By now most of you reading this page have probably read a great deal about the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) The only comment I will make is that the vote on this bill shows how far the Bush Administration has fallen and how out of touch it is with reality. The ideological rhetoric raised by the administration in defense of its opposition to the BIPARTISAN bill is as reprehensible as it is irresponsible, for it holds the lives of American children hostage to an ideology.
My book The Strange Death of Liberal America has as its epigraph the following quote from the late Paul Wellstone:
I believe that every infant, every child we hold in our hands, no matter what color of skin, no matter boy or girl, no matter rich or poor, no matter rural or urban, and no matter what religion, that every child that we hold in our hands, is one of God’s children. I believe that every child, every infant should have the same chance to reach his or her potential. I tell you, that is the goodness of this country, that is the American dream, that is what makes us a great Nation, and that is the most important goal for our Nation. And whatever makes that possible, I’m for it. And whatever stands in the way of that, I’m against it.
Rather than add yet another opinion piece to the already large number of posts on the subject, in the tradition of this blog I thought I would do something different. In researching CHIP, I found myself engrossed by the Senate debate that took place on September 26.
The United States Senate has always nurtured eloquence and the best of that tradition was on display as senators from both parties rose in defense of America’s children. The bill they were debating was a bipartisan effort, much of it due to two Republican senators, Charles Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah. In the interest of not only highlighting CHIP but also the memorable rhetoric of several senators, I offer below what I consider the best of the debate and one of the shining moments of the United States Senate. The occasion demanded eloquence for the very reasons Paul Wellstone spoke of and these senators did not disappoint. It is hard to be cynical about politics or politicians, or to not harbor hope for the future of this nation after reading their words.
I have to say, in listening to my colleagues talk about covering 200 percent of poverty, I hope the American people understand that when we talk about 200 percent of poverty—my colleague from New Hampshire talked about it as if it was a lot of money. When you talk about 200 percent of poverty, you are talking about a family of four trying to live on $41,300. Eighty percent of the people in the State of Arkansas whom I represent have an adjusted gross income of less than $50,000. As a parent myself, being blessed with two incomes coming into our household, a family raising and caring for a family of four on $41,300 a year—talking about what you are paying for rent, for food, for utilities, and then to say that we as a Nation don’t want to support you in caring for your children and seeing that they get good health care, that their health care needs are met; no, go into the private marketplace where the most expensive piece of health insurance you can purchase is in the private single-payer marketplace of health insurance——
Senator Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas
But it is interesting to me that the loudest moans in the Chamber of the Senate come when we take the floor of the Senate to talk about taking care of things here at home, taking care of basic things in this country. What is more basic than taking care of children and the health care of children? If it is not in first place, tell me what is in first place among your concerns about life. I am talking about the health of our children. If that doesn’t rank No. 1, tell me what does. It ought to rank No. 1, front and center.
Senator Byron Dorgan, North Dakota
It is interesting to me, we voted a while back about making English the national language. It is a reasonable request. If you want to become an American citizen, you ought to aspire to learn the language, English. Yet I come to the floor and I hear a foreign language. I don’t understand what they are talking about: ‘‘socialized medicine,’’ ‘‘Cubanstyle, government-run health care.’’ It seems to me they ought to speak English. I get so tired of people using these terms, such as ‘‘socialized medicine.’’
Yes, there is a government aspect to this issue. But as my colleague said, much of this is the private sector as well implementing it. I am so tired of people saying the Government can’t do a thing. How about those firefighters climbing the World Trade Center and giving their lives as those buildings came down? You know what, they were on the public payroll, were they not? Public service, that is what they were doing. Government workers. How about the teachers taking care of our kids today in the classroom? Government workers; yes, they are. How about Dr. Francis Collins working at NIH, who gave us the owners manual for the human body with the mapping of the genome code? Are we proud of him? Government worker.
I am a little tired of this language— ‘‘socialized medicine,’’ ‘‘Cuban-style system.’’ What a load. That is thoughtless rather than thoughtful debate.
The President says it is unfair to private health insurance companies for us to expand this program. I could not disagree more. Private health insurance companies are doing quite well. They do not need any more help from us. The fact that these kids do not have health insurance suggests these private health insurance companies either cannot or will not provide them the coverage they need.
Senator Richard Durbin, Illinois
I want to remind the President this issue is not about scoring political points or pushing an ideology. It is about bettering the lives of America’s future generation. Today we are making a choice, either to support a proven, effective program that has helped children in all States or supporting the status quo which could lead to more kids losing health care coverage as States struggle to make ends meet.
Senator Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota
The compromise bill discourages States from covering higher income kids by reducing the Federal matching rate for States that wish to expand eligibility over 300 percent of Federal poverty limits. It rewards States that cover more low-income kids by providing targeted incentives to States that increase enrollment for coverage of low-income kids. So there is a very clear message to the States, all 50 States: Cover your poorest kids, meaning your kids from low-income families, first. Don’t spend money on childless adults, as we heard so often during the debate. The word CHIP has no A in it. It is for children, not adults. Don’t spend money on parents unless you can prove you are covering low-income kids. Don’t spend money on higher income kids unless you can prove that your State is covering your lower income kids first. It is all there in black and white. Everybody can read it.
I get a sense, talking to some of my colleagues, that they haven’t read what we are going to be voting on. Anyone who suggests this bill is an expansion to higher income kids or other populations, as has been done under some waivers given by the Bush administration, is simply not reading the bill.
This bill is not a Government takeover of health care, either. And you heard that. This bill is not socialized medicine. Screaming ‘‘socialized medicine’’ during a health care debate is like shouting ‘‘fire’’ in a crowded theater. It is intended to cause hysteria that diverts people from reading the bill, looking at the facts. To those of you, my colleagues, who make such outlandish accusations, I say: Go shout ‘‘fire’’ somewhere else. Serious people are trying to get real work done. Now is the time to get this work done.
Senator Charles Grassley, Iowa
I always find it ironic that the American people seem to get from the White House what they don’t want, and they don’t get what they do want. The American people want to end the war in Iraq as soon as possible, a war which will soon be costing us, if you can believe it, $750 billion—three-quarters of $1 trillion—which even in Washington is a lot of money. For the war in Iraq, for Halliburton contracts, we seem to have an endless supply of money. The American people don’t want it, but that is what they are getting. On the other hand, the American people do want health insurance for their children.
Senator Bernie Sanders, Vermont
Print Posted by: liberalamerican
