alt.politics.usa.republican

In article < @ >,
noneedtoknow@ says...
> On Oct 3, 5:18 pm, Cl...@ wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 13:55:49 -0400, "Harry Dope"
> >
> > wrote:
> > > How come the children didn't get free healthcare when BJ Clinton was
> > >president?
> >
> > You dumb fuckwin, Barta
> >
> > Look up what health care costs were in the 90's
> >
> > Look up how many fell below the poverty line
> >
> > And ask yourself---why were the Clintons trying THEN to
> > do something about it----and were stopped by
> > republicans.
>
> Lets see if we can attempt to discuss this like adults and leave out
> the 5th grade name calling.
>
> First, SCHIP was first enacted in 1997.
> Second, Bill Clinton was president when it was first enacted.
> Third, it had STRONG bi-partisan support.
>
> SCHIP funds allowed states to:
>
> Expand Medicaid to children at higher income levels
> Cover children through a seperate program
> Combination of both
>
> Federal SCHIP funding is capped
>
> Funding Issues:
>
> SCHIP "Dip"
> SCHIP reallocatin formula
> SCHIP fund reversions
> SCHIP waivers
> Presidents medicaid and SCHIP proposal
> State fiscal pressures
>
>
> Those are just a few of the facts you can research on in regards to
> SCHIP.
> Note: It had STRONG bi-partisan support.
>
> Now, one of the big questions now in regards to SCHIP is if Bush has
> just reasons for the veto? He is saying he is opposed to higher
> income families receiving this when they don't need it, thus taking
> away from families who do truly need it. Is this a just reason? If
> he is right, yes I think it's a just reason.
> He is also saying he doesn't want the federal government running our
> health care. Is this a just reason? Many might think it is.
>
> It's important to discuss the reasons on both sides. Let's stop the
> blaming and name calling and get down to the issue. How many people
> truly understand SCHIP?
>
>
> Source:
> /programs/health/mann/
>
>
>
Excellent post, nice to see somebody make a reasoned argument for a
change.