Educating children remains a national priority in spite of some failing schools and profiteering by text book publishers and others. The country now embraces the notion that health care for children is also a priority in spite of the fact that SCHIP might allow coverage for some small number of unintended individuals.
The nation's health care system is broken. Improvements promised by information technology, medical advances, education and nutrition have resulted NOT in improved health care but in higher profits for insurance corporations, big pharma, and related sectors.
How in the world can the President justify vetoing SCHIP and how can Republican Congressmen support this position?
2007-10-19 04:06:47 · 12 answers · asked by murphy 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Could the medicare drug program's flaws -- designed by and for big pharma to enhance their revenues -- serve to halt any and all proposed medical programs?
2007-10-20 04:49:14 · update #1
Both.
2007-10-19 04:10:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
SCHIP might allow coverage for some small number of unintended individuals? Might? Seriously? If you want the President to give health insurance to poor kids, then send him a bill that does that without also giving free health insurance to rich kids and adults. The real question is: why aren't Democrats willing to do that? And the answer is: because they don't really care about poor kids getting health insurance. They're just trying to make the Republicans look bad. They'd rather have the issue than actually pass a good bill.
2007-10-19 09:14:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
You may find this hard to accept but both education and health care insurance are not and should not be the concern of the Federal Government. The public school system, its control and funding are purely the job of State Governments. While Health Care insurance is purely the business of the individual. Of course, as always, State Governments are free to provide it if they wish.
The Constitution is very specific. Anything powers not specifically given to the Federal Government by the Constitution do not belong to the Federal Government but to the many States and people respectively.
For you young people who are not aware of this fact, let me enlighten you. There was no Department of Education on the Federal Level until Jimmy Carter created it. The quality of education in America has gone steadily downhill ever since.
Health Care insurance was commonly available and quite affordable until Congress decided to "fix it" by controlling and regulating the heck out of it. It was Congress that created the HMO. There was no such thing before. Now that same Congress regularly bashes HMO's and wants to meddle even more.
The last thing you want, ever, is a massive, unaccountable bureaucracy in charge of anything. Take the controls and regulations off of the private sector and it will solve the problems the Government created.
.
2007-10-19 05:00:07 · answer #3 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
this is a good chicken or egg question. without healthy children growing into healthy adults educating them won't matter. on the other hand if we educate them perhaps they will find ways to prevent illness and will become productive adults and thus not need health care. i guess for now we should really look into trying to accomplish both. healthy educated children growing into healthy productive adults.
good idea but the "adults" that are in charge of the country now don't seem to think that far in advance. i pray for a change in leadership and some thoughtful decisions from both sides of the political isle.
2007-10-19 04:31:26 · answer #4 · answered by michr 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Education and health...they both go hand and hand. Republicans are throwing numbers around like $75k for families with children. What they're not tell you is which states does this number apply to. You can't compare New Jersey and New York to Mississippi. $75k in N.Y. is nothing, but it's a fortune in Mississippi. Without education that's what you get...B.S. There's enough votes in the Senate to overide the presidents veto, but not in the House. Those House Republicans will pay in '08'.
2007-10-19 04:25:44 · answer #5 · answered by Fern O 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What you're saying is all incredible. that's the form between the left and the incredible. the incredible seems on the guy as sturdy self reliant being. they're able to helping themselves with the right motivation. the inducement leads to prosperity (Necessity is the mummy of all invention). additionally they understand there are those that won't be able to help themselves, yet once you get the freeloaders to assist themselves, there will be greater ingredients available to assist the needy. The left has a tendency to make human beings into victims by potential of dividing them and telling them how undesirable they have it and needs them to place self belief in the government to repair their issues. the government (Robin Hood) will over tax the difficult working human beings shrink the ethical, productiveness and creativity. the shortcoming of training is quickly responsible for the housing disaster.
2016-10-13 04:30:44 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Education is more important.
Since when did anyone thinking that having insurance makes you healthy? All it does is help cover the expense of medical bills that are too high. I could take my kids to the doctor when they are sick for less than the monthly premium on insurance.
The real question is why are we equating insurance with health care. They are not the same at all.
If I buy "insurance" for my businesses protection from the mafia, does that mean I will be successful in business.
You really need to think about this more.
2007-10-19 05:00:46 · answer #7 · answered by inzaratha 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
This is actually a very significant question.
Considering the direction our nation is taking, i.e. a socialist collective, healthy citizens are more important to the elite as they can work and produce for the hive. Education is useful as well but, not as important as health in comparison in the soon to come >sic< "utopia".
Think about it.
2007-10-19 04:21:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
It is like the drunken sailor waking up after a night of throwing his money around and then realizing what he has done. While the thought of fiscal responsibility is right, it is an absolutely crazy issue to lay it on the line for. I think he forgets that he and Rove were the creators of the prescription drug giveaway which is worth about a Trillion dollars over the next 10 years. To take a stand on cutting benefits for low and middle income kids to the tune of $10 Billion seems like a total loser…or is that the President himself?
2007-10-19 04:19:35 · answer #9 · answered by Easy B Me II 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Education brings health concern in people.
2007-10-19 04:31:55 · answer #10 · answered by santanu 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You must not read the answers on here very much...the bill sent to Bush would have covered "children" into their 20's of parents making in excess of $75 thousand a year. Congress only sent the bill to Bush because they KNEW he would veto it and then they could demagogue yet another issue in their "we're running against Bush" presidential campaign.
2007-10-19 04:11:19 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