Congressman Kuhl's Press Release on SCHIP

About an hour ago, I linked to a story which appeared in the Daily Messenger over the weekend, which "reported" that Massa had accepted Congressman Kuhl's challenge to a debate on SCHIP, and included a statement from the Massa campaign that the debate "details were being worked out." I did find it odd that such a forum was being hosted this early in the campaign, especially since Congressman Kuhl has indicated that he would make a formal announcement on whether he's running for reelection around the time that the Massa people claimed the debate would be hosted. But I linked to it anyway since I couldn't believe that the Daily Messenger would be this wrong in its reporting.

Turns out that there is no debate, and that Massa's campaign misread Congressman Kuhl's press release. Rather than being an invitation to debate, it was a challenge to Massa to get his facts straight on SCHIP. In addition, it seems very clear to me that the Daily Messenger didn't even bother to contact Congressman Kuhl's office about this supposed debate (as doing so would have immediately put any rumors to rest on this), which doesn't surprise me at all for a paper that continues to show its bias for Massa. I can only imagine what went through their heads on this one: "Well, Eric's people say there's a debate, so it must be true, let's not even bother contacting Randy's office."

Here's the press release in its entirety, issued last Wednesday:

WASHINGTON – Jan. 23 - U.S. Representative John R. "Randy" Kuhl, Jr. (R-Hammondsport) issued the following statement today:

"Mr. Massa continues to regurgitate the same ill-informed and incorrect statements about a deeply flawed SCHIP bill. From the levels of expansion to who can access this program, Mr. Massa needs to consult with his friends in the Democratic Party before spewing falsities about this particular bill. I am astonished at the amount of inaccuracies in Mr. Massa's position since prior to this bill he had simply repeated what Speaker Pelosi had told him to say. A puppet is only as smart as its master, and unfortunately this time the puppet decided to speak for itself and got the facts wrong.

I invite Mr. Massa to actually examine the flawed SCHIP bill and then take a stance. I refuse to vote for any SCHIP legislation that includes the most regressive tax increase in American history, enables coverage for illegal aliens, higher-income children, and adults, and spends billions of dollars to substitute private health insurance coverage with government-run healthcare coverage. Since Congress has already reauthorized and fully funded SCHIP for 18-months, we should not be rehashing last year’s battles, but instead working in a bipartisan manner to develop a longer-term reauthorization of the State Children's Health Insurance Program."

Here are the facts about the H.R. 3963:

1. H.R. 3963 enables illegal aliens to fraudulently enroll in Medicaid and SCHIP.

· H.R. 3963 severely weakens the current law by removing the documentation requests under the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA), specifically the burden that citizens and nationals provide documentation proving their citizenship in order to be covered under Medicaid and SCHIP. Instead, the bill would require that a name and Social Security number be provided as documentation of legal status to acquire coverage and that those names and Social Security numbers be submitted to the Secretary to be checked for validity.

· In addition, this provision does not require that the individual presenting the name and Social Security Number (SSN) to document in any way that he or she is actually the person he or she is claiming to be. This is an open door to fraud and
abuse.

2. H.R. 3963 taxes the poor to benefit the rich. The bill uses the funding gained from taxing the poor to pay for expanding SCHIP eligibility to higher-income families.

· In their official analysis of the H.R. 3963, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that 1.1 million new enrollees will be added to SCHIP as a result of an "expansion of SCHIP and Medicaid eligibility to new populations." This means that these children live in families whose incomes are too high in order to qualify for the SCHIP program today. H.R. 3963 will also allow New Jersey to receive full SCHIP reimbursements for families with incomes up to 350% of the Federal Poverty Level, which is $72,275 for a family of four this year and $84,455 for a family of five.

3. H.R. 3963 spends billions of dollars to substitute private health insurance coverage with government-run healthcare coverage.

· CBO projects that 50% of the 1.1 million new enrollees in the "expansion of SCHIP and Medicaid eligibility to new populations" category already have private health insurance coverage. This means that the taxpayers will simply be paying for the government to buy out the health insurance premiums of these children who already have quality private health insurance coverage instead of focusing on actually enrolling low-income, uninsured kids.

