Overriding child health veto unlikely
By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writer
President Bush, anticipating his veto of a $35 billion spending increase for children's insurance will stand, has assigned three top advisers to try to negotiate a new deal with Congress.
Democrats appeared about 15 votes short in the House....
Leading the discussions for his administration are Mike Leavitt, the health and human services secretary; Al Hubbard, director of the National Economic Council; and Jim Nussle, the White House budget chief.
[quote][b]I say we consider the costs and the reasons for the growing costs and tap in to the creative and entrepreneurial spirit of America to fix our most complex problems.[/b][/quote]
Democrats Press Ahead on SCHIP
As Veto Override Fails, They Plan Bill With Minor Changes
By Jonathan Weisman and Christopher Lee
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, October 19, 2007; A04
House Democratic leaders promise to push a new version, daring Republicans to oppose them.
Said House Minority Leader Boehner, "[Americans are] tired of the political games. They want us to...work together."
Pelosi stressed Democrats will accept nothing less than expansion to 10 million children.
The new version will probably [offer] no substantive change.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Bush may be willing to go beyond his initial $5 billion expansion over five years.
the republicans will never control the whitehouse or congress again unless things change ...........
Democrats unyielding on health plan cost
By CHARLES BABINGTON and KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON - House Democrats, convinced Bush blundered by vetoing an expansion of a children's health care program, plan to approve a very similar bill this week...
The Democrats' revised bill would reduce the number of adults/higher-income families potentially eligible for the health insurance subsidies, presumably making it easier for Republicans to back it while saving face. On the key issue of spending, Democrats say theyâ€™ll not budge from the original $35 billion pricetag.
House passes revised children's health bill
WASHINGTON (AP) â€” The House passed a revised children's health proposal Thursday, but not by the two-thirds margin that supporters will need if President Bush vetoes the measure as promised.
The 265-142 vote was a victory for Bush and his allies, who urged House Republicans to reject Democrats' claims that changes to the legislation had met their chief concerns.
Allen/Michaud vote â€œyeaâ€ on passagehttp://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2007&rollnumber=1009
the same as michaud and allen ???
Is that a good thing ??? :roll:
smokers time to anti up again ................ :roll:
Compromises sought on kids' health bill
WASHINGTON (AP) â€” Bush/other critics of a $35 billion spending increase for children's health insurance say they'll support expanding coverage to families of four making as much as $62,000 a year, but want to limit states' ability to go beyond that level.
About three dozen states ignore certain income when determining who can get government-subsidized health coverage.
Roll Call: Senate passes health bill
By The Associated Press
Thu Nov 1, 7:46 PM ET
The 64-30 roll call by which the Senate passed a bill to expand a government health care program for children.
On this vote, a "yes" vote was a vote in favor of the bill and a "no" vote was a vote against it.
Voting "yes" were 45 Democrats, 17 Republicans and two independents.
Voting "no" were and 30 Republicans.
Collins (R) Yes; Snowe (R) Yes.
November 8, 2007
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Oregon voters send a message on HillaryCare.
Thursday, November 8, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST
Oregon voters passed judgment Tuesday on a plan that would have made their state children's health insurance program "universal." Sound familiar?
It should, because Oregon reproduced the current Schip fracas in D.C. on the state level--and the referendum took a major shellacking, with voters siding three to two against. Oregon's expansion was almost identical to the one backed by Congressional Democrats, so let's conduct a post-mortem, which may also be a portent.
November 8, 2007
Tobacco-Tax Measure Is Defeated in Oregon
WASHINGTON -- The Oregon measure, an 84-cent-a-pack tax increase, was rejected by 60% of voters, according to preliminary returns from Tuesday's elections. Altria Group Inc. and Reynolds American Inc. poured about $12 million into two groups opposing it, far outpacing the previous record amount spent in opposition to a state ballot measure there.
Source: Wall Street Journal, By T.W. FARNAM, November 8, 2007;Â PageÂ A15
Bush vetoes children's health bill a second time
By Caren Bohan
Wed Dec 12, 7:03 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush on Wednesday vetoed a bill expanding a children's health care program for the second time, angering Democrats who are locked in a fight with the administration over the budget and spending.
"Because the Congress has chosen to send me an essentially identical bill that has the same problems as the flawed bill I previously vetoed, I must veto this legislation too," Bush wrote in a message to the House of Representatives.
Late twists for kids health program
By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writer
The modest spending increase that Congress approved for a popular children's health insurance program will maintain coverage for those already enrolled. But many lacking insurance will have to look elsewhere.
Republican leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said the extension "provides all the resources necessary to cover low-income children who need quality health insurance."
