The Political Universe 07.20.07
Posted by Jason Easley on 07.20.2007
President Bush has threatened to veto an expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. It almost seems like the man is on a mission to leave office as the most hated president of all time, doesn’t it? I’ll tell you why the SCHIP program is a great idea with a bad funding source. Plus, is Hillary Clinton an enemy propagandist? We’ll talk about this, and the political quote of the week, in the Friday edition of this column.
Bush threatens to veto children's health insurance plan
Yesterday against the wishes of President Bush, the Senate Finance Committee approved an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). The SCHIP program provides a subsidy for health insurance for children and some adults who live in households that earn too much money to qualify for Medicaid, but not enough to afford private insurance. The vote on the expansion of the program was 17-4, and the bill will now be sent to the full Senate for debate and a vote. The five year $35 billion expansion of the program would allow 6.6 million people to keep their insurance, while adding 3.2 million more children to the program. On Wednesday, President Bush threatened to veto the bill. "If Congress continues to insist upon expanding health care through the SCHIP program — which, by the way, would entail a huge tax increase for the American people — I'll veto the bill," he said.
The expansion of the program would be paid for by increasing the excise tax on a pack of cigarettes, cigars, and chewing tobacco. The tax on a pack of cigarettes would increase by 61 cents a pack of this bill was enacted into law. The additional spending would bring the total five year cost of the program to $60 billion over five years. President Bush has called the program a big government attempt to enlarge their federal role in healthcare. The president proposed increasing funding by $5 billion over the current $25 billion being spent for a total cost of $30 billion. However, the Congressional Budget Office has said that this amount isn't even enough to keep the current program running.
While speaking in Cleveland a couple of weeks ago, the president said, "The program is going beyond the initial intent of helping poor children. It's now aiming at encouraging more people to get on government health care. . . . It's a way to encourage people to transfer from the private sector to government health-care plans. . . . I think it's wrong, and I think it's a mistake." What the president is not telling you is that the program is a joint federal and state program. The federal government only oversees the program. States can use one of three options to design their program. According to the Department of Health and Human Services states can, "use SCHIP funds to expand Medicaid eligibility to children who previously did not qualify for the program; design a separate children's health insurance program entirely separate from Medicaid; or, combine both the Medicaid and separate program options."
States have the option of enrolling some adults, but the program is specifically designed for children. The new bill would require states to pay a larger percentage of the cost if they wish to ensure adults in their CHIP program. To put thins into perspective, President Bush is threatening to veto a children's health insurance program over a difference of $30 billion spread out over 5 five years. The United States government currently spends $10 billion a month in Iraq. What is being discussed here is an extra $6 billion a year for CHIP. The administration spends this amount in a little over two weeks in Iraq. The CHIP program is popular among both Democrats and Republicans in Congress, because it is relatively inexpensive, and it works.
The problem here is that supporters of the program are using increased tobacco taxes to pay for it. As smoking has declined in the United States, so has the revenue derived from tobacco taxes, and while it is great that so many people have stopped using tobacco, the effects of decreased tax revenue are starting to be felt at the state level. As the states ban smoking in more places and raise taxes, the combined result is fewer smokers and less tax revenue. Federal tax revenue from cigarettes has declined every year since 2002. Expanding the SCHIP program is a great idea, and no Republican will want to vote against children's health care the year before an election, but I would advise those in favor of this program to take a strong look at alternative revenue streams, because the tobacco tax money is drying up.
The political quote of the week
"Dick Cheney has ruined the job."
-- Sen. Christopher Dodd, on CNN explaining why he doesn't want to be vice president.
Pentagon challenges Hillary on Iraq
Back in May, Hillary Clinton asked some pointed questions during a hearing about how the military plans to withdraw from Iraq. These questions led to an overtly political attack in the form of a letter written by Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman to Clinton. According to the AP Edelman wrote, "Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia."
He also added, "Such talk understandably unnerves the very same Iraqi allies we are asking to assume enormous personal risks." So Hillary Clinton is an enemy propagandist for pointing out the need for the U.S. military to be drawing up plans for a potential withdrawal at some point? This sounds like rhetoric that is straight out of the White House playbook. It also lends credibility to those who openly speculate that the United States has no intention of ever permanently leaving Iraq.
However, the letter does go on to hint that the military might be planning a withdrawal after all. "We are always evaluating and planning for possible contingencies. As you know, it is long-standing departmental policy that operational plans, including contingency plans, are not released outside of the department," Edelman wrote. The interesting thing about this letter is its tone of hostility. Senator Clinton serves on the Armed Services Committee, which oversees the Defense Department and their budget. As much as I dislike and distrust Clinton, I see nothing wrong with her advocating that the military should be planning their withdrawal. Planning a withdrawal is not the same as withdrawing. It is clear to me that the administration's effort to politicize every department has been successful at the DOD. Instead of serving the American people, these departments now echo the president's political views and goals.
Obviously one of these goals is to paint the Democrats, and especially Hillary Clinton, as a danger to American national security. Clinton isn't a danger to anyone. She is an ambitious person with a burning desire to be president. I don't think she has either the skills or experience that the job requires, but neither does our current president. In fact, none of the upper tier candidates in either party are good presidential material right now. That being said, if Hillary does win the presidency, I think her administration will at least be competent. I don't see any of the candidates as a threat to America, but there is something greatly wrong with our system when this type of political gibberish is coming from an Undersecretary of Defense. It is a very troubling sign to say the least.
Be sure to check out…
Justin talks about the VA, GOP voter discontent and someone named Michael Savage in his latest Thursday Political News.
Enrique talks about John McCain's Downward Spiral. The problems is that most Republicans never really liked John McCain. He was OK, but he never has had a large passionate base of support.
You really should check out Brian McLain's discussion of the Fourteen Points of Fascism. This week Brian brings us Points 5 and 6.
Greg Allen wrote a fantastic column this week that's titled Are You Hearing All The Facts? One of the problems with those interested in politics today is that they tend to limit their information gathering to sources which reinforce their point of view. How can you ever really understand an issue if you aren't willing to look at all sides?
This is your last chance to check out this week's TPU Radio show. You can either click here, or use the media player below.
We have reached the end of what has been a slow political news week. I hope the column didn't suffer too much. I'll have a new politics zone round table posted on Monday. This week's radio show will be a preview of the Democratic debate on Monday night, and you can check out this column on Tuesday for a full debate wrap up. Have a good weekend.
"Last night the Senate held an all night session. Sen. Hillary Clinton gave a speech at 4 a.m. It was the first time Hillary gave a speech at 4 in the morning that didn't begin with, Where the hell have you been?" --- Conan O'Brien
"Last night in D.C. they had that all night Senate session. It was the D.C. madam's slowest night ever. It was an eventful busy session . . . Barack Obama dozed for 15 minutes and raised another 10 million." --- David Letterman
"Boy has it been a hot summer. They call this the dog days of summer. Especially if you're Michael Vick." --- Jay Leno
STAY CURRENT