Universal Health Care: There is no need to wait until a new President is elected next year for the great national health care debate. It is underway right now, disguised as a routine extension of a state health care program for poor children -- SCHIP. In fact, this proposal is the thin edge of the wedge to achieve the longtime goal of government-supplied universal health insurance and the suffocation of the private system.
The Senate Finance Committee was scheduled to mark up tommorrow, but disagreement over the size of the program and how to pay for it has forced postponement. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) would triple SCHIP's current five-year cost of $25 billion to a level of $75 billion. That would grant federal largesse to an estimated 71 percent of all American children. Children in families making as much as $82,000 a year would become eligible, with states also continuing present coverage of adults under SCHIP, which is currently allowed in 14 states.
Democrats here find themselves constrained by their own "PAYGO" rules, because they must find the money to fund the expanded program. Senators of both parties want to raise tobacco taxes, but that well is not bottomless -- existing taxes have already reduced cigarette smoking. House Democrats, led by Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.), want to take money from private elements of Medicare instituted by the Bush Administration.
A principal sponsor of the $75 billion program is Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), whose sweeping "HillaryCare" failed in 1994. The then-First Lady miniaturized her goals by limiting coverage to poor children in the SCHIP program, and Republicans, led by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) in collaboration with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), accepted SCHIP as a fall-back position at a beginning outlay of $4 billion a year. It was the bargaining chip given President Bill Clinton (D) in return for his signing the Deficit Reduction Act of 1997.
SCHIP over the past decade has been a beloved program whose faults were overlooked, much like those of the Head Start school program. The federal government has consistently granted waivers to permit 14 states to cover adults under SCHIP, which now cost $5 billion a year. Minnesota led the way with 92 percent of money spent under the program going to adults.
The massive expansion of SCHIP fulfills Clinton's promise of "step by step" advancement toward universal health care. Her proposal to extend SCHIP to families at 400 percent of poverty (or $82,000 annually) has the cooperation of Hatch once again and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the Finance Committee's ranking Republican. The Republicans want a mere $30-billion increase, compared with Rockefeller's $50 billion, and that relatively minor dispute caused the postponement of the markup.
Stark's scheme of slashing the popular private Medicare program in order to pay for an expanded SCHIP would be a major step toward a government monopoly over all health insurance. Will children become accustomed to Washington's taking care of them? Will adults drop their children's private insurance? President George W. Bush may soon face the decision of whether or not to veto going into the election year.
We are stupid.....there goes $$ for research too......along with the 'controls'.......do you get to sue your government paid MD/NURSE for malpractice???....I dont know---what happens to teachers/police officers/state and fed workers etc.......THEY WILL ORGANIZE......and we get to subsidize......all for what??? Longer life??---to what age??--I move dead bodies regularly at my job........right now everyone has a choice to where they want to spend their last days...what will happen when healthcare is regionalized......what coverage are they talking about???....will it always cover birth control, abortions, stemcell "experiments", "new chemo drugs", artificial insemination, elective surgeries??......you see the folks with the $$ ,,,LIKE THE LEGISLATORS,ACTORS, PROFESSORS,OTHER MD'S, ETC ,,,will ALWAYS HAVE ACCESS TO THE TOP DOCTORS.............THERE IS NO LEVEL PLAYING FIELD IN MEDICINE......NO ONE CAN TELL YOUR BODY FROM MINE UNDER A MICROSCOPE......BUT OUR WALLETS WILL ALWAYS BE DIFFERENT........DONT LET THEM FOOL YOU........ >
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Step toward universal health care urged Gillibrand says program could compete with industry BY STEPHEN WILLIAMS Gazette Reporter Reach Gazette reporter Stephen Williams at 885-6705 or swilliams@dailygazette.net.