4. H.R. 3963 focuses on enrolling higher-income kids instead of low-income, uninsured kids.

· While CBO projects that H.R. 3963 will enroll 1.1 million kids who are in families with incomes too high to qualify for SCHIP now, only 800,000 currently SCHIP eligible kids will be enrolled as a result of H.R. 3963. This means that almost 50% more higher-income kids will be enrolled than current SCHIP eligible kids. Shouldn't SCHIP be focused on insuring low-income kids, not families who can already afford to purchase health insurance?

5. H.R. 3963 creates the most regressive tax increase in American history.

· In order to pay for 5 years of SCHIP and increased spending in Medicaid, H.R. 3963 will increase tobacco taxes by over $70 billion over the next 10 years. The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) calls tobacco taxes "the most regressive of the federal taxes," meaning that the vast majority of any increases will be on the backs of low-income American families

6. H.R. 3963 increases the number of adults on SCHIP, allowing even more resources to be taken away from low-income, uninsured kids.

· According to official CBO projections, there could actually be over 500,000 more adults on SCHIP in 2012 than there are today. There were 700,596 adults enrolled in SCHIP at some point in FY2006, and CBO projects that up to 1,258,000 adults could be enrolled on SCHIP at some point during FY2012.

Kuhl in the News

On Saturday, I was at a Randy Kuhl fundraiser at All Things Art in Canandaigua, where a great time was had by all, so with that I give you the latest items on Congressman Kuhl in the news:

Congressman Kuhl discussed his thoughts on the economic stimulus package with the Jamestown Post-Journal, reiterating his position that this plan is a short-term solution and that the government should not forget to give incentives to small businesses, as they provide jobs, which is the "best economic stimulus."

Congressman Kuhl also joined with Congresswoman Louise Slaughter in telling the Bush administration to backoff on its new border requirements, stating that the new regs would cause "more delays in passport backlogs and cost an already strapped American family more of their income."

Last, but not least, Eric Massa has accepted Congressman Kuhl's offer to debate the facts of SCHIP, which will most likely occur in March. Money quote: "A puppet [Eric Massa] is only as smart as its master [Nancy Pelosi], and unfortunately, this time the puppet decided to speak for itself and got the facts wrong. I invite Mr. Massa to actually examine the flawed SCHIP bill and then take a stance."

In Case You Missed It: Congressman Kuhl's Statement on the SCHIP Veto Override Vote

I was very busy at work yesterday, so I didn't have time to post this statement from Congressman Kuhl on the SCHIP veto override vote. IMHO, he hit the nail on the head:

Today I maintained my support for the original purpose of the State Children's Health Insurance Program – to provide health insurance to low-income children. The effort made to override this veto is needless political maneuvering and achieves nothing more than continued gridlock in Congress. In December, Congress, in bi-partisan effort, passed a bill extending SCHIP for 18 months and increased funding and resources to cover current enrollment levels without raising taxes.

This veto override vote is especially disheartening in light of last week's attempt by both parties to work together on a plan for America's faltering economy. I was optimistic that we could work together to fix our nation's problems during the remaining months of the 110th Congress. However, by choosing to delay this vote from mid-December to just days before the State of the Union Address, it is the majority who has once again shown their vested interest in political pandering at the cost of America's children.

SCHIP is a pivotal program and I am pleased that we extended the program for 18 months. There are still half a million children eligible for the SCHIP program, but not enrolled. Before we begin expanding this program to cover adults, illegal immigrants, wealthier families, and kids who already have private insurance, we must ensure that the 500,000 children who go to bed tonight without healthcare get the priority status that they deserve. No parent should have to wonder what will happen to the son or daughter if they become ill. By continuing to push for a flawed bill, the majority refuses to serve the children that the program is intended for and continue to jeopardize the health of our most vulnerable citizens.

Those who call for me to support the veto override continue to turn a blind eye to the realities of bloated and bureaucratic programs. We must create a program that actually provides underprivileged children with healthcare, and does not put them in line behind adults, wealthy children, and illegal immigrants. If those who want this bloated program feel so compelled to aid these groups, they should offer separate bills on the floor of the House of Representatives for a yes or no vote. The reality is that no member of congress would ever offer such a bill, not because they are afraid, but because they know that it is not the will of the American people to cover these individuals. Congress needs to be focusing on protecting our borders, stimulating our economy, and serving America's children, not rehashing last year's fights.

This SCHIP Won't Sail, Again!

