|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Bush to veto expansion of childrens health coverage
By Patrick Martin
2 October 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
President Bush was expected to veto legislation expanding the
State Childrens Health Insurance Program this week, after
announcing his intention in his weekly national radio address
September 29. The bill, passed by the House and Senate last week,
would extend the SCHIP program for five years and increase spending
from the previous level of $5 billion a year to $7 billion, enough
to increase the number of children covered from 6.6 million to
10 million.
The veto is an expression of the greed and callousness of the
American ruling elite. Bush has made tax cuts for the wealthy
the centerpiece of his domestic policy, pumping more than $2 trillion
into the pockets of those already fabulously rich. Yet he has
rejected as too expensive a modest reform measure that would significantly
reduce the number of children living without health insurance
in the richest country in the world.
The bill passed the Senate by a 67-29 majority, more than the
two thirds required to overturn a presidential veto. In the House
of Representatives, however, the margin was only 265-159, with
eight Democrats joining 151 Republicans. At least 25 congressmen
would have to switch their votes to overturn the Bush veto.
The White House singled out a provision in the bill that would
allow a family of four in New York state making up to $82,600
to qualify for state-paid health insurance, as though that was
an outrageous extravagance. Congressional Republicans denounced
this as middle-class welfare, although given the high
cost of living in the state, and particularly in New York City,
$82,600 a year for a family of four is little more than a subsistence
living.
This example was in any case a red herring, since New York
is the only state that has proposed to provide health insurance
through SCHIP to families with incomes up to 400 percent of the
official poverty line. New Jersey has sought to provide SCHIP
for families up to 350 percent of the poverty line, and all other
states have set the upper limit at 200 to 300 percent (the federal
level is 200 percent).
The result is that nearly all children covered by SCHIP live
in families with incomes below $63,150 a year (the 300 percent
level) and the vast majority live in families with incomes below
$41,000 (the 200 percent level). The bill passed by Congress would
actually make the New York and New Jersey plans isolated exceptions,
by sharply cutting back the federal subsidy when states choose
to extend insurance beyond 300 percent of the poverty level.
Under the patchwork and grossly inadequate health insurance
system in the United States, SCHIP is administered by the states
under general rules established by the federal government and
with federal funding covering the bulk of the costs.
The program was established in 1997 by a Republican-controlled
Congress after the defeat of the Clinton administrations
plans for a more comprehensive health insurance program. It was
targeted at lower-income working families rather than the indigent
and unemployed, who are covered by the Medicaid program, operated
under a similar federal/state division of labor.
With the army of uninsured swelling from 38 million at the
time of the defeat of the Clinton health plan to more than 47
million under Bush, most state governments have taken advantage
of the federal subsidies in SCHIP to extend coverage to as many
children as possible. Initially, the program was limited to families
between the poverty level and 200 percent of the poverty level,
but many states have expanded the program.
SCHIP was initially limited to a 10-year period, and legislation
was introduced early this year to prevent the program from expiring
on September 30. The Bush administration was involved in negotiations
over the framework for the renewal, including an expansion of
the program and the inclusion of dental services and mental health
treatment on a par with other medical services. In August, however,
under pressure from extreme-right elements and from all the Republican
presidential candidates to demonstrate its commitment to fiscal
austerity, the White House announced it would oppose any significant
increase in funding.
The Bush administration also took punitive action against SCHIP
recipients, imposing a requirement in August that state governments
enroll 95 percent of potential SCHIP recipients with incomes below
200 percent of the poverty line before extending the program to
families with higher incomes. While justifying this change with
cynical rhetoric about keeping SCHIP focused on the truly needy,
the real purpose was to make it impossible for states to expand
the coverage of the program, since it is in practice impossible
to reach 95 percent enrollment for a voluntary program.
In the ongoing negotiations, congressional Democrats backed
down considerably, agreeing to eliminate a major provision to
provide much of the funding by cutting subsidies to private insurance
companies that offer HMO-style managed care for Medicare recipients.
In a plan worked out with Senate Republicans and then passed by
both houses, the Democrats agreed that the entire cost of the
expansion of the program would be paid for through an increase
in excise taxes on cigarettes, an extremely regressive tax that
falls most heavily on the poor and lower-income workers. Not a
penny will come from taxes on the enormous resources of the health-care
industry itself.
The Bush administration continued to balk and threaten veto,
and the congressional Democrats then agreed on a stopgap extension
of the program until mid-November, so that Bush could veto the
longer-term extension without immediately cutting off SCHIP benefits,
and force passage of a watered-down version of the bill.
House Republicans also sought to disguise their opposition
to health insurance for children by waving the anti-immigration
banner. The bill contains reactionary provisions banning the use
of federal money to provide health benefits for illegal
immigrants. But House Republicans demanded more stringent enforcement
procedures, including requiring documents like birth certificates
or passports from patients seeking medical care, even for the
care of newborn babies who, by virtue of being born in the United
States, are automatically American citizens.
In a further bow to the chauvinist right, congressional Democrats
dropped language that would have guaranteed the right of the children
of legal immigrants to get coverage, an action that provoked many
Latino organizations to oppose the bill.
In their public statements, congressional Republicans, Republican
presidential candidates like billionaire Mitt Romney, and Bush
himself have attacked the SCHIP expansion as a step towards government-run
health-care provision. Typical was the comment of Texas Republican
congressman Jeb Hensarling, who declared, This is a government-run
socialized wolf masquerading in the sheep skin of childrens
health.
This hysterical rhetoric is sharply at odds with the factsnot
only the actual provisions of the legislation, but the support
for it by such fervently pro-capitalist groups as the American
Medical Association, the American Dental Association, the American
Association of Retired People (which endorse Bushs Medicare
drug program), and 43 of the 50 state governors (many of them
Republicans).
Even the main insurance industry lobby supported the billin
large measure because like most Democratic-sponsored health-care
reform plans, the bill would create a large and guaranteed
market for them. State governments do not provide health insurance
directly. Instead, they subsidize purchase of private insurance
by families eligible for SCHIP.
The White House has repeatedly warned of the crowding-out
of private insurance as parents, particularly those in middle-income
brackets who become eligible for SCHIP, choose a government-funded
plan rather than paying for private insurance on their own or
through their employer.
The concern is that millions of people, given the choice, will
prefer a publicly funded plan over one tied to the vagaries of
the market. The hysterical, anti-socialist red-baiting reflects
a well-founded fears that any shift away from market-driven health-care
policies could open the door to popular demands for measures far
more radical than anything envisioned by the Democratic Party.
See Also:
Bush administration attacks
child health insurance program
[21 August 2007]
Bush plans veto on child health
bill
[21 July 2007]
Former surgeon general describes
Bush administrations interference on science and health
issues
[17 July 2007]
US: Medicaid recipients denied
benefits under proof of citizenship law
[21 March 2007]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |