Why are Dems Giving S-CHIP To Kids Who Go to $20,000 Private High Schools?

Question

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1907687/posts

Answer 1

a. You know for a fact that the kids don't get scholarships?
b. You know for a fact that the family didn't go through a major income drop AFTER tuition was paid?
c. You know for a fact that they didn't lose the insurance they had by job change?

Didn't think so.
Why do middle class people who suffer hardship have to go and live in a box under a bridge before you can understand how they need help paying for health care?

It seems I was right, swiftboater of injured kids:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1670210,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

Answer 2

If we had Universal health care, a democratic system of healthcare, this wouldn't be an issue. No child should be turned away from receiving healthcare no matter how much the parents make. It doesn't matter if this kid goes to a $20,000 ayear private school or a public school in the ghetto. They still shouldn't be turned away from receiving full medical attention if they need it. Why should corporations be liable for their employee's health care? Why should any business be responsible for their employee's health care. And, we all know that health care is way too expensive for the workers to buy. This is a public issue. This is an issue of health which should not be a privelege but a right because it effects us all. To have a healthy country, a healthy democracy, a healthy economic system, we need a healthy electorate and healthy citizenry. Without your health, you dont' have anything, therefore the overall economy and democracy suffers. I don't care if the parents are rich or poor, we all should have equal healthcare available whenever we need it exactly the same as what our elected officials in congress, senate and the white house get. This shouldn't be a 2 tier, a 3 tier or a 4 tier system based on what job you do or how much you make. It should be a 1 tier system where everyone gets the best healthcare no matter who you are.

BTW, I answered your question despite the fact that you site a right wing extremist site that is bent on deviding Americans even more.

Answer 3

You are on point with why President Bush vetoed the new bill. The Democrats are playing the children angle. In reality it is those of above the poor/medium means that are actually taking advantage of this system. These folks are really out there, yet the cost of catastrophic injury for two kids is astronomical. So, I give them some slack. The Governor of New Jersey was on Sunday TV this past weekend. His state has had an exception made and used the system for many years. The last approval was given two days before Clinton left office. In his state about 55% using it are adults.

The bill needs revision, not revisiting something with loopholes that is a tax drag on the rest of us hard working people. Thanks.

Answer 4

The sad fact is that the Dim's do not really want the program they "support" to go through....they knew Bush would veto...and they could make him the bad guy...just that simple...They do not have an impressive enough platform to win on merit alone....they have to make the current administration look worse than them....not an easy feat...so, this is the best they can come up with.

And the bleeding heart liberals who are sooooo concerned with upper middle class, do they not realize, the United States coffers are not bottomless....start feeding clothing and medicating the upper middle class, and there will not be any left for the poor and disenfranchised they claim is their real passion.

The day that they take part of my income to pay for a health care program for children in private school....is the day I move to the back side of Montana and pull a Ruby Ridge.

Answer 5

If this is truen, it is an absolute disgrace and the democratic party should have caught it before using this child as there poster boy.

However, you are quoting from a right wing propaganda site. I searched and searched and could find no other sites (that did not reference the one above) that talk about this family's wealth.

Answer 6

I have a real problem with that-
A huge problem with that.
As a single Mother who worked and paid her own health premiums and went without luxuries so my daughter and I could have health coverage at $45.00 a week when i was only making $8.50 an hour. That pisses me off.
People scream and cry that they can't afford health insurance and say none is available because they don't want to pay for it.
It's available and it's not free- I haven't found anywhere in the constitution that free health care is a right.

Answer 7

Well, you're absolutely right. One scammer is proof that everyone who gets the insurance would also be scammers, able to afford their own insurance but choosing not to so they can take advantage of the government. Not only that, but the whole thing was a plan by the Democrats just for the sole purpose of giving this insurance to people who don't need it. You sure did figure that one out. I guess now that the cat's out of the bag, they'll have to scrap this plan and figure out some other way to get money to rich people. After all, that's what the Democrats are known for, right?

Answer 8

Freerepublic? Right-wing partisan website?

I guess I should be satisfied. Cons rarely cite their sources.

The cost of livint in the northeastern states and other parts of the country are much higher then in rural areas like South Dakota or Mississippi. 50, 60 grand doesn't take you as far in NYC as it does in rural Alabama.

Answer 9

Because they would sell there sole to win in 08> Promise everything like they did in 06 Haven't delivered anything have they>>Besides they would raise your tax's to pay for all the free giveaways>

Answer 10

Because the latest attempt to expand S-CHIP is not about helping poor children. It is about having a political issue to misrepresent when attacking their opponents.