A Bill thought certain to pass the House and the Senate easily, is now stalled. Only days ago, it seemed the decade-old State Children's Health Insurance Program would be expanded.
But the future of the $5 billion-a-year program, which serves 6.6 million children and has long enjoyed bipartisan support, has become mired in an ideological fight over the proper role of government in health care and in more mundane legislative arm-wrestling over how to fund the effort in a tight budget climate.
The values and beliefs in question are those discussed early on in our nation's history. What is the role of government and what defines overwhelming authority. Mister Bush, in accordance with his presumed prerogative declares privatization of all programs is paramount. Rather than use the people's money to support us and ensure a healthy commonwealth, the bush Administration proposes programs that benefit those that already have.
President Bush has attacked the proposals as big-government attempts to enlarge the federal role in health care, saying they would siphon choice away from individuals and reduce private insurance coverage for some children. He has proposed about $5 billion in new funding for children's health insurance over five years, for a total of $30 billion - an amount that the Congressional Budget Office says would be too little to keep covering even just the number of children enrolled in the program now.
"The program is going beyond the initial intent of helping poor children," Bush said at an appearance in Cleveland last week. "It's now aiming at encouraging more people to get on government health care. . . . It's a way to encourage people to transfer from the private sector to government health-care plans. . . . I think it's wrong, and I think it's a mistake."
Apparently, we, as a nation no longer believe that we must provide for those most in need, particularly those unable to fend for themselves. We have abandoned the notion that together, we must promote the common interests, in order to guarantee the quality of our future. If we do not, if we choose to create a divide, a fissure between the rich and poor then certainly as a country, we will fall.
The autocrats of antiquity chose to impose their preferences on the common people. Rulers forgot, and ultimately were reminded, governments serve society and not the wealthy few. We must take care of those that cannot attend to their own needs. If for no other reason, if we do not, it will affect us all financially.
While it might be nice to think that we can and will pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps, practically speaking, that is not always possible. Thomas Paine perhaps presented an analogy more apt than any I might construct. In the scholar's desire to explain the intent of government, compare and contrast the rationale for such a system, while honoring the role of society Paine wrote.
In order to gain a clear and just idea of the design and end of government, let us suppose a small number of persons settled in some sequestered part of the earth, unconnected with the rest; they will then represent the first peopling of any country, or of the world. In this state of natural liberty, society will be their first thought.
A thousand motives will excite them thereto; the strength of one man is so unequal to his wants, and his mind so unfitted for perpetual solitude, that he is soon obliged to seek assistance and relief of another, who in his turn requires the same.
Four or five united would be able to raise a tolerable dwelling in the midst of a wilderness, but one man might labor out the common period of life without accomplishing any thing; when he had felled his timber he could not remove it, nor erect it after it was removed; hunger in the mean time would urge him to quit his work, and every different want would call him a different way. Disease, nay even misfortune, would be death; for though neither might be mortal, yet either would disable him from living, and reduce him to a state in which he might rather be said to perish than to die.
While we as individuals might muse, "People must take care of themselves," in truth we must realize if we are to truly respect life, ours and their, it is indeed, "All for one, and one for all," that must guide us.
We are our brethren. While I may be able to financially treat any ills my son, or daughter might incur, if I allow the offspring of my neighbor to suffer, than what might I say of myself. Can I truly and admirably be satisfied with my own wealth if I am willing to watch the poor suffer and possibly perish.
Many Americans acknowledge they could not live with themselves if they did not care for the young. Citizens throughout the land think children must be our priority. We as a nation must insure our progeny. Our civilization survives when our children thrive. As a culture, we must make certain the young receive the best health care we can provide.
Congress was diligent working in the interest of the weakest among us. While the logistics may be less than lovely, the intention is admirable. Ensuring that our youngest citizens have health care is commendable.
