Much like pineapples, I am hardcore. (thisgirliknow) wrote,
Much like pineapples, I am hardcore.

I'm a bit more than upset at Bush right now with regard to the SCHIP veto. Funding superfluous wars, but still he feels like he has the right to take health care away from children? If SCHIP disappears, the emergency room becomes primary health care for [more of] these low-income families (SCHIP generally provides healthcare to children who fall in the "gap" -- they have too much money to be on Medicaid, and don't have jobs that provide [affordable] insurance).

If their primary care is the Emergency Room, that pisses me off for so many reasons. 1) They never pay. It's too expensive, and the hospital has to treat these people anyway. Who pays for that? Your taxes. 2)Emergency Room waits are long enough. If you go to the emergency room, it should be for an emergency, not something that should be going to a regular doctor.

And let's say they just don't go to the emergency room. And of course, they don't go to the doctor. No primary care, no secondary care. I suppose we'll just wait until they need surgeries and have high-risk diseases. Who needs prevention? Obviously not America.

So... here's hoping. The Senate can easily override the veto within their chamber, but with the House being all stupid, it looks like they are going to postpone the vote and try to sway a couple more Republicans to their side.

SCHIP was going to be funded by a tax increase on cigarettes. His only possible defense, in my opinion, is saying, "Well, we wanted to keep the price of cigarettes low"

It was absolutely ridiculous to veto this bill. There's no doubt.

Next step: WRITE to your LOCAL CONGRESSMAN. Or your senator, or anyone in Congress, really. EVERY VOTE counts, and they NEED more of the House to override Bush's veto.

*Yes, it passed the House and the Senate, originally. Then Bush vetoed the bill, and so it's sent back to Congress to override. EACH house has to override it by a 2/3 vote. We have this in the senate (including many Republicans who adamantly agree with Bush on other issues) but not in the house.

This article goes into more detail, including a great quote from Edwards

I'm not for not showing both sides. Here's why Martinez agrees with Bush, and voted against it
Tags: political
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.