Incrementalism - the new way Democrats plan to nationalize health care Posted by: McQ
on Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Hillary and Bill Clinton learned quickly and quite firmly that American's weren't big fans of the idea of government run health care when Hillarycare was first trotted out early in the 1st Clinton administration. Or so you assume. But in fact, what was learned was not to introduce it as a whole. Instead, like turning up the heat on a frog in a pot, just take a little at a time, until, eventually, you have it all.
The story that has been touted in the news lately is the bill which introduces a much higher federal sin tax on cigarettes ($0.61)and a 20,000% increase on some cigars.
Well, as usual, it's "for the children". The intent is to pay for the SCHIP program which is an existing children's health insurance program for poor children.
Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, urged the president to support the committee's proposal, which he said would keep health coverage for 6.6 million children currently covered by the plan and reach 3 million more low-income, uninsured children over the next five years.
As usual, that's not the whole truth. In fact, according to Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) the bill includes an provision which would provide health insurance for children of parents at 400% of the poverty threshold.
What does that mean in terms of household income?
$80,000 for a family of four. So this particular bill and those particular taxes are aimed at a completely new demographic which anyone, even some who hang out here, would have difficulty defining as poor (although they'll try ... just sit back and observe).
"Members of Congress have decided, however, to expand the program to include, in some cases, up to families earning $80,000 a year — which would cause people to drop their private insurance in order to be involved with a government insurance plan," Bush said in a speech in suburban Maryland.
"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.
Incrementalism. President Bush is entirely right to veto this attempt to expand the power of government.
My non-Libertarian opinion of the day: It ought to be illegal to report on a bill in Congress, in a news report, without mentioning the farkin’ bill number - because without it, this stuff is a bear to find, and I always prefer to look at the actual text of a bill.
Part of the reason might be that that version of the bill is/was still in committee rather than on the floor yet. I can’t find hide nor hair of it with various searches on thomas.loc.gov.
(Not surprisingly, a local paper can out-report the AP.)
Did the link to Price and Bush’s response get eaten?