Bush vetoes expansion of kids' health insurance program

[almaty 19]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Wednesday vetoed legislation expanding a children's health insurance program by $35 billion over five years.

President Bush says he vetoed the SCHIP bill because it was a step toward "federalizing" medicine.

1 of 2 Bush exercised the veto at 10 a.m. ET before leaving the White House for a trip to Lancaster, Pennsylvania, to discuss the federal budget and taxes.

Speaking in Pennsylvania, Bush said he vetoed the bill because it was a step toward "federalizing" medicine and inappropriately expanded the program beyond its focus on helping poor children.

"I believe in private medicine, not the federal government running the health care system. I do want Republicans and Democrats to come together to support a bill that focuses on the poorer children," the president said, adding the government's policy should be to help people find private insurance. Watch Bush explain his veto »

Democrats quickly took to the floors of the Senate and House of Representatives to condemn the veto of the bill that received bipartisan support.

"I think that this is probably the most inexplicable veto in the history of the country. It is incomprehensible. It is intolerable. It's unacceptable," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, who pleaded with Republicans to help overturn the veto.

Congress sent the legislation on the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, to the White House on Tuesday after the Senate voted 67-29 last week to expand the program.

It appears Congress lacks the votes to overturn Bush's veto. Though 67 votes in the 100-person Senate would suffice to override a veto, the 265-159 House vote on September 25 is short of the two-thirds majority needed. View Bush's and previous presidents' veto records »

However, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she would try to get the 15 additional Republican votes she said she needed to overturn Bush's veto, noting that "2-to-1 Republican voters support SCHIP and oppose the president's veto."

"It's very sad that the president has chosen to veto a bill that would provide health care to 10 million American children for the next five years. It is a value that is shared by the American people across the board," Pelosi said.

House Democrats also were quick to compare the bill's $7 billion annual cost to the money spent each month on the Iraq war.

"The president and Republicans in Congress say that we can't afford this bill, but where were the fiscal conservatives when the president demanded hundreds of billions of dollars for the war in Iraq?" asked Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Illinois.

Some House Republicans, however, said Bush was right to veto the bill.

"The public can see that we're playing more political 'gotcha' than we are at really solving problems," said Rep. Todd Akin, R-Missouri, who said the legislation contained "all of these little hidden gizmos, among other things that we're going to provide health care to the children of illegal immigrants."

Akin also said the bill would have led to "a massive expansion of, basically, 'Hillary' socialized medicine," a reference to Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York and her unsuccessful health care efforts as first lady in the 1990s.

Democrats denied the bill would provide coverage to illegal immigrants.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland, said Tuesday that he won't schedule an override vote on SCHIP until next week or later. There is no time limit in the House on when to bring the bill up again.

Under the legislation, the program would double -- from 4 million to 8 million -- the number of children covered.

In the Senate, 18 Republicans joined all of the Democrats in voting to expand the program from its annual budget of $5 billion to $12 billion for the next five years.

Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah was among those Republicans who split from the president. "It's very difficult for me to be against a man I care so much for," he told his colleagues on the Senate floor before the vote. "It's unfortunate that the president has chosen to be on what, to me, is clearly the wrong side of this issue."

A Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted September 27-30 found 72 percent of those surveyed support an increase in spending on the program, with 25 percent opposed. The poll's margin of error was 3 percentage points.

Bush and many Republicans contend the program's original intent would be changed under the bill.

The program gives coverage to parents who make too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to buy private insurance for their children. Critics have said their concern is that parents might be prompted to drop private coverage for their children to get cheaper coverage under the bill.

The veto is the fourth of Bush's presidency. After not using his veto power at all during his first four years, the president has vetoed three other bills in his second term: two on stem-cell research legislation and one on a war funding bill with a Democratic timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq.

Edited October 3, 2007 by almaty

[almaty 19]

Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah was among those Republicans who split from the president. "It's very difficult for me to be against a man I care so much for," he told his colleagues on the Senate floor before the vote. "It's unfortunate that the president has chosen to be on what, to me, is clearly the wrong side of this issue."

lol/...yeah, bush cares so much for the children..he is a regular compassionate conservative.....

[LuzyC 0]

.

Edited October 3, 2007 by LuzyC

[GaryC 7]

[almaty 19]

Speaking in Pennsylvania, Bush said he vetoed the bill because it was a step toward "federalizing" medicine and inappropriately expanded the program beyond its focus on helping poor children.

"I believe in private medicine, not the federal government running the health care system. I do want Republicans and Democrats to come together to support a bill that focuses on the poorer children," the president said, adding the government's policy should be to help people find private insurance.

i guess, he never heard of medicare..medicaid..no, he wants to expand the profits of private insurance and penalize hospitals, who will not get paid for services renedered due to no insurance or insurance with unbeleiveable deductibles, that the family cannot pay..he is a chopf##k..

