Suppose you knew a child whose family didn't have--for whatever reason--did not have medical insurance. And suppose that child developed a condition that required attention that was urgent, but this child was neglected because of the lack of insurance. The condition might be life threatening, and it might not be. Wouldn't you want this child to get the attention it needs?
Most of our Congressmen believe that these children need medical care. Our President doesn't. Our President, on philosophical grounds, has said he'll veto a bipartisan bill that would properly fund the State Children Health Insurance Program. (See the Wikipedia article that explains this program.) I say it would properly fund it, but it is a compromise bill. Democrats believe that we need $50 billion over 5 years, and this compromise bill grants $35 billion. Bush will go no higher than $5 billion because he believes that it would hurt the insurance industry. (See the movie Sicko by Michael Moore, please.) Bush said, "My concern is that when you expand eligibility . . . you're really beginning to open up an avenue for people to switch from private insurance to the government."
Wouldn't it be terrible if we the people of the United States--who are the true government--helped children whose families can't afford insurance? (As if the insurance industry takes care of us anyway... but that's another point.)
The poster shown here, by the way, reflects the vision of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his progressive policies in the 1930s. What happened to our vision? What happened to our optimism? What happened to our heart? Note the motto on the poster: "The health of the child is the power of the nation."
No comments:
Post a Comment