October 16th, 2007
08:25 PM ET
11 years ago

Dems turn up SCHIP pressure

Watch Jessica Yellin's report about Democratic efforts to override the veto of the SCHIP bill.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - It was a busy day on Capitol Hill in the political and public relations battle over a bill funding kids' health insurance which President Bush recently vetoed.  Congressional Correspondent Jessica Yellin reports.

Click here to see CNN's new political portal: CNNPolitics.com

Filed under: Congress • SCHIP
soundoff (37 Responses)
  1. therealist

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

    October 16, 2007 09:04 pm at 9:04 pm |
  2. Mike, Lubbock, Texas

    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.

    October 16, 2007 09:46 pm at 9:46 pm |
  3. THOMAS BILLIS las vegas nv

    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.

    October 16, 2007 09:51 pm at 9:51 pm |
  4. Jake Doniphan Ne

    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?

    October 16, 2007 10:09 pm at 10:09 pm |
  5. Michael, Clarksville, AR

    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.

    October 16, 2007 10:35 pm at 10:35 pm |
  6. Christian, Tampa FL

    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.

    October 17, 2007 12:05 am at 12:05 am |
  7. ABB

    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.

    October 17, 2007 12:18 am at 12:18 am |
  8. Bradley Schaubs, Greeley, CO

    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.

    October 17, 2007 01:34 am at 1:34 am |
  9. Laura - Tulsa OK

    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.

    October 17, 2007 01:48 am at 1:48 am |

    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.

    October 17, 2007 02:45 am at 2:45 am |
  11. Truebob, Hollywood FL

    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.

    October 17, 2007 05:56 am at 5:56 am |
  12. Dan (Columbia, MD)

    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?

    October 17, 2007 07:36 am at 7:36 am |
  13. Jeff - Jacksonville, FL

    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.


    October 17, 2007 08:35 am at 8:35 am |
  14. Sue in Michigan

    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!

    October 17, 2007 08:36 am at 8:36 am |
  15. Jeff - Jacksonville, FL

    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!

    October 17, 2007 08:38 am at 8:38 am |
  16. Robert, Vivian, LA

    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!

    October 17, 2007 08:55 am at 8:55 am |
  17. laurinda,ny

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

    October 17, 2007 09:18 am at 9:18 am |
  18. therealist

    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..

    October 17, 2007 09:28 am at 9:28 am |
  19. spinstopper

    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..

    October 17, 2007 09:33 am at 9:33 am |
  20. Lou Dobbs, Plano TX

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

    October 17, 2007 09:41 am at 9:41 am |
  21. Ken Howell Chapel Hill NC

    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.

    October 17, 2007 09:54 am at 9:54 am |
  22. Chris, Middletown, CT

    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)

    October 17, 2007 10:00 am at 10:00 am |
  23. Robert, Vivian, LA

    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!

    October 17, 2007 10:32 am at 10:32 am |
  24. poboy

    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!!

    October 17, 2007 11:35 am at 11:35 am |
  25. James, Phoenix AZ

    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!

    October 17, 2007 12:00 pm at 12:00 pm |
1 2