When you talk about Universal Health Care as the other countries in the 'first world', it appears you are talking about government ran healthcare systems like in Canada and Europe. Hopefully, you are not taking Michael Moore's latest film 'Sicko' as total fact. It has been long documented that these government-ran healthcare models produce long delays in treatment including in Canada and Europe. Recent data suggests these models produce longer lives and less problems with pregnancy and child mortality. You need to remember there also other variables in play here. Healthy habits in societies such as Japan probably contribute much to this improvement of health statistics. The unhealthy practices in the US doesn't help our statistics. When it comes to cutting edge care, the US healthcare system has some of the highest if not the highest rates of success (one in particular is CANCER). This was not accomplished by having a government sponsored or controlled system. Certainly we need to find ways to get healthcare to those who either can't afford it or don't get it because they are worried about the expenses they may incur (people should not be forced to go bankrupt over resonable healthcare). One of the problems with our healthcare model is its successes (the great but expensive advances). If you are among the populus that believes you should have the latest, most expensive medications (Crestor, Plavix, etc), diagnostic tests (yearly whole body MRI's, routine PET scans of the heart), etc than we will need to tax at a much higher rate than what Europe already taxes their citizens and we still may not be able to afford this system.
On the note of government provided healthcare for all, what do you think about government provided housing, food and drink, and transportation for all? I've heard one individual recently on CNN suggest we should just go to work and the government should provide everything else for us. I believe Karl Marx had this same idea of utopia.

Unless you personally deal with or are covered by government sponsored medical programs, you probably will never understand what they are really like. Many of you are unhappy with the way FEMA handled Katrina. Maybe you are upset that you might not see any retirement money from Social Security in the future. The same problems with management occur in government funded medical programs. As for Truebob in FL, you probably do not work in the healthcare industry. Doctors for the most part are capitalists. Yes, they hire someone to manage their claims. Its called overhead which is a business expense. If the insurance pays at the same rate or less than your expenses, you lose money. This is where Medicaid, SCHIP, and like programs enter. If I'm in the private practice world of your anesthesiology friend, then I probably do NOT take on these patients. I tell these patients to go the medical school where they see the poor patients. This creates a bottleneck at the medical schools. These schools rely more and more on patient service billings than state revenue because states are also pinching pennnies. The schools need to have a mix of payer sources that can cover expenses and keep them from running a deficit (unlike the government that doesn't have to balance its checkbook). So if almost all of these government funded program patients are funnelled into the medical schools and the numbers of patients in these programs increase, then that will increase wait times for these patients to get into see a physician (kind of like the waits heard about in Canada). Its simple economics. If you have a business and one customer routinely pays less and hassels you more, you go to other customers. Medical care is similar. It is already happening to some with Medicare. Because of the proposed cuts in Medicare (up to 40 something % in a decade or less), some private doctors are not taking on new patients with Medicare. I wonder if your anesthesiology friend is doing the same to make his million dollars a year.

The dems are really stretching it low by bringing some dumb kid in to do their bidding. She already quailfies for the program in place. Free health care for families that make $80,000????? you got to be kidding!

This family qualifies for SCHIP as it stands now!!! Why change it? Look how the media is trying to mislead you you sheep! No one is trying to take away this girls health care. What is wrong with you people?

"It's just a way to move towards a total government take over of the health care system."

And that is bad because… Think about it. There are are basic medical procedures that cost more that the median income for the American household. Private insurance companies make money by avoiding payments. The average pregnancy costs more than the federal poverty level for a family of four. It's not just affecting the poor anymore. The problem permiates into the middle ans sometimes even the upper class. Every single civilized industrial country in the "first world" has universal healthcare but us, and guess what. They like it.

Hi Tim, Bush has signed this bill BEFORE as President, it is the Democrats that are changing it to include layabouts sleeping in Mommy and Daddies basement (25 year olders) and people that earn WELL OVER the poverty line. Well over.

At the age of 25 I was out of the house and in the service, not looking for a handout from the Democrats, but defending the losers rights to play politics with the poor children, the same poor children that Bush pledges to take care of FIRST, but the Democrats are getting all they can out of this "game" in compliance with CNN and the MSM who reports when Larry Craig farts, but can't REPORT all facets of this story.

I challenge you to provide me a link or some data that links George Bush with Halliburton, you said it, now prove it.