Creating a new nonprofit health insurance program would be a way of establishing universal health care coverage in America, U.S. Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand said Wednesday. “I would support a program that people would buy into, something like Medicare,” Gillibrand, DHudson, said in a lunch speech to the Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce at the Holiday Inn. A new entity similar to the existing Medicare program for the elderly could compete with the existing health insurance industry to cover the 47 million uninsured Americans, she said in response to an audience question. “It would be increased competition for the existing insurance structure,” she said afterward. “I would suspect that within five years, 70 percent of people would choose it because it would be cheaper.” Gillibrand was elected to represent the 20th Congressional District last November, defeating incumbent U.S. Rep. John Sweeney, R-Clifton Park, despite the district’s largely rural and Republican makeup. Debate about ways to establish a national health care system that covers everyone has increased in recent years because of rising health care costs and a growing number of uninsured. The issue has also gained buzz from the popularity this summer of Michael Moore’s documentary on health maintenance organizations, “Sicko.” Gillibrand said being uninsured means people are relying on emergency rooms and hospitals for their health care, at a higher expense that primary care. The congresswoman suggested establishing a new program in which either businesses or individuals could buy health insurance from the nonprofit insurer for, say, five percent of their income. “Five percent I think is affordable,” she said. Gillibrand earlier this month voted in favor of the Children’s Health and Medicare Protection Act of 2007, which would expand medical access for children and senior citizens. But no legislation has been introduced to date on her nonprofit insurance idea. Gillibrand, who campaigned last year on strong opposition to the war in Iraq, told the audience of about 200 that progress on ending the war is being made in Congress, despite public frustration that it isn’t moving faster. “I support all legislation I can that has to do with timing,” she said, referring to setting deadlines for the Iraqi government to meet specific goals. “If you tell the Iraqis we are leaving, it will create a sense of urgency that will bring leaders together to reach compromises,” said Gillibrand, a member of the House Armed Services Committee who visited Iraq in early July. “I do see our [congressional] oversight and accountability having made progress,” she said. “The reason we’re making progress is because we’re coming to a consensus in this country.” Among appropriations achievements in her first seven months in office, she cited having secured $1.5 million for improvement to the Saratoga region’s electrical infrastructure. “It will help [Advanced Micro Devices] if they decide to come, but it will help the rest of us long before then.” AMD is planning to locate a new computer chip factory in the Luther Forest Technology Campus in Malta and Stillwater, and new electric transmission lines are among the needed infrastructure improvements. That money still needs Senate approval and could be vetoed by the president, she said. “Nothing is final,” she said. After the speech, Gillibrand said the bridge collapse last week in Minneapolis will bring a lot more attention and money to the nation’s infrastructure needs, and she’s backing a water bill that will bring district communities with crumbling water and sewer systems money to replace them.
“Five percent I think is affordable,” she (Gillibrand) said.
Well, let's get started then...Where's your 5%, Ms. Gillibrand, or would you like to donate 10% to help someone who is not so fortunate, so as to be able to pay their 5%? And why do the people who make less money than me have to pay less for the same coverage? That's just not fair. Let's make it a flat fee, if you're going to do that, or better yet, why not just have all the politicians in Albany and Washington D.C. work GRATIS and maybe with the money that's not paid to them, we'll be able to afford National Health Care. I mean really, you're supposed to be serving your constituents, not making money off of them.
both of the following are from wikipedia...
Quoted Text
Presidential pay history Date established Salary Salary in 2007 dollars
September 24, 1789 $25,000 $566,000 March 3, 1873 $50,000 $865,000 March 4, 1909 $75,000 $1,714,000 January 19, 1949 $100,000 $875,000 January 20, 1969 $200,000 $1,135,000 January 20, 2001 $400,000 $471,000
The annual salary of each Representative is currently $165,200, though the Speaker of the House and the Majority and Minority Leaders earn more. The Speaker of the House earned $212,100 during the 109th Congress (January 4, 2005-January 3, 2007) while the Majority and Minority Leaders earned $183,500 (the same as the Leaders in the United States Senate). A cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) increase takes effect annually unless Congress votes to not accept it. Congress has the power to set members' salaries; however, the Twenty-Seventh Amendment prohibits a change in wages from taking effect in the same two-year term in which it is passed into law.
Imagine how much health care could be paid for with $71,862,000.00. That's just the base salary for all of the 435 Representatives. Then, we can add the $165,200 per senator for another $16,520,000.00. We already have $88,382,000.00 towards the bill... and then we can start looking at the wonderful little stipends they get for sitting on each of these "committees." Since most people in Congress are already rich, what would they care? And if they can't afford to serve and stay in office, then maybe they shouldn't stay there for years and years on end (Mr. Carey, Mr. Kennedy, etc.)
And after this fun....sorry, but I gotta go and get back to work for "the man."