Key members of the Senate Finance Committee announced a bipartisan deal late last week that would raise the federal excise tax on cigarettes by 61 cents, to $1 a pack, to expand the program by $35 billion over the next five years. That would create total program funding of $60 billion over the period - enough, lawmakers said, to cover 3.3 million additional kids while keeping the focus on children of the working poor. The committee is expected to vote on the plan as early as this week.
The program, which will expire on Sept. 30, "has helped millions upon millions of low-income, uninsured American kids see doctors when they're sick," Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said in a statement. "This agreement will make sure that even more children get the health care they need."
House Democrats, meanwhile, have sought an even bigger increase: $50 billion, for a total of $75 billion in funding over five years. It would be paid for, at least in part, by trimming payments to private Medicare plans for seniors. Such an expansion would reach even more of the nation's 8.3 million uninsured children and, more generally, provide a foundation for further efforts to cover more of the 45 million uninsured Americans, they argue.
However, it seems this well-established and necessary program may be eliminated. If it survives, in another, poorly funded form, as the President proposes, again many of our progeny will be wounded.
A recent study revealed, 1 In 4 Kids Go Without Health Care. Some uninsured children of the working poor don't go to the doctor's office; it comes to them.
They make too much for Medicaid but not enough to have their own insurance.
And 150,000 patients per year, nationwide, get free care from 21 mobile units provided by the Children's Health Fund. But a new report out Thursday from this non-profit group says far too many kids are falling into a huge health care crevice, CBS News has learned exclusively.
The group's report finds despite billions of dollars in government spending, more than one in four children still don't have full-time health care a gap twice as big as anyone thought, CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports.
"It's more than just insurance and lack of insurance, that are keeping children from getting medical care," says Dr. Irwin Redlener, president of the Children's Health Fund of Columbia University.
It's estimated that 9 million children are completely uninsured. But the new study says 11.5 million more kids end up without medical care for part of the year. And another 3 million can't get a ride to the doctor. That's more than 23 million children. Medical professionals disturbed by the finding and a reality that they are all too familiar with went to Capitol Hill to lobby for an ample increase in funding the federal Children's Health Insurance Program. However, it seems our compassionately conservative President rejects the prospect.
Rather than consider the needs of the young, Mister Bush postures, 'Government is too big.' Perhaps it is. When Administrators make the rules, disregarding the principles our forefathers established than we, as a society no longer function. I am forever baffled by how easily we forget, in a democracy, in a republic, the term government is meant to signify, "of, by, and for the people."
Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.
Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.
Indeed, when we allow those entrusted to serve with extraordinary power, the people, particularly the littlest ones are left to languish.
In some local communities, citizens came together to provide services for the young. States provided supplementary services. In December 2005, some thought the numbers of children without health care was decreasing.
In the past year, 20 states have taken steps to increase access to health coverage for children and their parents and nine states have reversed actions they took during the 2001-03 economic downturn to limit benefits, according the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured, part of the Kaiser Family Foundation, which tracks health care trends.
As a result of these and other steps, there are 350,000 fewer uninsured children in the United States than there were in 2000, the foundation reported. Over the same period the overall number of uninsured rose by 6 million.
Ambitious steps like the child health bill just signed in Illinois and the "Dr. Dynasaur" children's health program in Vermont have broadened coverage for children.
While elected officials cannot agree on how to provide or pay for health coverage for uninsured adults, there seems to be a consensus that covering children is both medically wise and politically smart.
However, the situation was never stable. The States alone could not fill the demand.
Eleven states facing political and financial pressure, including Maryland, Pennsylvania and Tennessee, have made it more difficult for eligible children to retain coverage.
The movement to expand coverage for children dates to the mid-1990s, after the Clinton administration devised a complex plan to provide all Americans with health care coverage. That plan failed, and advocates of wider coverage began pursuing more incremental changes at the federal level and lobbying state legislatures to expand coverage.
Alan Weil, executive director of the National Academy for State Health Policy, a nonpartisan research group, said children's health was one area of state spending that had consistently risen, at a time when most other programs ? including health care for adults ? have suffered cuts. Weil said it was much easier for elected officials to approve spending "for the kids" than to expand welfare programs for adults, even in times of hardship.