[yogib37 3]

Speaking in Pennsylvania, Bush said he vetoed the bill because it was a step toward "federalizing" medicine and inappropriately expanded the program beyond its focus on helping poor children.

"I believe in private medicine, not the federal government running the health care system. I do want Republicans and Democrats to come together to support a bill that focuses on the poorer children," the president said, adding the government's policy should be to help people find private insurance.

i guess, he never heard of medicare..medicaid..no, he wants to expand the profits of private insurance and penalize hospitals, who will not get paid for services renedered due to no insurance or insurance with unbeleiveable deductibles, that the family cannot pay..he is a chopf##k..

:thumbs:

You are right Brother Dean, He wants to protect his buddies in the medical and insurance area. Anything to cut into the pot is not right.

Yes other rich chopf#ck Like bush that does not give a ####### about the poor.

Reminds me of the Mel Brooks film 'History of the world' where the Roman Senate was voting on giving to the poor or keep it for them self. they said : F##K the Poor' :lol: But it is same goes for in the Bush empire.

[GaryC 7]

The Democrats who control Congress, with significant support from Republicans, passed the legislation to add $35 billion over five years to allow an additional 4 million children into the program. It would be funded by raising the federal cigarette tax by 61 cents to $1 per pack.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071003/ap_on_...ildren_s_health

Socialized medicine sucks. Just a backdoor attempt to shove it down our throats. Using "children" to fool the masses is despicable.

Edited October 3, 2007 by GaryC

[smoke20 0]

i'm sure i'm getting torched for this but......if this bill is for medical coverage for lower income children, why tax smokers more? why not repeal the Earned Income Credit that their parent get come tax time? seems fair to me medical coverage for low income children paid for by the wind fall their parents get from everyone elses taxes. lets be honest many (not all or most..i said many) of the people getting these returns are not spending it on the kids.

and the other thing everyone is always slamming insurance premiums & deductibles. insurance companies can not stay in business if they are putting out more money than they bring in. why isn't everyone all smoked up about the cost of health care. the insurance companies aren't the ones charging $1500-$2500 for an emergency room visit, a $75 asprin etc. i'm thinking something needs to be done about the price gougeing coming from the medical industry. i understand training, equipment, research & medication costs....but it shouldn't cost as much as it does. these hospitals & drug companies have us by the short hairs yet everyone wants to blame the insurance companies.

*gets gone before the flames come*

[Cantankerous 0]

I do not think the SCHIP program needs an additional $35 Billion dollars and I certainly hold great disdain towards using sin taxes to pay for things like this. For example, does NY really need to cover families with this program that make 400% over the poverty line when right now the program covers them at (I think) if they are up to 200% over the poverty line.

The best exlanation I have found so far does indicate SCHIP needs more than the $5 Billion the President is willing to sign off on. Give them $15 to Billion more to cover rising costs and move on.

SCHIP Budget

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I heard it was being expanded to people up to the age of 25. I dont know any children 25 years old. I love the way they frame it around the word children.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

The Democrats who control Congress, with significant support from Republicans, passed the legislation to add $35 billion over five years to allow an additional 4 million children into the program. It would be funded by raising the federal cigarette tax by 61 cents to $1 per pack.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071003/ap_on_...ildren_s_health

Socialized medicine sucks. Just a backdoor attempt to shove it down our throats. Using "children" to fool the masses is despicable.

agreed

[no name 1]

Socialized medicine sucks.

agreed

Based on what? Not your own experience, surely.

I can assure you it does not suck, from my own experience.

[Dan J 277]

There is a better way to pay for it, but it would likely get on the bad side of a lot of parents. Right now parents get tax deductions and credits for having kids. We can remove that and simplify the tax system, and use the difference to pay for health care and education.

[Sinergy 3]

There is a better way to pay for it, but it would likely get on the bad side of a lot of parents. Right now parents get tax deductions and credits for having kids. We can remove that and simplify the tax system, and use the difference to pay for health care and education.

yea i wouldnt go there

i dont think parents should be penalized for having kids! basically we DONT get tax breaks on ######! we have to buy more food, more clothes, more everything. theres our contribution to taxes.

[almaty 19]

The Democrats who control Congress, with significant support from Republicans, passed the legislation to add $35 billion over five years to allow an additional 4 million children into the program. It would be funded by raising the federal cigarette tax by 61 cents to $1 per pack.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071003/ap_on_...ildren_s_health

Socialized medicine sucks. Just a backdoor attempt to shove it down our throats. Using "children" to fool the masses is despicable.

socialize medicine does not suck..ask a retired senior citizen on medicare..who would not have any medical coverage except medicare ...