Why Bush/GOP vetoed/threatened denial millions of Children Health?

Question

is it to block further sin taxation, Bush and his GOP/NEOCONS buddies?
Why didn't democrates stick this bill to the WAR funding to force dubya the idiot take care of the needy children?

Answer 1

Interesting!

How the GOP expose its real identity truth.
Anything they do never been to the general public interest.

They label anything that benefits the masses as a mean to deteriorate the Health Care system, labeling any other free care system as a limp and useless, downplaying the success of the Canadian system, making rogue descriptions of the European free care system , just like they did to forfeit the soviet free medical care system..

America not only lagging for efficiency of its social rightful right for a CARE SYSTEMS they already paid for (the enormous taxation imposed upon), lagging as well in morality channeling an outpouring of Tax moneys to defend evil entity in the middle east, that will not in a million year benefit Americans.

Answer 2

Big words for an uneducated fool. Would you have the government pay for everyone to have health-care, retirement and unemployment?

Just exactly WHO would pay for this????

What is your solution??? Have Bill Gates fund America???

Get educated on how far a dollar can go and then ask your silly questions.

Sticking it into a WAR funding Bill is exactly why we need a Constitutional Amendment - Thanks Rudy- for the line item VETO!

Answer 3

The problem with those that follow the liberals never "see" what the bill WAS. It was to expand the current funding from $10 billion to $35 billion. It would cover families of four making up to $83,000 per year !!! DON'T YOU PEOPLE READ? You didn't know it also includes children of ILLEGAL ALIENS.

Answer 4

A goal is not to improve American health care.
Their goal is equally miserable health care for all.



The bill is supposedly for "children," yet childless people up to 25 years old are eligible. Since when is a 25-year-old with no kids eligible for taxpayer-funded insurance through a "children’s" program? Since this isn’t a children’s program but pure HillaryCare with kids as cover, that’s when.

• This bill is supposedly for those not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid, but it includes incomes up to 400 percent of the poverty line. That’s $82,000 a year! That is not poor, by any
legitimate definition of the word. This is simply a middle-class entitlement, and one that anybody worthy of the title middle-class and the independence it connotes should neither need nor want.

• This bill is supposedly to be paid for by a tax increase on cigarettes (50-plus cents) and cigars ($10 each!) What happens when people quit smoking due to the added expense and tobacco products inevitably sell less and generate far less tax revenue as a result? You guessed it – the Democrats will scream that they just have to raise taxes to keep all those poor kiddies from losing their precious
little program. It’s bad enough that this bill is pure socialism, it’s also a bait-and-switch tax-hike grenade just waiting to have the pin pulled out.

Answer 5

Quite an intelligent question. Unlike most I receive. I believe it is because he lives in another world. A world that has no 'projects', no 'child who goes home to aloneness', no home filled with guns, dealer-fathers, and violence, no addicted-mothers, no foodstamp families, no 'we can't afford toilet paper-pet food-shampoo-toothpaste-dish detergent' families'. Bush and the frigging GOP *uckers simply don't have a clue. Only 23% of people of poverty level can afford internet. HELLO!! If you don't get it now... you NEVER will. Peace and lets get some equal (you know what? I can't even think of the word!... So I'm gonna stop now. No need to vote me best answer. I don't deserve it, just venting. Hugs and love.

Answer 6

Because
A) you can only push up cigarette prices to a certain point before the market slumps and the system collapses
B) it doesn't address the underlying problem which is that people shouldn't have kids if they can't afford to take care of them
C) you shouldn't penalize cigarette smokers for the problems of people who shouldn't have had those kids in the first place

People need to look after their own kids. Socialized medicine is a different story because the payment falls on everyone (there are certain flaws with this plan too). But I'm not defending Bush, because of course vetoed this bill for all the wrong reasons. He probably got a payoff from Phillip Morris. What should instead get passed is a bill that uses federal money to supply contraception in a variety of public places, and demands all children be covered at their parent's expense, and the private healthcare system be severely reformed which in effect would make it cheaper and stop it from refusing to cover lifesaving procedures.

(as an aside, i'd like to distance myself from all the crazy capitalists who look at socialism as some force for evil. It's a system of government that carries its own pros and cons. I respect a lot of socialist ideas and think some of them could help us here.)

Answer 7

Because 83k per year is not poor/poverty level and children are not 25 years old. The question is why can't the Dems propose a bill for our nations poor children and not their own political agenda. Besides, President Bush has proposed 30 billion additional dollars in funding over the next six years for SCHIP. It seems to me that Bush is the one that cares about needy children's health care.

Answer 8

Why can't you people understand that there are already programs in place and have been for years? Since when does an 83000.00 dollar a year income constitute being poor? This is just one more failed attempt to have government provided and controlled health care. Foolish.

Answer 9

Whatever is good for America, Bush and the right wing are not for. Last 7 years they've done one thing. Find wars they think they can win. We see how that's going, don't we?

Answer 10

needy children my left rear cheek...nothing about an eighty grand family is needy...get a life. he vetoed the bill because its to...g...d...expensive just like every other extremist welfare scheme.