Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2007 > September > 21
Friday, September 21, 2007
Democrats use kids health care in political war
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The absurdity of Democratic efforts to expand a government health care program for the poor to children of the middle class is captured in an observation made recently by U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Mike Leavitt.
“Families making $80,000 a year would be offered coverage” under the bill just about to pass Congress, said Leavitt. “Many who are currently having to pay the AMT [alternative minimum tax] would be eligible. So they have to pay the tax for those who are rich and would qualify as being poor at the same time. Only in Washington.”
The alternative minimum tax was passed into law in 1969. It was one of periodic congressional efforts to chase down the rich — in this case 155 high-income households spread across America who managed to avoid most taxes by taking advantage of available deductions. It set a minimum tax rate for some high-income taxpayers, beyond which some deductions are disallowed. But since the law was not indexed to inflation, the covered “rich” are now marrieds with middle-class incomes. So much for “soak the rich” tax pursuits. The “rich” can dodge; the middle-class stand, checkbook in hand, dumbstruck and befuddled while stroking a check to the tax man.
For that injustice, Democrats offer some compensation to the middle class. They’ll be able to drop private insurance and transfer their children onto the government dole — something only the most obtuse and unaware wouldn’t do. When passed a decade ago, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which pays 73.3 percent of PeachCare, was intended for children of the working poor — those without access to insurance in families with incomes of 200 percent of the federal poverty level, or $41,300 for a family of four. Georgia is one of a handful of states that expanded eligibility including children in families of four with incomes in excess of $48,000 per year.
The U.S. House of Representatives upped eligibility to 400 percent of poverty, covering children in families of four with incomes of up to $83,000. The Senate version, which appears likely to prevail, would make it 300 percent of poverty, or about $62,000.
“The legislation would raise taxes on working people and would raise spending by between $35 [billion] and $50 billion,” President Bush said Thursday.
The final version is likely to come his way within days. The program is set to expire next Sunday. Bush has promised to veto either the House or the Senate version — and should. “Our goals should be for children who have no health insurance to be able to get private coverage, not for children who already have private health insurance to be able to get government coverage.”
By Congressional Budget Office estimates, almost eight of 10 children with parents earning between 200 and 300 percent of poverty are covered by private insurance and that between 300 and 400 it’s nine of 10. “We believe SCHIP should put poor people in line first before putting those who can afford private insurance,” said Leavitt.
As Democratic leaders have demonstrated repeatedly in grandstanding on Iraq, offering pullout legislation they know has no chance of succeeding, the SCHIP bill that will hit the president’s desk in the coming week is entirely about politics.
U.S. Rep. Rahm Emmanuel (D-Ill.), chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said Bush is “going to get a chance to side with 10 million kids or not,” and if he vetoes the bill “it will be a political victory for us.”
Politics. Pure 2008 White House politics. That’s the essence of Democratic strategy on Iraq, and it’s the essence of their strategy on children’s health.
It’s phony — even down to the financing, which as Leavitt noted, drops the cost “from $16 billion in the final year to a little over $3 billion.” Physician reimbursement rates are raised in 2008 and 2009 but are unrealistically lowered in the following two years to conceal the bill’s true cost.
Deceit and politics. Veto it, yes.
Permalink | Comments (225) | Post your comment | Categories: Column
Services »