Despite the Dems' failure last year to expand SCHIP in their efforts to make political fodder over trying to cover health expenses for upper income families, illegal immigrants, and adults provide more aid for Poor Children™, the Dems are trying to exploit the SCHIP issue in the New Year (again), scheduling a SCHIP veto override today. Here is House Republican Leader John Boehner's press release on the latest chapter in this never ending saga on the Dems exploiting a loser issue for them in the name of the Poor Children™, i.e., upper income families, illegal immigrants, and adults.

UPDATE: The Dems failed, again, to override the veto.

Tomorrow, It Begins!

Tomorrow is the first day of 2008. Next year we will be inundated with campaign ads from presidential and congressional candidates alike. While we've already seen the beginning of the campaign season, what we will witness next year will only make the last several months look like pre-season scrimmages between Pop Warner football teams, i.e., completely irrelevant.

While most of the country will focus mainly on the presidential race, those of us in New York's 29th Congressional district will concentrate more on the congressional campaign. I started this blog three months ago with the express purpose of supporting Republicans who represent Ontario County, NY, and there is no question that the Dems will do anything in their power to unseat Randy Kuhl and try to expand their majority in Congress, making this the number one race in our area. Last year, despite the extreme unpopularity of the Iraq War at the time, and various scandals coming out against certain members of the GOP, Congressman Kuhl still beat a very tough challenger by a 2.9% margin. And even though he won in every county other than a bluish part of Monroe County, his margin of victory here in Ontario County was the slimiest in the district: 2.4%.

This year, though, with even leading Democrats admitting that the Iraq War surge is working, the Dems decided to focus their attention elsewhere to "kitchen table" issues, more specifically socialized medicine "health care." Back in October, when Congressman Kuhl was fighting against the Dem leadership's plan to expand SCHIP to idiotic levels, Massa told Time magazine that he was "now making SCHIP his No. 1 priority." Liberal 527s started airing attack ads around the clock demonizing our good Congressman, but his position ultimately prevailed, and as Rottenchester pointed out yesterday, Congressman Kuhl can still tell voters that "he 'voted for S-CHIP', and he has plenty of time before the 2008 campaign for voters to forget what happened this year" (Editor's note: Given that Gallup poll, I don't think Congressman Kuhl wants voters to forget that he fought against expanding this program to cover upper-income families, and because he and other Republicans stood up against the lies and deceptions that Dems and liberals threw at them, the program retained its intended purpose: to cover children from lower-income families, which is exactly where most people stand on the issue!).

So with the surge working in Iraq, with SCHIP (Massa's "no. 1 priority") no longer an issue, and with voters' approval of the Democrat-led Congress swirling in the toilet for months, where does Massa go from here? Honestly, I have no idea, but a lot can happen in eleven months, and I'm sure he'll campaign even more aggressively than he did in 2006. Therefore, if we are determined to keep Randy Kuhl in Congress, we must work even harder than we did last year. When over 45% of the voters in the 29th are either registered Republicans or Conservatives, our job is certainly much easier than Massa's, but rather than aim for a mere win, our goal needs to be an overwhelming, runaway victory (think more of what the Pats did to our Bills a few weeks ago rather than squeaking by the Giants on Saturday).

The biggest county up for grabs, of course, is Ontario County, and Massa's people know it! Even though nearly 46% of the voters in this part of the county are either registered Republicans or Conservatives, Congressman Kuhl only received 702 more votes here than Massa, despite the fact that the bluest area of our county, Geneva, is not even in the district! Fortunately, we have already begun to mobilize supporters here like never before. A new Young Republicans chapter was created here over the summer (to join, simply email ontarioyrs@gmail.com). This blog's viewership has more than tripled since October. And the Ontario County Republican Committee is committed to expanding its voter outreach to unprecedented levels next year.

According to the Cook Political Report, this race is listed as "Lean Republican." Let's surprise all of the pundits next year and win big. Congressman Kuhl deserves our full-fledged support, and we deserve to have him reelected next year. So with that, I wish you all a Happy and Prosperous New Year!

Kuhl Co-Sponsors Bills on Health Issues

First, Congressman Kuhl co-sponsored a bill designating the first week of June as National CPR and AED Awareness Week.

Second, Congressman Kuhl has co-sponsored a bill saving projects for disabled children.

