all children?”
Preamble, United States Constitution:
“…promote the general welfare”
Health care is a right. The system we HAVE is broken. With the poorest bearing the burden to pay for the more well off. We need, and the nation is in favor of, national health care.
The question posed in this thread, Nathan, is: Pro-Con: Should Congress expand health insurance to cover all children? Doesn’t say anything about coverage for everybody.
Yes, every child in this country should have access to quality health care. Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, is entirely wrong. Time and time again, people have underestimated, or overestimated, what it takes for quality health care for our children. If there is one thing, besides the basics, I want my tax dollars going to, it would be child health care.
In the world health care standings, we rate 37th in the world. In performance, we rate 72nd. In % of money spent/gdp. we rate 2nd. In life expectancy, we rate 24th. Our system is broken, and needs serious fixing, especially for our children. Numbers don’t lie.
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
I would love to see a single payor source for health care like Europe…it works well for them and they have much better outcomes.
It would be nearly impossible to do the same thing here, I think the most we can hope for is an improved system, not a changed one. There is too much money being made by “the powers that be” for things to dramatically change. They’ll fight to the death to protect their interests…and that doesn’t include providing quality healthcare at a price that the average person can afford out of pocket.
Nathan has left the room..all you have to do is ask him to back something up or answer a question and he’s gone in a flash.
That, or perhaps I was making Waffles for breakfast…
Perhaps if you wouldn’t run away from every conversation we have about guns you wouldn’t now find yourself having to project your own traits towards me.
LOL, there goes Nathan again…the old bait and switch.
BlueJay,
For heath care to be a “right” you must first take something from someone else. Obviously you are far too ignorant to grasp the concept of what freedom is and how that is what our “rights” are actually based on.
Why don’t you get off your lazy self rightous ass and get a job where you can actually provide your own damn son with health care rather than constantly plague us on this thread with how it is your right to have it.
make that righteous…
“Why don’t you get off your lazy self rightous ass and get a job where you can actually provide your own damn son with health care rather than constantly plague us on this thread with how it is your right to have it.”
There goes Nathan again with his heart full of Christian love and compassion. Do yoiu think maybe Santa left dog shit in his stocking instead of coal?
I thought KFG and the liberal gang were going to buy BlueJay some health insurance.
Mary, why don’t you hop in on that?
For all the Nathans in the world:
Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
where there is sadness, joy;
O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
For it is in giving that we receive;
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;
and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life
Mary,
Did Santa leave you dog shit? Is that why you are the way you are?
Off to brunch at Gerrards, the best biscuts and gravy in the world! I love it when my kids are home!!!! Have a good one everybody.
Mary,
The only time liberals like you talk about God is when you are trying to rub it into the faces of those who actually believe in God.
Idiot.
Oh, and I hope you enjoy your lunch. :)
mary: The idea of universal inusurnce is of course paid for by the taxpayer, and ultimately the results and costs make the current system almost criminal. But there is a catch. Places with such systems have a different taxation raison d’etre. In America the tax code is written to benefit commerce, elsewhere not so much, the needs of the people are paramount hence the VAT system of taxation. I fear that if we laid the template of universal coverage over the existing tax grid it would never mesh and just ooze money down a hole. I know that in Canada and Europe very low cost per diem regulated day care is available which is run at a loss, but paid for by the fact that moms can go to work if they want, contribute to the economy, pay taxes and in the case of single moms get off the welfare roles. In fact they are strongly encouraged to get a job. This is part of a mindset that makes universal coverage only the first step, but it will be demeaned as socialism and unAmerican, hence never be implemented because Congress will never change the basic American taxtion premise.
People wouldn’t need health insurance if hospitals wouldn’t charge people 5,000 for a broken wrist 15,000 for having a kid, and we live in a society that thinks one can pill pop their way to health with drug companies gladly promoting that. and our salt,sugar,fat, and chemical laden food makes us sick.
Get prescription drug ads off the air,allow people to buy drugs from Canada, get soda and junk food out of the schools, ban soda and junk food from government food stamp programs. Do those and you’ll see a healthier people and lower health care costs but not one of those will happen because of the moneyed interests and lobbyists won’t let it
As Blue Jay said above,
From the Preamble of the U. S. Constitution:
“….promote the general welfare…”
Nathan, when you enlisted in the Military, you took this oath of office:
“When one enlists in the United States Military, active duty or reserve, they take the following oath:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.”
And yet, you rag on Jay for not holding a job, which is false… and not providing insurance for his son?? Hey, some folks who work simply cannot afford the costs of insurance. Is that so blasted difficult for you to comprehend??
Chas,
BlueJay has the skills that he could probably get a job which provides insurance for his son, but he regualry says that he is too good to work for someone else.
So, instead, he allows his son to suffer for his own misguided principles.
Then nitwits like you come on here and defend him.
Why don’t you and KFG and CapnAmerica and Mary get together to pay for his health insurance?
“your own damn son ”
Hmm, I better get you clear on that.
Are you damning my son? Or, are you presuming to speak for god as you are wont to do?
Little surprise given the tree you fell from.
I didn’t advocate for health care for my son or for me Nathan. I said it is a right for everyone.
I know, you cons can’t get past the idea that the universe extends no further than the end of your nose and you don’t understand it in others.
You’re leaving out part Nathan.
The part about how places that HAVE insurance won’t hire me because of pre existing health history.
Not that I would want to work for them anyway.
And I’m off to make my own work now. You stay here on the government dime with your government provided health care and keep up with your tender Christian mercies attacking me and my family.
Maybe YOUR problem is you are bitter as you are coming to realize you will never have children of your own who will need health care?
Nathan, I’ve met Jay’s son… he doesnt appear to be suffering to me… However, I am sure that Jay’s bank account could be suffering, when the need arises for either his son, or him, to see a doctor…
And, why do you constantly play “bait and switch”??? My challenge to you is that since you have taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, and since the Constitution talks about “promoting the general welfare” — you are in reality NOT protecting and defending the Constitution, by opposing the expansion of health care to CHILDREN!!!
Once again, the gist of this thread is dealing with CHILDREN…. those who cannot provide for themselves, as adults can…
BTW, Nathan, not all that many employers provide health insurance…. but many DO provide lower cost access to health insurance, by participating in group rates…
Jay, Insurance Groups do not typically exclude those with prior health issues(because it is a Group)… If employers refuse to hire some applicants based on health issues, they could possibly find themselves in violation of the ADA laws as well…
Tom Paine: Amercians can’t buy drugs from Canada because Canadian pharmacies can no longer fill US scripts, but most of all 3-5% of our total needs would overwhelm their system. They are 1/10 our size in population and those over 65 get drugs N/C. Seems a lot of folks crossed the border a few years to take advantage of the of their drug system but it started hurt Canada’s ability to take care of their own, so the Candaian government put a stop to it.
The one problem with providing health care to all children is a benefit for those that have children but what about the adults that do not have children?
The way health care should be handled, the cost should be based on your income.
As an example –
As it is right now, take two people, one makes a hundred thousand a year and the other makes 10 thousands a year.
Both of them have the same medical problem, both of them get the same medical treatment; both of them pay the same cost.
But the difference is the one that makes a hundred thousand a year, for him the cost is pocket change.
The one that makes 10 thousands a year has to decide on what sacrifices to make to pay the bill.
Instead of proposing changes to fall as a burden on the tax system, why not propose changes on the medical industry to charge appropriately a percentage cost based on income of the patient?
Kind of like an income tax system.