I said it before and I'll say it again...leave the medical decisions up to the medical professioinals. Surely NOT politicians, who can't find their way out of a paper bag. This is clearly just more 'BIG GOVERNMENT'! It's about as close as you can get to a socialist nation people. It is getting scary now!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
No compassion in GOP vs. SCHIP Froma Harrop is a nationally syndicated columnist. Froma Harrop
One of the less pleasant debates in Washington has been over SCHIP. The State Children’s Health Insurance Program covers children whose families make too much money to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford their own coverage. In other words, it’s for the working stiffs. Both houses of Congress have passed bills that would expand SCHIP coverage. President Bush promises a veto and has sent out his helpers to smear the popular legislation. Writing in the Louisville Courier-Journal, Kentucky Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell called it “a giant leap toward government-run health care” that also lets adults “leech” off a program designed for children. By “adults,” he means kids up to the age of 25. Could this be the same Mitch McConnell who periodically emits roars of approval for the socialized insurance scheme known as Medicare? As for the expensive new Medicare drug benefit, McConnell’s biggest beef centered on Democratic efforts to save billions by having the government negotiate for lower prices. If only the SCHIP bill had included a way to enrich drug companies .... Oklahoma Rep. John Sullivan complains that “there’s nothing in this bill that stops states from covering illegal aliens.” (Yes, just like there’s nothing stopping the Bush administration from enforcing the immigration laws.) Actually, the SCHIP legislation bars illegal immigrants from joining. Sullivan was referring to a provision that let states change rules on required documentation. This was deemed necessary because many of the applicants, largely poor whites and African-Americans, couldn’t find original birth certificates and don’t have passports. In any case, Social Security numbers will still be required. Illinois Rep. Dennis Hastert, the former House speaker, enlarged on this theme by arguing that the benefits allegedly going to illegal immigrants were being taken away from the elderly. Like many of his Republican colleagues, he’s sore that the bill cuts overpayments to private Medicare HMOs. (These plans have been receiving an average 12 percent more than the cost of care in traditional Medicare.) Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt told PBS’s “NewsHour” that the legislation would put families earning $80,000 on “public assistance.” The reality is that few families making that much would qualify. New York state wants a waiver to cover families of four making up to about $80,000 because the cost of living in New York City can be extraordinarily high. Nearly two-thirds of the apartments for sale are listed for over $450,000 — and that’s in the Bronx! Asked the inevitable question about why expanding government-run SCHIP is bad and expanding government-run Medicare is good, Leavitt responded that Medicare “was focused on those who are in need.” No, it wasn’t. It was focused on those over 65. Some, if not most, members of that group are in need, but Medicare covers senior citizens making $80,000 a week. Why don’t Republicans suggest an $80,000-ayear cutoff for Medicare benefits? Secretary Leavitt, are you there? The legislation does rely too much on massive increases in tobacco taxes. America’s largely low-income smokers shouldn’t have to carry that freight. Another valid concern about the SCHIP expansion is that it would prompt some families to drop private coverage. There are ways states can deter this, but in the end, if parents can obtain better coverage in the government program at less cost, that’s not so terrible. And shouldn’t families of moderate means be able to get coverage at least equal to that given the poor? Of course, the “crowd-out” argument could have been applied just as easily to Medicare. Heaven forfend that some barely middle-class families get in on a government program to insure their children. Is this what compassionate conservatism has come to? Yuck.
Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt told PBS’s “NewsHour” that the legislation would put families earning $80,000 on “public assistance.” The reality is that few families making that much would qualify. New York state wants a waiver to cover families of four making up to about $80,000 because the cost of living in New York City can be extraordinarily high. Nearly two-thirds of the apartments for sale are listed for over $450,000 — and that’s in the Bronx!
We ARE too expensive for ourselves---especially in NYS(or shall I say NYC),,,and it is all relative to what??,,,,the winds of change at the stocks(or not), the corporate get togethers in NYC, the UN hosting, 9/11, a war going on, etc......
WHERE DOES ALL OUR $$ GO IN NYS????
SHOW ME THE $$ TRAIL...............................
I wish they would stop pandering and give the REAL ANSWERS.....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Actually, the SCHIP legislation bars illegal immigrants from joining.
It does no such thing.
Quoted Text
Sullivan was referring to a provision that let states change rules on required documentation. This was deemed necessary because many of the applicants, largely poor whites and African-Americans, couldn’t find original birth certificates and don’t have passports.
A copy of your birth certificate can be recieved very easily by going down to the county and asking for it...for a good sized price.
Think it's too high a price? Talk to the county bureaucracy...or buy a few less packs of cigarettes.
Quoted Text
In any case, Social Security numbers will still be required.
And can be bought at the corner of Broadway and State during the time period of 2AM to 5AM Thursday through Sunday mornings.
Quoted Text
The legislation does rely too much on massive increases in tobacco taxes. America’s largely low-income smokers shouldn’t have to carry that freight.
Well, if they don't want to carry the freight by paying the taxes on the cigarettes, then here's your choices...stop smoking so you don't have to go to the doctor's so much on your Medicaid plan (and if you're not on the Medicaid, then guess what, you don't fall under the "largely low-income smokers" qualification, huh?) or pay the taxes and quit your whining.
Quoted Text
Heaven forfend that some barely middle-class families get in on a government program to insure their children. Is this what compassionate conservatism has come to? Yuck.
No...there's a difference between compassion and conservatism. Compassion iswhat people who want to hand out other people's stuff to people to help them, conservatism is when someone wants to protect their own stuff. So, in other words, Ms. Harrop, they're as far apart as the east and west, or another way you would get it, they're as far apart as Democrats and Republicans on illegal immigration (for the most part, that does need to be qualified because of a few people that didn't read their party handbook).
No...there's a difference between compassion and conservatism. Compassion iswhat people who want to hand out other people's stuff to people to help them, conservatism is when someone wants to protect their own stuff. So, in other words, Ms. Harrop, they're as far apart as the east and west, or another way you would get it, they're as far apart as Democrats and Republicans on illegal immigration (for the most part, that does need to be qualified because of a few people that didn't read their party handbook).
Well put BK!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Logged