Common Ground

As you know, the Fighting 29th and I don't agree on much, but I'm pleased that we agree that the D&C should not publish cut and paste editorials. Thanks to Rottenchester for linking to my post.

Insert the Blanks Editorial on SCHIP

So the Democrat & Chronicle has an editorial up today from "Guest Essayists" John Sweeney, national AFL-CIO president, and James Bertolone, Rochester and Vicinity Labor Council president, which bashes Congressman Kuhl for his refusal to rubber stamp the Democrat's expansion of SCHIP to cover upper-income families, adults, and illegal immigrants. Go ahead and read the whole editorial yourself.

Now read this editorial from yesterday, supposedly written by John Sweeney (again) and Louis Neuman, Central Minnesota AFL-CIO Trades and Labor president, in the Minnesota St. Cloud Times which bashes Congresswoman Michele Bachmann. Other than the name change and Minnesota "statistics," does it sound familiar? Or how about this one in the Topeka Capital-Journal, from September, written by Andy Sanchez, executive secretary-treasurer of the Kansas AFL-CIO, which bashes Bush. Then there's this one in the Tennessean from early October written by Jerry Lee, president of the Tennessee State Federation, along with this one in the Arizona Daily Star, written by Rebekah Friend, also from early October, both of which just bash Bush.

Now, question to the D&C Editorial Board: Is it your policy to publish cut and paste editorials, or is it too hard to do a simple Google search to verify whether the content of the editorial you have hasn't been published elsewhere?

WSJ Article: SCHIP Wreck

In a previous post, I suggested that when voters learn more about the Dems plan for SCHIP expansion, i.e., to include upper-middle class families rather than just cover lower income families, most voters agree with the Republicans on this issue.

Now we have further proof based on a ballot question in Oregon, a state that went to Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. By a large margin, voters rejected a state level cigarette tax for a state children health insurance program expansion, similar to the proposal being debated on Capitol Hill.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Oregon voters passed judgment Tuesday on a plan that would have made their state children's health insurance program "universal." Sound familiar?

It should, because Oregon reproduced the current Schip fracas in D.C. on the state level--and the referendum took a major shellacking, with voters siding three to two against. Oregon's expansion was almost identical to the one backed by Congressional Democrats...
.....
There are political lessons here, in case anyone in Washington is paying attention. Voters are rightly concerned about health care and would like everyone to have insurance, but they realize that government programs are very expensive. Americans also don't seem to want to pay for health-care reforms directly through higher taxes. That accounts for the reliance by politicians on the easier sell of tobacco taxes, and it also explains why Congress has disguised the real cost of its Schip contraption with a $30 billion budget gimmick.

I encourage you to read the whole piece and ask yourself, "If voters in a state as liberal as Oregon rejected this, what do you think the feelings are of voters in the conservative-leaning 29th Congressional District of New York?"

Winning the Argument on SCHIP

Fred Barnes offers some helpful advice and a "winning strategy" to Republicans on SCHIP after citing the much discussed Gallup poll. Money quote:

Limiting S-chip to its original purpose of providing health insurance to poor children (in families at less than $41,200 income) meets with the public's approval. Expanding S-chip into the middle class doesn't. The key is citing the $61,800 figure. .....
So the Republican task on S-chip is easy. All they need to do is oppose making middle class families earning up to $61,800 eligible for a program designed to aid the poor.

Exactly!

House Republicans Lash Out at Majority Leader Over SCHIP

As they should be doing. If the Democrats were willing to compromise with Republicans on this issue over the valid concerns Republicans have with income caps, and coverage for illegal immigrants and adults, we would have the SCHIP debate resolved. Instead, the Dems want to play politics over childrens' health, which is disgusting.

And if the Dems were willing to work with Republicans on this issue in the beginning, they wouldn't be dealing with this:

In a closed-door meeting before the last vote on the children’s health care bill, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer appealed for the support of about 30 wavering Republican lawmakers. What he got instead was a tongue-lashing, participants said.

The GOP lawmakers, all of whom had expressed interest in a bipartisan deal on the SCHIP legislation, were furious that the Democratic leader from Maryland had not reached out to them in a more serious way early on. They also criticized him and Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois for failing to stop his allies outside Congress from running attack ads in their districts, while they were discussing a bipartisan deal.

