Take that, you obstreperous children

Seven years in and the president has vetoed four bills — including one today that denies health coverage to about 10 million children of low- and moderate-income families. The bill would have reauthorized and expanded the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, to cover an additional 3.4 million kids (from 6.6 million).

But according to our fearless leader, this was not about denying coverage but about a “philosphical divide.” The nearly two thirds of House members and more than two thirds of Senators apparently believe their responsibility was to cover as many children as they could; the president believes in private insurance.

The policies of the government ought to be, help poor children and to focus on poor children. And the policies of the government ought to be, help people find private insurance, not federal coverage. And that’s where the philosophical divide comes in. I happen to believe that what you’re seeing when you expand eligibility for federal programs is the desire by some in Washington, D.C. to federalize health care. I don’t think that’s good for the country. I believe in private medicine. I believe in helping poor people — which was the intent of S-CHIP, now being expanded beyond its initial intent. I also believe that the federal government should make it easier for people to afford private insurance. I don’t want the federal government making decisions for doctors and customers.

Customers. Apparently patients are no different than car buyers — except that many are sick and most are scared and confused.

The president’s answer, as it has been for most issues, is to play with the tax code:

That’s why I believe strongly in health savings accounts or association health plans to help small business owners better afford insurance for their workers. That’s why I believe we ought to change the federal tax code. You’re disadvantaged if you work for a small business and/or an individual trying to buy insurance in the marketplace — disadvantaged relative to somebody working for a large company. If you work for a large company, you get your health insurance after tax. If you buy insurance you have to pay — no, you buy your insurance after taxes as an individual; you get your insurance pre-tax when you’re working for a large corporation. You’re at a disadvantage if you’re an individual in the market place.

So I think we ought to change the tax code. I — my view is, is that every family ought to get a $15,000 deduction off their income taxes, regardless of where they work, in order to help people better afford insurance in the marketplace.

Nothing wrong with altering the tax code to make medical expenses an automatic, pretax deduction. But that won’t fix the problem.

Providing coverage and getting the insurance companies out of the mix just might.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

Runner’s diary, Wednesday

The last run before the big race on Sunday. Four days of stretching and light cardio ahead and then….

Today: Five miles or so (GPS didn’t work because of the cloud cover). Felt good, though the air was thick and humid making breathing a chore.

Ready or not, here it comes.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

Clean elections work;Bergen GOP apparently doesn’t

The Record today explains why the failure of the Bergen GOP to garner enough $10 contributions to qualify for public financing is not a failure of the state’s clean elections pilot, but a failure of the Bergen GOP. Essentially, the heavily Democratic 37th is not exactly hospitable to Republicans, but there was no excuse for the party’s candidates not to get at least 400 contributions and qualify for partial funding. That’s 400 contributions in a district with 220,000 residents.

(T)he Clean Elections program is a worthy experiment that offered the GOP an unprecedented level of parity in exchange for a minimal show of will — not to mention the sort of ethical rectitude that Republicans have loudly championed amid Democratic scandal in Trenton.

Reports suggest there has been a serious effort on the part of local Republican candidates, particularly Nibot. That they fell short suggests a failure of the party organization.

Tellingly, the only other candidate who hasn’t yet met the requirements is a Libertarian Assembly hopeful in Central Jersey. The Bergen Republicans, meanwhile, are facing third-party status in a two-party race.

The GOP failure does point out a flaw in the program — one that can be addressed by including primaries. The GOP is not likely to mount much of a campaign in the 37th, where state Sen. Loretta Weingberg remains popular.

The primary is the key in this district — as recent history proved, with Weingberg leading a slate against the county party apparatus and winning. And the primary is key in most districts, which are not competitive and are not likely to be.

So let’s expand this thing next time out.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.