Dems connect economy, veto override
By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writer
Fri Jan 18, 7:01 PM ET
WASHINGTON - Democratic lawmakers on Friday cited the slowing economy as a reason that the House should override President Bush's veto of a bill that would increase spending on a popular children's health insurance program.
The House has scheduled a veto override vote for Wednesday. The bill the president vetoed would increase spending by $35 billion over five years on the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
House to try for another veto override
By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writer
Wed Jan 23, 3:24 AM ET
WASHINGTON - The struggling economy gives Democratic lawmakers another weapon in their effort to expand a popular children's health insurance program. In the end, however, they appear to have made little headway in overcoming a presidential veto.
"In a slowing economy, strengthening SCHIP and providing health care to 10 million children is sound policy, and overriding the president's veto is more critical than ever," said Nadeam Elshami, spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Veto of Childrenâ€™s Health Plan Stands
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: January 23, 2008
WASHINGTON â€” Democrats cited the nationâ€™s economic problems as a reason to expand a popular health insurance program for children on Wednesday, but their effort failed as the House sustained President Bushâ€™s veto of a bill to provide coverage to nearly four million more uninsured children.
The vote for the bill was 260 to 152. Supporters were 15 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed to pass the measure over the presidentâ€™s objections.
Reps. Allen & Michaud voted to override Pres. Bushâ€™s vetohttp://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2008&rollnumber=22
[i]Editor's Note: What does this mean for SCHIP/Maine?[/i]
Sen. Snowe Press Release
WITH LAW ON THEIR SIDE, SENATORS CALL ON BUSH ADMINISTRATION TO VOLUNTARILY RESCIND AUGUST 17 CHIP DIRECTIVE
~Two Non-Partisan Analyses Conclude August 17 â€œDirectiveâ€ Violates the Congressional Review Act~
April 18, 2008
Washington, D.C. -
Washington, D.C. â€“ Senators John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV (D-WV) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) today released legal opinions from the non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) and Congressional Research Service (CRS), both of which indicate that the August 17 CHIP "directive" is in fact a rule for purposes of the Congressional Review Act and, therefore, in violation of the statutory requirements for Congressional notice and review.
At the request of the two Senators, GAO and CRS were asked to provide their independent legal analyses of the August 17 directive issued last year by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The directive mandates that states achieve 95% enrollment of children in families earning less than 200% of the poverty level before they can seek to enroll additional low-income children in families earning more than 250% of the poverty level.
A cornerstone of the Childrenâ€™s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) has always been state flexibility. However, with the August 17 directive the Administration knowingly mandated changes to CHIP that are unachievable â€“ in effect, tying the hands of those states attempting to provide greater access to health insurance for children.
According to GAO, "The August 17 letter from CMS to state health officials is a statement of general applicability and future effect designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy with regard to [CHIP]. Accordingly, it is a rule under the Congressional Review Act. Therefore, before it can take effect, it must be submitted to Congress and the Comptroller General."
"Both GAO and CRS have now confirmed what so many of us have known for some time, that the Administration clearly overstepped its legal authority in issuing the August 17 letter," Rockefeller said. "The directive is a bold-faced attempt to subvert the law and prevent states from implementing their plans to provide health insurance coverage to millions of uninsured children nationwide. CMS now has a critical choice to make: rescind the rule or continue to spend taxpayer money defending a growing list of lawsuits it is unlikely to win."
"It would be in the best interest of all parties involved, but particularly children, if CMS voluntarily withdrew the August 17 letter," Rockefeller concluded.
"Rather than working with Congress and the Governors in an open, cooperative and transparent manner, CMS chose to circumvent the rules and go their own way," said Snowe. "As we can see from the opinions released today, this is clearly the wrong approach. Thatâ€™s why we have encouraged the Administration to rescind their August 17th directive and try to develop a workable consensus â€“ with proper notice and full opportunity for public comment â€“ on how to balance expanding CHIP eligibility with enrolling the lowest income children first."
The August 17 CHIP directive to state health officials, released by CMS, effectively mandates that any state trying to enroll children in CHIP from families earning more than 250% of the federal poverty level, or $44,000 for a family of three in 2008, has to first prove that it covered 95% of children in families earning less than 200% of the federal poverty level ($35,200 for a family of three in 2008).
The directive was issued during the height of last yearâ€™s CHIP reauthorization debate in an attempt to suppress statesâ€™ efforts to cover additional low-income children. When it became clear that there was an overwhelming bipartisan majority in Congress that would not support the Bush Administrationâ€™s position, they issued the guidance to the states.