If the Dems really cared about childrens' health, they would not be playing political football over this issue. Sadly, all they care about is running attack ads against fine congressmen like Randy Kuhl, thinking they'll win more seats next year by doing so. Fortunately, because the truth is getting out, and with congressional job approval in the toilet because of this and other concerns that the American people have with the Dem leadership, that won't happen!

Dems' Dirty Tactics on SCHIP

Well so much for a meaningful debate on a SCHIP compromise. From Congressman Kuhl:

There are two major problems with the Democratic leadership on today’s SCHIP vote

1. There will be 13 Southern California Representatives (9 Republican and 4 Democrats) absent from today’s SCHIP vote because they are where they should be – taking care of their family, friends, and neighbors during the horrific fires. Congressman David Dreier (R-San Dimas, CA), Rules Committee Ranking Republican and Leader of the California GOP Congressional Delegation, was joined by several of his California colleagues in formally requesting of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) that she delay any consideration of new S-CHIP legislation while members are in their districts dealing with devastating wildfires. In a letter to the Speaker, the California members said that members should not be forced to make a choice between an important vote like S-CHIP and being with their constituents in a time of need. The letter was delivered to Speaker Pelosi’s office amid reports that an S-CHIP vote would be held less than 24 hours after new legislation was shared with the minority.” To see the letter or to read more, click here.

2. The new version of the Democrats’ SCHIP bill, H.R. 3963, was reported out of the House Rules Committee at 11:25 p.m. last night under a closed rule. Which means that the Republicans did not get to view the 293- page bill until late last
night, let alone be part of the negotiations. We will not even have 24 hours to review the bill before we vote on it. Republicans have stated that we are willing to work together to reauthorize the SCHIP program but Democrats have refused our offer.

Interestingly enough, according to Nancy Pelosi in A New Direction for America: “Members should have at least 24 hours to examine bill and conference report text prior to floor consideration. Rules governing floor debate must be reported before 10 p.m. for a bill to be considered the following day.”

SCHIP Polling

So the Fighting 29th has a lengthy reply to my last post, and I do agree with him that "[w]hen pollsters try to probe the reasons behind the thumb up or down, they have to inject some facts into their questions, and their choice of facts adds some bias to their questions." There's no question about that, and it makes the pollster's job a lot harder to gage public opinion on specific issues (especially one as complex as SCHIP expansion) versus who one plans to vote for or the job approval of a specific politician.

That being said, I do take issue with the other polls the Fighting 29th cites, as the questions they asked are extremely "unloaded." For example, here's the main question which the Gallup poll asked, where 52% agreed with Bush and 40% agreed with Democrats:

As you may know, the Democrats want to allow a family of four earning about $62,000 to qualify for the program. President Bush wants most of the increases to go to families earning less than $41,000. Whose side do you favor?

This question is as specific as they come, and goes to the heart of the issue for why President Bush and Congressman Kuhl do not agree with the Democrats, i.e., what should the income cap be for families participating in the program?

However, here's the question that the CBS poll asked, where 81% agreed with expanding SCHIP:

WOULD YOU FAVOR OR OPPOSE EXPANDING SCHIP?

Notice that the question doesn't ask by how much, nor does it give any context to the issue. In fact, if I didn't follow this debate so closely and I was simply asked whether I supported expanding a plan called the State Children's Health Insurance Program, I'd say yes too.

The Washington Post/ABC New poll was more specific. It asked:

There's a proposal to increase federal spending on children's health insurance by 35 billion dollars over the next five years. It would be funded by an increase in cigarette taxes. (Supporters say this would provide insurance for millions of low-income children who are currently uninsured.) (Opponents say this goes too far in covering children in families that can afford health insurance on their own.) Do you support or oppose this increased funding for this program? Do you feel that way strongly or somewhat?

When this question was asked, 72% supported expansion. Yet note that this poll does NOT address the issue of income levels, as the Gallup poll did. It only asks if people support spending more money on children's health insurance, and that it would be funded through an increase in cigarette taxes (though it doesn't point out that the increase was going to be as high as 61 cents a pack). Again, if I didn't follow this issue so closely and was given this question, I might have said yes, though would have been more reluctant to than the CBS poll.

As for the CNN poll, I unfortunately can't find the polling data online, but this is the story lede:

A new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll shows a majority of Americans want Congress to override President Bush’s veto of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, otherwise known as SCHIP.