Just to give you some backround on Halliburton, the first President to offer them a no bid contract was Bill Clinton, did he have any motives for doing so??

poor kids only thats is the way it should be no adults just poor children,who parents are disabled them selves or making 7.oo an hour faitfully both parents..that child is consider poor…83,000 is more farther to the rich geez i thought 25,000 or less is poor

Dear Concerned Republicans,

I agree that we need to stop the use of Government funding to provide healthcare for rich adults. I read something today that disgusted me it was about a 61 year old man who makes 400,000k a year, and uses Government funded health care. His name is George W. Bush. If he believes enough to veto a bill that would provide health care for children why doesn’t he make all the members of his cabinet start paying their own healthcare cost, and then pay his own healthcare cost. Here are some facts that you should know:
1. 91 percent of the children being covered under the SCHIP are under the poverty line
2. The Adults (College students, and Pregnant women) covered have been authorized by two Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

If Bush is so against Government funding for healthcare he needs to stop all of it, starting with the richest people, like say a rich oil mogul who gets kick backs from Halliburton and has never in his life had to worry about money, never in his life had to choose between giving his children the medicine they need and eating, and never in his life worked a day.

What I find most digusting about this entire issue is the blatant deceit by the democrats in Congress.

SCHIP still exists. Indigent children are still covered by the program. What Bush veto'd is families earning up to $52,000 and in some cases $83,000 annually as well as adults up to the age of 25.

This is nothing but a political ploy by the democrats to push through universal health care. They thought if they started with the children it would open the door for adults. Well they were wrong. Now they are rolling out children in wheel chairs, who by the way already qualify for subsidized health care, and say Bush veto'd them. Thats a pretty blatant lie and the democrats should be ashamed.

Unfortunately the average voter simply won't, or can't, do the math necessary to make a qualified judgement regarding the issue.

Notice how Democrats trot out children when they fail to pass socialist legislation??

Ahhhh - reminisent of the good old days of Bill & Hillary crying about Republicans not caring for the chillllldren.

No to more taxes!
No to more social entitlement programs!
No to European Socialism!
No to Pelosi and Reid's political child pornography
No to Hillary-care!

When are the democrats going to wheel out some of the 25 year old recipients of the SCHIP program. You know, the ones who will dump their private insurance for the taxpayer subsidized brand at the age of 25. I had a wife and two children by the age of 25. What are these welfare men and women been doing?

Posted By Jake Doniphan Ne : October 16, 2007 10:09 pm

Jake, good for you with your kids by 25. I thought in this country we encouraged higher education, though, which for our doctors, lawyers, and MBAs, takes until they are at least 25, with no income. Student loans don't cover insurance, at least they didn't when I went to school. If it hadn't been for my father's insurance plan through his union job (darn unions), I wouldn't have had any coverage. I guess we want to penalize these people who would become our medical staff by not giving them insurance while training, though. They can probably fix themselves, right?

Also, Michael, Clarksville, AR : October 16, 2007 10:35 pm, you're right all of them have been covered. What about the ones who currently break the current 2x maximum at like $59K and have a similar situation? That's the point that you're so conveniently missing. Prior to their accident, the Frosts were expected to pay $1,200/month for private insurance ($14,400 annually), which would only be a measly 25% of someone's $60K income. Yeah, that would be affordable after taxes, rent/mortgage, food, and other necessities.

Lastly, why does everyone think that people are going to drop their insurance if they can get some coverage from SCHIP? If all of you complain about how poor coverage will be and how people will have to drive 5 hours, don't you think that if people CAN afford it, they'd pay for the better coverage and skip SCHIP.

It is just too bad that nobody wants to hit at the fact that the whole idea of singling out one group to be taxed to pay for the healthcare of another group goes against all the priniciples that this nation was founded on

What I would LOVE to see is a journalist interview the parents of these "poor" children. Ask them their income level - ask what kind of cars they drive - how many flat screen TVs, computers, I-PODs, designer clothes, etc they have in their home. And then ask if they REALLY believe the government should pay for their healthcare because they're doing EVERYTHING POSSIBLE to provide for their kids???

This ISNT about children - it's about parents making better choices. I don't make anywhere NEAR $83,000 but I can afford to pay for my kids healthcare. Do I have to forego spending money on luxuries? Yes. And if I want those nice luxuries I will get a better job, a 2nd job, or find other ways. Requiring the Government to pay for my bills is wrong.

Say no to socialism!

I can't think of a single instance since the Bush regime took power of something positive being done for the people who make less that $250K a year.

