Originally posted by: Fern
This is typical of many posts here - see a headline and without bothering to check, run to the forums and scream how Repub's wanna eat your babies etc.
I'd say you've just performed a wonderfully effective demonstration of not "let[ting] facts and cost effectiveness come in the way of ideology" (I.e, Repubs *bad*, Dems *good*)
From the Admin:
H.R. 3162 is objectionable on several fronts. First, as a general matter, the legislation is structured in a way that clearly favors government-run health care over private health insurance. The result of this approach would be a dramatic encroachment of government-run health care resulting in lower quality and fewer choices, which the American people have repeatedly rejected. Second, the legislation dramatically expands Federal spending far beyond what is necessary to reauthorize SCHIP responsibly. Third, it will result in the elimination of benefits and choices for millions of Medicare beneficiaries including both senior citizens and individuals with disabilities. Fourth, it would weaken scrutiny of Medicare?s unsustainable fiscal path by eliminating a current law provision that informs the American people when Medicare?s financial condition has deteriorated. Fifth, it weakens the ability of States to cover unborn children under their SCHIP programs. Finally, it imposes a massive, regressive tax increase.
It also appreas that there is concern that this bill roles back tax benefits (deduction) for those paying their health insurance. I strongly oppose that.
(More information on the above list of concerns can be found at the White House site the above poster linked.)
While I am strongly in favor of coverage for children (and have previously expressed that here many times) IMO one must keep a watchful on the details in a bill, instead of just reading the headlines, before deciding to support it.
There are many many valid concerns to this amendment to the original program. Given Congress's demonstarted sloppiness in drafting & passing bills how one could cry foul over closer scruntiny etc is partisan silliness.
Finally, and contrary to the assertions of many here, the Pres does support an increase of the program to the tune of $5 Billion IIRC. But feel free to continue on with your baseless *propoganda*.
Fern
