Peer Hannaford of the American Spectator says they do, and here’s why:
They are convinced that it is a surefire issue for them, come November 2008. They don’t care as much about children as about winning the next election. They figure they can hang the blame for “hurting children” on the Republicans, win veto-proof majorities in Congress in ’08 and/or
the White House. Then, they will move toward their real goal: nationalized, government-run health care for all.The SCHIP bill was intended to be the camel’s nose under the health care tent. SCHIP was actually created by a Republican Congress in 1997 to cover poor children, period. The major flaw in the bill is that it would expand coverage to approximately two million children who are already privately insured. Children in families of four with annual incomes of twice the poverty level (approximately $40,000) are currently eligible for SCHIP. This would be raised to include families making three times the poverty level, or $61.900. This is well above the median U.S. household income ($48,201, according to the Census Bureau). Thus, it would move SCHIP coverage well into the middle class.
This, indeed, is the camel shoving its nose well into the tent. “Fee” government health insurance? If you and your family already have private coverage and make $61,900 a year, would you drop it for the “free” coverage? Of course. So, this year it’s $61,900; next year $80,00, and so forth.
For the record, if my family ever becomes eligible for “free” government insurance, I will reject it. I prefer to pay my own way, thank you very much. I just wish mor people would. This whole attitude of “Well, it’s already there. You’d be a fool not to take it” is dishonest and unethical. No Sir. Count me out.
As for the opinion, it makes sense. Would you really be that surprised to find out the Dems just wanted to use the children as a political wedge? Me neither.