Anyone? — Jeff

My kids now go to a good school Jeff, a school outside my poor, failing school district. Rich kids use to only go there…, Thanks BUSH!!

So a 25 year old living in his parents basement gets free government paid health insurance if his poor parents only make a paltry $83,000/year?

This bill should be about POOR CHILDREN, not middle class adults.

It's just a way to move towards a total government take over of the health care system.

Does anyone think that if this bill passes, the costs will be held down, and it will no be expanded?

When middle class people start dropping their kids from private health insurers to enroll them in this "free" program, the costs will continue to soar.

vote Ron Paul: End the war, and end the welfare state!

The liberals are very predictable - its always "the Republicans are spending billions in Iraq" (point of clarification - both parties are equally culpable - and both parties funded the war…so drop that rhetoric now….you come across as partisan morons) - and the classic - Bush vetoed this bill for the children - Bush told congress he would of signed it again with an increase…by up to 20 billion (I think) - the Democrats chose to increase it to point where he would veto (35 billion) - and now who is playing games with the SCHIP program…address that (just this issue…leave your baseless rhetoric at the door)

Regardless of where you live in the U.S., if you make $200K a year with a family of four, YOU ARE NOT POOR! The idea of a middle-class making between $80K and $250K per year is ludicrous. This is a purely political stunt, and the democrats want us to feel guilty again. Just more toro caca from the left.

Wow! Republicans sure hate children don't they? I guess they are too busy talking about family values (Larry Craig, anybody?)

Why stop at 83,000? Lets cover everyone, and make it madatory. That way everyone gets less quality healthcare than our elected officials lashed benefits..

Yes, we are a self-centered nation that doesn't understand the word community or why it is important to help the weak, oppressed and impoverished. All of which, can only symbolically be found, within our own borders. Yes, lets talk about community..

I think God said Adam and Eve, Not Adam and Steve.

Yes, there are too many 25 year olds living in their parents basement while their parents are struggling because they only make $83,000/year to provide health care for their poor "child."

Just say no! Support the VETO! SCHIP for POOR kids only! No adults, no families making more than three times the poverty level!

Tax and spend, tax and spend.
This is the only plan dems have for America.

Well, it's a lot better than spend, spend, spend (on things we shouldn't even be doing) without any money in the bank. I have no problems paying taxes as long as there's something of value to be gained by society. The Republicans seem to think they can just spend money, drive the deficit higher and higher and then everything will be hunky dory…well, look around. We're in great shape. NOT!

You know, Dan, it isn't that we LIKE taxes, it's just that we see taxes as a way to help the greater good (unlike the untaxed war being fought that is draining every part of this economy right now and for decades to come.) I had to gag over the tax and spend comment as well…what are you thinking? You'd rather have a President send $3000 a second to another country, than tax us and spend the money here? Republicans have really lost sight of what is important in this country. I am tired of the fear mentality–if we don't get them there they will get us here! Baloney…we are creating more enemies every day with this war, and meanwhile, our children suffer. While this bill is not perfect, it at least addresses some inequities in the current program for, actually, not much money. And remember too, that the Democratic majority in both Houses is very slim. It isn't like we can steam roll any issue into being. There has to be a true bi-partisan vote on anything, unlike Bush's first term plus, when he DID have a clear majority and still could not pass everything. Seems to me the true spending party right now are the Republicans, who are masters at sticking labels on their foes whether they are true or not. For the sake of this country's future, take off the blinders and think about someone other than yourselves for five minutes. This country was built on Biblical ideals of loving our neighbors and treating others the way you'd like to be treated. Right now, I feel like the Republicans believe in creating wealth for themselves and making it grow for themselves, and the heck with anyone else who hasn't been lucky enough to be able to be in oil or a military contractor. We need to care about each other and share!

The Republicans do so have Family Values. They "values" the money that their own families have and want to keep as much of it as they can.

I can't think of a single instance since the Bush regime took power of something positive being done for the people of this country…at least, not the people who make less that $250K a year.

Anyone?

By left-wing socialist standards an annual salary of 83k a year is rich by tax standards but poor enough for government sponsored healthcare.

It's no wonder that the Democratic controlled Congress has the lowest approval ratings in U.S. history. There isn't a tax or social program you guys don't like is there?