If this isn't media bias, I don't know what is. Bush did NOT veto SCHIP; he only vetoed the Democrats' plan to expand the program by so much, which as we know, included upper-middle class families and illegal immigrants.

I strongly disagree with the Fighting 29th's claim that Congressman Kuhl was trying to "cherry-pick the one poll that agrees with my position." Instead, given the options of the polls out there, there was only one that specificly addressed the real issue at hand, and it showed that a majority of Americans agreed with Congressman Kuhl's position.

That being said on SCHIP polling, let's move on. The Fighting 29th has a post up that there's a compromise being discussed on SCHIP that may address the concerns Congressman Kuhl had over the income levels of program participants and whether illegal aliens and adults should be covered, all of which are reasonable concerns. Let's hope this turns into a meaningful debate, versus the emotional hysterics shown the last time around.

The Kaiser Poll on SCHIP

So the comments section is abuzz that I should talk about this poll on SCHIP expansion conducted by the liberal "non-partisan" folks over at NPR, Kaiser Family Foundation, and Harvard.

The Fighting 29th offers the following highlights:

When asked about the possibility of S-CHIP leading to people dropping private insurance, 65% said still favored S-CHIP expansion. 64% said they supported the veto override, and 52% said they weren't concerned about S-CHIP expansion leading to government-run health care. 35% said they would be less likely to support their Member of Congress if he or she voted to sustain the veto.

What he doesn't mention is that the "non-partisan" Kaiser Family Foundation is extremely involved in promoting SCHIP expansion, which makes them much more vested in the outcome of this debate than USA Today/Gallup and, therefore, makes its poll results appear rather dubious.

Second, just look at the party affiliation of the polling sample:

22. Generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as: (a Democrat), (a Republican), an independent or what?
34 Democrat
23 Republican
35 Independent
3 Something else
3 Don’t know
2 Refused

23. Do you lean more towards the: (Democratic) or (Republican) Party?
Leaned Party Table based on total
51 Democrat/Leaned Democrat
33 Republican/Leaned Republican
10 Non-Lean Independent
1 Something else
3 Don’t know
1 Refused

Now I know that 2006 was not a banner year for Republicans, but no one can tell me with a serious face that only 23% of Americans consider themselves Republicans, and certainly no one can claim that 51% of Americans "lean" Democrat. If that's the case, how did any Republican survive last fall?

Yet, let's suspend reality for a second and believe this poll and its national percentages for party affiliation. How do these numbers apply to New York's 29th Congressional district when, according to the latest voter registration figures from the New York State Board of Elections, over 45% of registered voters in the district are either Republicans or Conservatives? That's nearly double the number of people than the sample in the Kaiser poll who think of themselves as Republicans, which begs the question: Speaking strictly of Congressman Kuhl's re-election and the opinions of his constituents on SCHIP expansion, what would the Kaiser polling results be if their party affiliation sample mirrored those of the NY 29th?

I have a feeling that the Fighting 29th wouldn't like the results of that kinda poll...

So I did a Google search...

And I discovered that last week, the Fighting 29th linked to my previous blog post on the poll Gallup conducted on SCHIP expansion. Here's a snip of what the Fighting 29th had to say:

Both Kuhl [and] the Ontario GOP omit another interesting statistic from that poll. When asked who they trust to get S-CHIP right, 52% say that they trust the Democrats. Only 32% trust the President. Another interesting fact: 17% of the respondents were following S-CHIP "very closely", and 34% "somewhat closely". Almost half of the public (49%) are following the issue "not too closely" or "not at all".

So, when a generally uninformed public is presented specific facts on S-CHIP, they tend to agree with Republicans. When those facts are absent, their general distrust of the President governs their opinions. The news on S-CHIP could be worse, but this certainly doesn't qualify as good news for Republicans.

So if I understand this right, one of Eric Massa's leading supporters in the blogosphere is essentially saying, "When presented with the facts on SCHIP, the public agrees with Congressman Kuhl's position. Thankfully the American people are either too ignorant or not paying much attention to this issue and will blindly support Democrats on health care, so haha, facts be damned, GO MASSA!" I'm paraphrasing, naturally, but still, that's the Fighting 29th's point. Also notice that he doesn't even dispute the facts given in the poll; he just thanks God that people aren't paying much attention to Massa's signature issue. Because, really, the program's name has the words "children" and "health" in it, so it must be good, and only the Democrats care about "children" and "health," so why care about all these needless facts?