"It goes back to the Elizabethan poor laws that drew a conceptual distinction between the deserving and the undeserving poor," he said. "It's very hard to call kids undeserving, even if you don't like the parents' behavior. It's not the kids' fault they are without health care."
As of the beginning of this year, 16 percent of all Americans lacked health insurance, but only 12 percent of children under 18 went uncovered, although that still amounts to 9 million children, according to the Kaiser commission. The gap between the two groups has been widening over the years as fewer and fewer employers offer health care coverage, federal spending on health care fails to keep pace with rising costs, and states are forced to limit eligibility to balance their budgets.
Again we are reminded that although archaic Elizabethan laws may have thought to differentiate between the deserving and those that some think are less so, the current Administration does not make this critical distinction when it comes to children's well being. In 2007, those in the White House, the individuals that represent the highest form of authority have lost their virtuousness. They have become as Thomas Paine warned us against.
Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built upon the ruins of the bowers of paradise. For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other law-giver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of the rest; and this he is induced to do by the same prudence which in every other case advises him, out of two evils to choose the least.
Might we remember that in our desire to lessen the forces of "government" we must not forego what makes us great, society.
As those in Congress and the White House debate ideology, lives are at stake. The cost of medical care is on the rise; needs do not decline. In a time when half the bankruptcies are due to medical expenses, America must pay attention. Three quarters of those filing, had medical insurance. Considering that close to two million Americans, debtors and their dependents are affected by medical bankruptcy, we must acknowledge that this program benefits us all. When one person cannot pay their bills, we all absorb the debt. Ethically, when an individual, a child passes because of neglect, we as a society are diminished. Please ponder.
For people such as Beverly Chappell, 43, a Web site developer in Thornton, N.H., the debate is about health and family, not ideology. Chappell and her husband, David, 49, a self-employed carpenter, earn a total of $43,000 a year and for years could not afford health insurance for their family. While the couple still have none, they had signed up their children for the program in 1998 - just before their son Nathan had his first severe asthma attack.
"If I had not had that insurance, I would not have taken him to the emergency room and he probably would have died," Beverly Chappell said. "The program has value. Nobody should have to evaluate when it is an emergency and when it is not because they are afraid of getting a bill."
Fear of big government cannot compromise our principles. When those in authority corrupt a system that benefits society we must stand up and say, "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union . . ."
The Miracle of Medical Care is Threatened . . .
Child Health Insurance Stalls in Congress, Plans to Renew Program Bog Down as Lawmakers Debate Funding, Philosophy. By Christopher Lee. Washington Post. Sunday, July 15, 2007; Page A04
pdf Child Health Insurance Stalls in Congress, Plans to Renew Program Bog Down as Lawmakers Debate Funding, Philosophy. By Christopher Lee. Washington Post. Sunday, July 15, 2007; Page A04
On the Origin and Design of Government in General, With Concise Remarks on the English Constitution, By Thomas Paine. The Founders Constitution. The University of Chicago.
Study: 1 In 4 Kids Go Without Health Care. CBS News Has Learned Researchers Found Bigger Health Care Gap Than Thought For Children. CBS News. May 2, 2007
Number of children without health care in U.S. decreasing, Federal program, states filling gaps. By John M. Broder. The San Diego Union Tribune. December 4, 2005
Medical Problems Cause Half of Personal Bankruptcies, By Karen Pallarito. Forbes.
Medical bills figure in personal bankruptcy, By Christopher Snowbeck. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Friday, August 06, 2004
Half of Bankruptcy Due to Medical Bills, By Maggie Fox. Reuters. OC Register. February 2, 2005
Medical Bills Leading Cause of Bankruptcy, Harvard Study Finds. Consumer Affairs. February 3, 2005
Elect Susie Flynn President. The Children's Defense Fund
The Constitution of the United States of America. Cornell University Law School. |
Subscribe to Site [RSS]
