Universal coverage for pregnant women and children = 9 days of DOD spending

Nurses Activism

Published

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/03/02/immoral_lack_of_care.php

but even if schip is fully funded, millions of children will still be excluded from health care coverage.

up until now, medicaid and the schip program have made great strides in providing children with health insurance. but even with their successes, one out of every nine of our children is still without health insurance and millions more are underinsured. as congress considers reauthorization of schip this year, we have a unique opportunity to take the next logical, achievable and moral step that would guarantee comprehensive health and mental health care to all children and pregnant women. we at the children's defense fund propose a plan whereby children’s health coverage under medicaid and schip would be consolidated into a single program. this will include a guaranteed, comprehensive benefits package nationwide for children whose family incomes are at or below 300 percent of the federal poverty level (topping at about $62,000 a year for a family of four).

under the proposal, children currently enrolled in medicaid, schip and means-tested federal programs like school lunch and food stamps would be enrolled automatically, with an opportunity for parents to opt out. uninsured children could also be automatically enrolled when they are born, enter school or get a social security card, again with the opportunity to opt out.

...

another element of the proposal would substantially increase reimbursements to health care providers so children can actually get health services when they need them. and there would be no additional cost to states for child coverage expansion or enhanced benefits.

health coverage can be provided to every child in america in 2007. the funding necessary to expand coverage to all children and pregnant women would be the equivalent to just nine days of defense department spending in 2007, and three months of the tax cuts to the richest one percent of americans this year.

which is of the greater moral value? 20,000 plus in tax cuts for dick cheney and his family or health care for poor children in your community?

Oh, the poor rich, my heart bleeds for them ,my heart even bleeds for Uberman$500,000. , but then again, I guess Im a bleeding heart liberal.:wink2:

Poor people have all the money?

I'm merely clarifying labels.

I think the problem comes with putting labels on everything. When we label we tend to sterotype and most people are not true sterotypes. We are indidviduals. When we start seeing everyone as an individual then maybe

we can learn to value human life more maybe we can become more compassionate when people are not just statistics or a group or class or a label.

I respect your opinion timothyI think you have wonderful logic and knowledge but I think I just found were we differ.

Specializes in Nursing Ed, Ob/GYN, AD, LTC, Rehab.

I am 100 percent against socialism in any form including that of free health care for adult americans, just go look at the quality of care in socialized nations and youll be happy for america. Having said that though I believe anyone under 18 should be protected under their state for healthcare, minors cant get health care and should not be punished for their parents bad choices. Once youre 18 though you gotta find your own, just like with education.

Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.

Moderator Note:

Please remember to keep focus on topic not individual poster......

The Terms of Service - All Users Please Read and Follow thanks you for keeping this a flame free site.

I am 100 percent against socialism in any form including that of free health care for adult americans, just go look at the quality of care in socialized nations and youll be happy for america. Having said that though I believe anyone under 18 should be protected under their state for healthcare, minors cant get health care and should not be punished for their parents bad choices. Once youre 18 though you gotta find your own, just like with education.

What about our current Medicare for the elderly, disabled, and renal dialysis?

Michael Savage will get mad if you dont give him credit for his phrase. I actually like some of the things he has to say, I think he is a closet liberal.:wink2:

http://www.cbpp.org/2-5-07tax.htm

the skewed benefits of the tax cuts, 2008-2017

with the tax cuts extended, top 1 percent of households

will receive more than $1 trillion in tax benefits over the next decade

Specializes in Critical Care.
http://www.cbpp.org/2-5-07tax.htm

the skewed benefits of the tax cuts, 2008-2017

with the tax cuts extended, top 1 percent of households

will receive more than $1 trillion in tax benefits over the next decade

simple facts:

individual income accounted for 899 billion in tax revenue in 2005

individual income accounted for 797 billion in tax revenue in 2000

that is a 12.8% increase in income tax receipts within 5 yrs of implementation of the 'cuts'. it cumulatively results in more then 400bn additional income taxes over a five yr period.

plus, there are countless bns in other increases as the general economy has benefitted from the so-called 'cuts', resulting in higher tax receipts. no matter how you look at it, there is simply not a trillion dollar 'cut' in tax revenues going on; it's a huge increase in receipts.

this is the common problem with this line of thinking: that tweaking the input has no effect on the outcome. in reality, the tax 'cuts' had a huge positive impact on the economy, resulting in more receipts.

just as raising those taxes would have the opposite effect, decreasing tax receipts and stifling economic growth. that would be very bad for the poor and middle class. it's a simple fact that the number of dollars are finite. the more the gov't confiscates, the less that is available for economic growth. the gov't doesn't increase economic growth, it saps from it. the goal must be the fine line between taxation and growth. that means that as some point, decreasing taxes has an adverse effect just as increasing taxes has an adverse effect. the issue is balance.

an economy that has grown on average of greater than 3% every year since the 'cuts' is evidence that a good balance has been created.

i favor tax 'cuts' not because i want to give the rich more money but because i am better served with them being taxed more; and that is what those cuts have achieved.

simple fact: the 'rich' aren't paying less taxes, but considerably more as a result of the 'cuts'.

by any objective measure, it is an overwhelming measure of success for the poor when the gov't can devise a scheme to make the 'rich' pay not only more overall taxes, but the greatest proportion of taxes. that is the net result of president bush's pro-poor tax policies.

reversing that trend would require the poor and middle class to have to share more of the burden. that would not be a pro-poor or pro-middle class policy.

~faith,

timothy.

Oh, the poor rich, my heart bleeds for them ,my heart even bleeds for Uberman$500,000. , but then again, I guess Im a bleeding heart liberal.:wink2:

I've been wanting to ask this, and this is a good post to lead in:

Why this hatred for the wealthy? I'm not wealthy, though as a CRNA I make a pretty good living. Why the vitriol? In most cases, the wealthy became wealthy through their own hard work. They took advantage of opportunities that were presented, and often made their own opportunities. Why resent them for what they earn? Why the presumption that they somehow don't deserve what they earn?

Uberman, just a thought. Quoting radio personalities, particularly when those personalities are as rabid as Savage, is not a particularly good way to get your point across.

I am very proud of my life.

I am Christian not secular.

I have helped more than one young girl decide not to abort her baby by helping her find an alternative.

I've been the best wife I could be for more than 40 years.

My kids are neither in jail nor on welfare. They have associate degrees and my son supported his wife all the way to a masters at age 26.

I am glad for the opportunities to volunteer for the Red Cross blood drives, to visit and bring books, filmd, and video games to veterans in rehab, to play with kids in a shelter, and to work for the common good.

Most of all I am proud of the nursing care I've provided in five decades.

All nurses should be proud of our valuable work.

AND no one who has contributed nursing care for nearly thirty years should be denied healthcare.

God bless you all. I pray for those who broadcast hate and those who listen. It is really sad. We Americans can be so much better than this.

Thankfully most of us are.

+ Add a Comment