Thankfully, blogs like mine exist to set the record straight and show that the American people really do not want their tax dollars to pay for the health insurance of upper-middle class families, making the public less "uninformed."

That being said, though, I'd like to thank the Fighting 29th for selflessly advertising my blog, and welcome him back anytime!

Letter to the Editor of D&C on SCHIP

Here's a wonderful letter to the editor about the SCHIP veto, written by a fellow Canandaigua resident, published in Saturday's Democrat & Chronicle:

Drop emotional SCHIP rhetoric

Emotional and dubious TV ads criticizing Congressman Kuhl and Republicans require correction.

The State Children's Health Insurance Program is not being discontinued or de-funded. The president is willing to make a modest expansion of funds for the program. It is the expansion to adults and entire families well above the poverty level that the new bill would include, that makes it irresponsible. Social Security is projected, by some estimates, to reach insolvency by 2017. Medicaid costs have been passed down to states and then on to municipalities, causing strains and increased taxes. Medicare is another entitlement with open-ended financial burdens.

Honest media would report what the cost projections for each of these programs were at inception, and the dollar figures in cost at present as an example of the Congress' ineptitude, or deceptive practices, in initiating these dependency programs. Without addressing how to pay for the above obligations, Dems want to burden you and your children even more. Decide about this as you decide about your own financial decisions, using reason and the facts, not emotion.

—MIKE LOFTON
CANANDAIGUA

This SCHIP Won't Sail, Part 3

There is some new polling from Gallup, showing that 52% of Americans believe “most [SCHIP] benefits should go to children in families earning less than 200% of the federal poverty level – about $41,000 for a family of four. Only 40% said benefits should go to families earning up to $62,000…”

Congressman Kuhl agrees with most Americans on this issue, while Eric Massa wants this program to cover upper-middle class families, which can only be accomplished through a tax increase, and is making this the cornerstone of his campaign. Again, I can't wait until November 2008!

This SCHIP Won't Sail, Part 2

Time Magazine has a story out today about Eric Massa's reaction over Congressman Kuhl's sound position in the SCHIP debate. As I stated previously, the Democrats want to expand this coverage from just lower class families to include upper class families who already have health insurance and illegal immigrants, and fund it all through a tax increase. According to the article in Time, Massa "is now making SCHIP his No. 1 priority."

Let me be clear about this: CONGRESSMAN KUHL IS NOT AGAINST SCHIP! Congressman Kuhl is only against the Dems' brainless expansion of the program. If Eric Massa wants to support unconscionable government spending, and even make that the corner stone of his campaign, then I can't wait for next November!

This SCHIP Won't Sail

As you know, Congress is currently fighting over the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Republicans disagree with Democrats on whether this program (originally intended for lower class families) should cover upper class families who already have private health insurance and illegal immigrants. Believe it or not, the Democrats' plan would allow families making up to $83,000 a year to be eligible for SCHIP. And how are the Dems going to pay for it? Why through a tax increase, of course. The Democrats, in turn, want to portray any Republican against their mindboggling expansion, including Congressman Kuhl, as a heartless bastard.

Here's what George Will has to say on the matter:

SCHIP was created in 1997 by a Republican-controlled Congress. Today's Democratic-controlled Congress wants to transform its mission. It began as a program whereby the federal government would subsidize state governments in providing health insurance for children from households not poor enough (generally 200 percent above the poverty line) to qualify for Medicaid but not affluent enough to afford to buy insurance. Were it to become law, the new SCHIP would be a long stride toward unlimited federal funds working as incentives for states to expand eligibility to more and more affluent families.

It would immediately include some with incomes 400 percent of the poverty line ($83,000 for a family of four). Over time, its "mission creep" would continue. Mike Leavitt, secretary of Health and Human Services, says that the new SCHIP would enroll 2.8 million more children, but 1.1 million of them would be from families for whom SCHIP had become an incentive to drop their private insurance. To that, some liberals say, sotto voce: Good. (Emphasis added.)

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: This is the type of nonsense that goes on in a Democrat-controlled Congress.