Posted on 06/28/2007 4:02:48 AM PDT by Kaslin
WASHINGTON -- There is no need to wait until a new president is elected next year for the great national health care debate. It is underway right now, disguised as a routine extension of an immensely popular, non-controversial 10-year-old program of providing coverage to poor children. In fact, this proposal is the thin edge of the wedge to achieve the longtime goal of government-supplied universal health insurance and the suffocation of the private system.
The Senate Finance Committee was scheduled to mark up this portentous legislation expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) today [Thursday], but disagreement over the size of the program and how to pay for it forced postponement. Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller's version would triple SCHIP's current five-year cost of $25 billion to a level of $75 billion. That would grant federal largesse to more than just poor "kids" (as politicians endearingly call children). An estimated 71 percent of all American children in families of four making as much as $82,000 a year would become eligible, with states also continuing present coverage of adults under SCHIP.
But where to find money to cover the massive cost? Senators of both parties want to raise tobacco taxes, but that well is not bottomless, as existing taxes have reduced cigarette smoking. Instead, House Democrats want to take money from private elements of Medicare instituted by the Bush administration. The overall effect would make three out of four American children accustomed to relying on government care no matter what course their parents take. In sum, SCHIP turns out to be socialized medicine for "kids" (and many adults).
A principal sponsor of the $75 billion program is Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, whose hand is detected in health care struggles the past 15 years. After the Clinton administration's sweeping "Hillarycare" failed in 1994 and contributed to that year's Republican takeover of Congress, the first lady miniaturized her goals by limiting coverage to poor children. Republicans, led by Sen. Orrin Hatch in one of his several collaborations with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, had lost their revolutionary zeal after the government shutdown of 1995 and accepted SCHIP as a fallback position at a beginning outlay of $4 billion a year. It was the bargaining chip given President Bill Clinton in return for him signing the Deficit Reduction Act of 1997.
SCHIP over the past decade has been a beloved "kids" program whose faults were overlooked, much like the Head Start school program. The federal government has consistently granted waivers to permit 14 states to cover adults under SCHIP, which now cost $5 billion a year. Minnesota led the way, with 92 percent of money spent under the program going to adults.
The massive expansion was proposed by Sen. Clinton this year, furthering her promise of "step by step" advancement toward universal health care. Her proposal extends SCHIP to families at 400 percent of poverty (or $82,000 annually). Hatch after 10 years is back again supporting a Democratic program along with Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Finance Committee's ranking Republican. But they want a mere $55 billion (a $30 billion increase), compared with Rockefeller's $75 billion, causing the postponement of today's markup.
The Democratic congressional majority now faces the consequence of its "paygo" mandate to account for higher spending. The Senate's preference for tobacco taxes runs into present overall cigarette taxes of more than one dollar a pack, lower legal cigarette purchases and reduced smoking typified by a 19 percent decline in New York City. More creative funding comes with Rep. Pete Stark's scheme in the House Ways and Means Committee for slashing the popular private Medicare program. That not only would fund an expanded SCHIP but move toward government monopoly over all health insurance.
An indirect but pervasive impact of Sen. Clinton's grand design would be the impact in the same family of children who are insured by the government while their parents are covered privately. Would the children become accustomed to Washington taking care of them? Would the adults drop private insurance? The future is now for universal health care coverage, and President George W. Bush may soon face the decision of whether or not to veto it going into the election year.
Americans are tired of freedom. It’s too much work.
I don’t see much hope of a reversal of this process in my lifetime. Undoubtedly, this must be fought, although it is likely a futile battle. But the bulk of one’s attention must be paid to protecting oneself and one’s family from the ever-expanding state.
Sadly, I agree.
“Americans are tired of freedom. It’s too much work.”
Sadly, I believe you may be right.
The legacy of freedom was not preserved in the public schools, instead it was replaced with a false legacy — one of socialism and gov’t curing every ill. The individual is the forgotten person in our society, drowned in the do-gooder philosophy of collectivism, so no one is responsible for themselves anymore.
The RATS know what keys to play to delude the public into supporting nationalized health care. They call it incrementalism. It is collectivism.
I like Milton Friedman’s proposal from some years ago:
1) eliminate Medicare and Medicaid;
2) give all Americans catastrophic protection (that the vast majority will never use);
3) eliminate subsidies (including tax subsidies) for health insurance;
4) allow health savings accounts and competitive insurance plans to fill the gap to the catastrophic coverage level (it would be affordable to nearly all)
They’re not going to stop until they get 100% of our paycheck.
In real world (Non-DC) dollars, with the current exchange rate, that would translate into about 600 billion dollars, American.
>>They’re not going to stop until they get 100% of our paycheck.
I disagree in a sense. They won’t stop until they get 100% of your soul, as well as 100% of your paycheck.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.