Mike from Lubbok says:"Experiences with Medicaid, SCHIP, and like programs produces a very trying experience for many individuals who have to work with the inefficiencies of these govertment funded programs. That is why many physicians do not take on patients who have these insurances…"
What this really means is that the money is better elsewhere. As if a DOCTOR would have to deal with any of the paperwork or billing issues. They have others do that for them. I'm sick of seeing Doctors and Insurance creeps bash this program. An anesthiseolgist I know makes over a million dollars a year, and constantly says the janitor could do his job (3days a week, BTW). If this country can't protect our children to the fullest extent possible, what is the point? I"ll bet if this where 150 years ago, these same people would be saying "If their parents can't afford to give them an education, why should the government pay for it?" Jerks.

The Dem will never get the votes they need to over turn this veto. They add on so much pork and now bring children to show everyone how and who we will be hurting. Please stop the grandstanding and be truthful about this bill. Let the news companies really tell the true story about this veto. I believe in health care for childen that are poor, but not for people who can afford it. Wish we were told the truth for a change, by both parties.

SCHIP is getting too big if it wants to cover families making $83,000. If U think about it , that means that a family making $83,001.00 will have to pay for health care for a family making $82,999.00. I vote NO on SCHIP expansion.

To Thomas Billis in Las Vegas:

The GOP is no longer a "family values" platform. We've all seen how Bush trades money for lives. Indeed, Republicans nowadays represent "business values." You want family values? Try looking into the Democratic party - they've picked up the slack of the GOP.

Let me think about that for a moment… Democrats Tax and Spend. Republicans Tax and Give Money to the Rich. Tax and Spend, Tax and Give Money to the Rich, Tax and Spend, Tax and Give Money to the Rich… Yep, I still prefer the Democrats way of doing things.

To "therealist:"

Yes, because the Republicans never used vast sums of money on things like, hmm… THE WAR IN IRAQ. $500 billion to kill people in the middle east, but we can't have $35 billion to give healthcare to children? Have conservatives gone insane? This is not a reasonable position! It is twisted and surreal for a rich and privileged society to pour vast sums of money into military misadventures and huge programs like missile defense while simultaneously not spending any kind of money to make sure that families with children can be rest assured that they will be taken care of!

If Germany, Canada, and other countries can do it, so can we! We're talking about children here, for the love of God and all that is holy! What is wrong with you people? Are you really so selfish that you can't accept a 61 cent raise in tobbaco taxes to finance children's healthcare?

This is a moral issue. There is a clear right and wrong regarding this issue. It is right to ensure that children are cared for without a heavy burden on their families.

Perhaps America is too much of a self-centered nation to understand what community means.

Folks, let's get the facts straight and stay away from emotionalism. Every kid the Dems have put on their commercials and brought to their news conferences is ALREADY covered under the CURRENT law in place. The Dems want to expand govenment healthcare to those who make almost $100K per year.

If I'm wrong, set me straight. We should all want the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If we don't, then we have an agenda and a bias.

When are the democrats going to wheel out some of the 25 year old recipients of the SCHIP program. You know, the ones who will dump their private insurance for the taxpayer subsidized brand at the age of 25. I had a wife and two children by the age of 25. What are these welfare men and women been doing?

I wonder what the Republican slime machine will turn up on her.They know they are on the wrong side of this issue and the Dems are daring them to continue denigrating children.I have got to go I want to look up the definition of Family Values that allows these people to do this.

As a physician in West Texas at a teaching hospital, I see plenty of Medicaid, SCHIP, and like funded medical insurance programs. What I have yet to hear from the media or the politicians, is who (what caregivers)sees these patients. In most of West Texas (El Paso to Amarillo), most doctors (especially those who are specialists) will not see these patients or see only a few. They are usually pushed into the medical school affiliated hospitals and practices. I saw this also in Arkansas and many other places in Texas (Dallas/ Ft. Worth/ San Antonio/ Houston/ etc). Certainly, it is nice for our children to have affordable insurance, but is our politicians really aware of how restricted their care would be if they end up in one of these programs if they can instead afford private insurance. Experiences with Medicaid, SCHIP, and like programs produces a very trying experience for many individuals who have to work with the inefficiencies of these govertment funded programs. That is why many physicians do not take on patients who have these insurances, and families with these insurances have to drive at times 5 HOURS or more to come see me or my colleagues because they can't find anyone closer to take care of their problems. I would greatly appreciate CNN commenting on these issues rather than focus on how we should be covering all of our children with these insurance programs considered by many in the medical field as those patients that need to go to the teaching hospitals or indigent clinics.

Tax and spend, tax and spend.
This is the only plan dems have for America.