The Contoversy Over the State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)

Congress has introduced a bill to increase the monies to fund the State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and President Bush is threatening to veto the legislation.

Typically the facts will be obscured by the rhetoric surrounding the proposed legislation by providing a variety of numbers, percentages and other figures that will simply cause most people to run from the issue because of the hyperbole that will be presented to the public. The Democrats will accuse the Republicans of not caring about poor children in America and the Republicans will counter. Exactly what the Republican counter claim will be is uncertain because the Democrats have already seized the rhetorical high ground.

According to the New York Times there are 6.6 million children that are covered by the program and millions more awaiting coverage. The Bush administration has proposed a $5 billion dollar increase over five years which represents a 20% increase to the current program. Congress wants to add $35 billion to the program over five years.

No one wants to deny health care to children because they are poor. Perhaps the issue is to determine who can afford private insurance and who can not. Currently the poverty level is identified as families that earn less than $20,000 per year. Admittedly in America that is poor. However is a family income of $40,000, $60,000 or $80,000 poor?

This program is available in many instances for families that earn $50,000 annually and in some cases rises to $80,000 in annual income. Last year it was reported that an additional 710,000 children were added to the uninsured number and half of that number of uninsured children was from families that earned between $40,000 and $80,000 annually.

That is hard to comprehend. A family that earns from $40,000 to $80,000 annually can not pay the estimated cost of about $1,500 per child for health insurance?

The Heritage Foundation reports that "fully 61 percent of children who became eligible for public insurance due to the creation of SCHIP already had private coverage. As SCHIP grows to allow children from wealthier families, this figure will rise. According to a Congressional Budget Office analysis of Census data, current proposals in Congress to expand SCHIP eligibility would reach children in income groups in which 89 percent or more of children currently have private coverage."

It sounds like many families are making a choice to not purchase health insurance for their children. Instead they are electing to have the government pay for their insurance. That sounds like a good option except that taxpayers like you and me will have to pay for the health insurance for these children. That just doesn't sit well with me, but perhaps I am in the minority.

I want poor children that cannot afford adequate health insurance to receive health care, however I don't feel I should have to pay for the wealthy. As a side note, the maximum that my family ever earned was $55,000 annually (our average income was only about $42,000 annually) and we raised and educated two children, purchased a home and provided health insurance for the family without a government subsidy. We had to make choices and establish priorities in our budgeting without looking to the government for money.

Is this program a hand-up or a hand-out? Many will be vilified for not helping the children, however this sure looks like it has all the ingredients for spending tax dollars for those that could afford the insurance, but want someone else to pay.