Last week, the Senate Finance Subcommittee on Health Care, which Senator Rockefeller chairs, held a hearing on the August 17 directive. Testimony from that hearing is available at: http://finance.senate.gov/sitepages/hearing040908.htm.
The legal opinions from both the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Congressional Research Service (CRS) are attached.
it means expansion.
The directive mandates that states achieve 95% enrollment of children in families earning less than 200% of the poverty level before they can seek to enroll additional low-income children in families earning more than 250% of the poverty level.
Is an interesting gem.
That is the plan...I'd ignore the good senators
Here is a perfect example of what is wrong with SCHIP....I have a relaive whose wife was pregnant and she had some complications requiring hospitalization a couple of times. They racked up some pretty big bills. While at Maine Med in Portland, the caseworker got them on MaineCare and all of their bills, right through her delivery were all paid by you and I. They both work. She has a cash business and claims little income. He owns his own company and employs four people.....they live like kings...ATVS, snowmobiles (2) and have 2 homes (though one is technically for sale so it gets excluded according to the MaineCare rules). She is driving a nice, big GMC Yukon....now that they are all on MaineCare, they run to the doctor right steady.
Something is wrong here....very wrong.
[quote="rightofcenter"]Here is a perfect example of what is wrong with SCHIP....I have a relaive whose wife was pregnant and she had some complications requiring hospitalization a couple of times. They racked up some pretty big bills. While at Maine Med in Portland, the caseworker got them on MaineCare and all of their bills, right through her delivery were all paid by you and I. They both work. She has a cash business and claims little income. He owns his own company and employs four people.....they live like kings...ATVS, snowmobiles (2) and have 2 homes (though one is technically for sale so it gets excluded according to the MaineCare rules). She is driving a nice, big GMC Yukon....now that they are all on MaineCare, they run to the doctor right steady.
Something is wrong here....very wrong.[/quote]
You're right, there is something very, very wrong here. But I need to correct and explain a few things.
SCHIP, in Maine, is called "Cub Care"; the program name is so catchy is just brings a tear to your eye. But it's just Medicaid (which in Maine is known lovingly as "MaineCare" so as not to stigmatize the recipients by acknowledging them as recipients of welfare) covering children 18 and under whose family countable income (not including income that isn't countable) is under 200% of the poverty level for the household size.
So, in the case of the pregnant recreational enthusiast cited above, SCHIP is not the program payer of choice; it's just simply MaineCare.
And, for pregnant applicants, or recipients, there is absolutely NO asset limit; you can own more snowmobiles, boats, cars, yachts, stocks, bonds, diamonds, rubies, trusts, and so on than Obama has crazy pastors, and it don't mean a durn thing: there is no asset limit. She can drive her GMC Yukon over a cliff (hopefully jumping out in time, at least for the sake of the baby), ride her snowmobile over to her second home, take the speedboat down the river to the hospital, and you and I are going to pay for the delivery, her post-partum care for at least the next two months, and all the baby's medical bills for at least the next year, NO MATTER WHAT.
You know why? 'Cause thems the rules.
How do I know? Because I'm not just a crazy ex-Marine trying to impose a theocracy on everyone. In order to keep my three dogs fed I also had to get a job after retiring from the service, and the one I got is for the People's Republic of Maine determining eligibility for public assistance.
I guarantee you that none of you, even the legislators that post here, have any idea whatsoever about the extent of governmental largesse in Maine is. None of you. If you're a taxpayer, I could sicken you with what I know about welfare policy.
I used to think that if more people were aware of it, it would be stopped. I now know that it is unstoppable, at least until the point of societal collapse: too many people that don't need it are recipients; they won't stop it as long as they keep getting something for nothing.
Plato was right. I'm sorry to say.
The new ruling notwithstanding, it remains up to Maine government on whether or not to move ahead with a SCHIP expansion, yes?
SKF....I suppose you are correct. It wouldn't surprise me if Baldacci called the legislature back for a special session just for that reason. Heck, its only going to cost another $25 million or so to expand SCHIP. I am sure the gov and the legislature can find a few more fees and "non broad based" taxes that they can increase in order to pay for this. If they can tax their way to keeping Dirigo alive, surely they can see it in their hearts to do it for the children of Maine!
White House May Soften Health Policy
By JANE ZHANG
May 8, 2008; Page A5
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration appears to be softening a policy states complained hindered their efforts to expand health-care coverage for poor children under the State Childrenâ€™s Health Insurance Program.
In a letter sent to states Wednesday, the administration will give states more flexibility to prove they have enrolled 95% of poor children from eligible families -- a condition, laid out in an August directive, for using federal funds to expand coverage under SCHIP.