Do you agree or disagree withe this comment??

Question

This is a brillian political move for the Democrats. They knew that if they loaded the SCHIP bill with lots of pork, that the President would veto it. And this will give them more politcal ammunition. So who is it that does not care for the children? I would say that the Democrats in control of Congress have shown that it is they who do not care.
I noticed that the articles in todays paper are glaringly vacant of all pertinent facts. Like the part where this program is expanded to include children in households making as much as $80,000 dollars a year. Since when is that poverty level. They also left out the part about how illegal immigrants will also be able to get these benefits.
If the democrats are going to help children, then lets make it about children. I may not always agree with what the President says or does, however, he was right to veto this. And he did it for the right reasons. He has extended his hand to make a compromise on a bill that would benefit the neediest of children and exclude the pork. There is no answer from the democrats except to sling more mud. But, then again, their approval rating is lower than the Presidents and they have accomplished less. And they have the majority.
It is about the children and not political points, right??????

Answer 1

the 80k cap was only for high cost of living areas, and only for people with 4 children or more. do you really think a family of 6 making 80k in norther California is rich?

oh, and you can talk about pork all day, but unless you actually define what you are calling pork so that it can be discussed, it just sounds like meaningless rhetoric.

the ONLY flaw (in my opinion) with the bill was that there were no safeguards against illegals using the insurance for their children. i think these kinds of programs should only be for citizens, but some might disagree.

Answer 2

That 80K ceiling reflects differently all around the country. In many places, bringing home 80K to a family of three or four doesn't leave room to buy health insurance. In other places, it's a lot of money. In LA for instance, 80K a year means you barely make it with a family of four. A ONE bedroom apartment there even in a barely decent area of the city can be as much as $1200 a month or more. In podunk Indiana, 80K a year means you're living fairly high on the hog, even with three or four kids. I'm having trouble blaming the Democrats for this one. Simply because I see the President spending 12 billion dollars a month in Iraq and asking for more for a war that is clearly not going to end for years to come. Yet he vetoed this bill, not because he thinks the ceiling is too high, but because it smacks of Universal Health Care, which he is against. Isn't it still UHC even when the package is smaller? I guess it's okay when it's small enough to remain almost unnoticed. I think he comes out on the losing end of this one because over 70% of our citizens see a need for UHC, and they see his veto as a declaration against a move towards UHC.

As far as the illegal alien aspect, I can't blame one party over the other. All I know is that the Republicans have had seven years to do something about illegal aliens and they haven't been any more effective than the Democrats at reaching a solution. I blame the partisanship atmosphere between the parties for failing to get a grip on this issue.

EDIT: Very nice blueridge. I did not know those facts, thanks for the info.

Answer 3

It is about political points and right now the democrats have the upper hand, but give it a little time as the republicans start showing what the bill was all about. It will back fire in their face, and that is why 6 democrats walked away from it. Children is a issue that all Americans are concerned about, it's like talking about clean air, who doesn't want clean air, or healthy children? Then you get into the meat and potatoes of the argument and find out it's not about children at all, or they would get the 900,000 that are eligible for CHIP right now on it, instead of expanding it to include wealthy kids.

Answer 4

#1 - $80,000 per year FOR A FAMILY WITH FOUR, and the ADMINISTRATION GETS TO SAY WHETHER OR NOT THE FAMILY QUALIFIES. It's not "automatic."

#2 - The funds are in the form of BLOCK GRANTS which means the STATES have great power in how the money is distributed.

Seems to me like YOU are the one "misinformed."


Just take the medicine like a good Republican - bush has NEVER cared one whit about kids or people struggling or health issues in America.

bush is a ONE ISSUE guy: "May I please have some more billions for the Industrial Military Complex?"
*****************************
To Elway: My pleasure. Heard it on NPR this morning. Along with several choice comments from some leading Republican Congressmen who are DISGUSTED with bush's veto on this.

Answer 5

The "Politico" website found a very revealing memo created by Hillarys secret task force on socialized medicine in 1993. It reveals the fact that this group wanted to begin again with "Childrens" health care if their entire plan was refused. Politicians would have great difficulty voting against something labeled for "the children", and its creation as socialized medicine would lead to eventually imposing the entire plan on the American people. In other words the childrens plan was the Trojan Horse which would lead to the socialist takeover of healthcare these people wanted. As usual, the left must use artifice, scam, misrepresentation and always the "back door" in order to impose its will on the American people.

Answer 6

i do no longer think of it relatively is a remark - to no longer remark on some thing is to proceed to be silent. although, last silent could motivate whoever's asking you to ask often, and at last you will ought to utter some thing in sort of a reaction. a minimum of by announcing "No remark" you're telling the interviewer which you do no longer prefer to grant any enlightenment on some thing, and the interviewer will understand this.

Answer 7

I truly believe this was an attempt to whittle into the numbers that will ultimately be covered under a comprehensive medical plan. It is not about kids. Poor kids need to be covered. So do poor senior citizens.

Answer 8

You need to check it out on factcheck.org. Bush had it all wrong as usual, he mis stated many things about this including the 83,000 yr thing was wrong. He didn't do his research seems he just listened to what he wanted to hear.

Answer 9

The Libs knew Bush would not sign if they did this, because he told them so.

And the Democratic party knows that it's followers will not read the "fine print", so they knew they could get away with calling Republicans mean once again.

Answer 10

I think you are right on, just let them continue on their path to destruction. As long as they keep voting in Harry Reid's the Republicans have nothing to worry about.

I have to say though, I do think all care about the children, some just have a wacky vision for the world.