Increased Spending on Low-Income Childrens' Health Care
I am very pleased to see that the Senate has passed "veto-proof" legislation to increase/renew the spending on the State Children's Health Insurance Program, set to end September 30th. This legislation would help to provide health insurance for children in families that fall above the Medicare levels, but below the level to be able to afford private health insurance.
The criticism of this bill is that it moves health insurance closer to a government-run health care scheme. (Read about it on CNN.com.) If this were the case and this provided health care for these under-served youths, is this a problem? If these kids' parents cannot afford private health insurance, how else would these children earn health insurance?
As J E Gucken points out in her blog (Politics For Every Man), this legislation was not a slam-dunk in the House of Representatives. In fact, 205 Republicans in the House voted against increasing the spending on Children's Health Care.
How about we leave health care for youths out of the political arena and recognize that it is a good idea to ensure that this group of youths has adequate coverage?
The criticism of this bill is that it moves health insurance closer to a government-run health care scheme. (Read about it on CNN.com.) If this were the case and this provided health care for these under-served youths, is this a problem? If these kids' parents cannot afford private health insurance, how else would these children earn health insurance?
As J E Gucken points out in her blog (Politics For Every Man), this legislation was not a slam-dunk in the House of Representatives. In fact, 205 Republicans in the House voted against increasing the spending on Children's Health Care.
How about we leave health care for youths out of the political arena and recognize that it is a good idea to ensure that this group of youths has adequate coverage?
posted by eponcz at 8:51 AM
0 comments
