Bush Vetoes Child Health Insurance

Bush vetoes child health insurance plan - President George W. Bush - MSNBC.com

"WASHINGTON - President Bush, in a sharp confrontation with Congress, on Wednesday vetoed a bipartisan bill that would have dramatically expanded children's health insurance.

It was only the fourth veto of Bush's presidency, and one that some Republicans feared could carry steep risks for their party in next year's elections. The Senate approved the bill with enough votes to override the veto, but the margin in the House fell short of the required number."

Such bullshit
It's bad enough we don't have free medical as it is, considering most other countries have taken a step forward and offer it to their citizens; it seems we can't even provide it to our children. I've got a tumor behind my right ear and I woke up this morning bleeding from the inside of my ear and have no health insurance either, my jaws f*cked up too after getting hit with a pool stick across the face. Won't have health for about 8 months...

This is being covered live on C-SPAN right now.

I heard about this a few days ago, at least Bush saying he was GOING to veto that bill. He really is an ass, proving he doesn't really care about kids.

<< He really is an ass >>

That's putting it MILDLY!

I read he didn't go for the bill because it would help pave the way for socialized medicine...something he's TOTALLY against.

He just doesn't get it!

I was reading an article put out by some conservative Christian group about these two children used as poster children for health care, and how their family has a house worth $300,000 and how they go to private school. There parents wouldn't get healthcare or something.

So, clearly, the answer is to let children who have no say in this suffer. That is the Christian thing to do, right? Just a few hundred thousand more casualties in the fight against socialism!

It's ridiculous the amount of money we spend on military and trying to solve other countries problems and we can't even help the children in our own country that can't afford medical attention get it.and staying in Iraq seems pointless to me at this point I think we have been there long enough if things were going to get better they would have by now I think were just reinforcing the hatred that is over there already If I was running the country I would take all the troops out of all the other countries were in and just say if anybody attacks us again we just nuke them into oblivion i mean honestly what kind of idiot would attack a country knowing that their homeland would than be obliterated it would be like the cold war but at least that was more peaceful than IRAQ

oh my shit, that pisses me off. my mom is a pretty adamant republican and now i can officially say that bush not only caused the most poverty among americans for a loong time, is a dumbass AT THE LEAST for everything he did and does, but hates children too

I'm no fan of Bush (I should rephrase; I think he's a scumbag...), but that being said he didn't cause the poverty. How could he?

Why tax smokers? Why not end the war on drugs or the war in Iraq or another colossal waste of tax dollars and use that money? Although that would be a much bigger task so maybe we needed this bill to be passed.

The people who smoke cigarettes are already the poorest and least healthy people in this country, we need to insure everyone in this country, this bill seems like a band aid on a stab wound. Our country needs 100% coverage for everyone, not just kids.

Smokers are the "poorest and least healthy" for a reason.

They chose to smoke. That's like smoking pot and claiming you're the Poorest and Highest person you know. Duhhh, cigarettes are expensive and are detrimental to your health. It says so right on the package.

Pot doesn't make you sick if you try to quit.

It also says on the package (and it's common knowledge) that Tobacco is addicting...

I don't agree with "Sin taxes" (taxes on Alcohol, tobacco, etc) in the first place, but arguing that the reason we shouldn't tax smokers is because they're poor and unhealthy is like arguing we shouldn't tax rich people because they spend a lot of money.

They don't get poor from buying cigarettes though, lower class people are just more likely to pick up smoking. This bill just takes money from them that they could use to deal with their own health problems since they have a higher chance of having medical problems in first place.

No, they have a higher chance of health problems because they smoke. If they stopped smoking they could both improve their healthy and... here's the kicker, not pay the tax.

Not to mention save (if they smoke 1 pack a day) 1825 dollars a year (at 5 dollars a pack).

It's not easy to quit smoking, especially if you don't have the resources for some sort of quitting program and just do it cold turkey. Everyone knows it's a unhealthy and expensive habit.

Also, I'm kind of just playing the devil's advocate here because everyone seems so against this veto.

I'm an ex-smoker myself, and not to sound like an asshole or anything... but suck it up and stop buying cigarettes. It's not that hard, just don't buy any!

Willpower. Force of mind. Strength of Character. Have these things been forgotten in todays "click-to-buy with a credit-card before-you've-even-earned-the-cash" society?

Uh oh... what am I talking about... i'm 17. Todays society is all I remember, chances are people lacked these qualities before today, but couldn't use the same scape-goats as I just did.. they had different ones.

I'm not a smoker, just playing the devil's advocate...

Personally, I loved the logic used by some politicians for the tax to pay for the program. "Maybe we could get more people to quit by raising the tax"...Umm...Then how would we pay for the program?

JP? You do realize it isn't "free" health care, right? We would be paying for it with...You guessed it...More taxes.

I'm not completely convinced on universal coverage, government run health care, or whatever you want to call it. On one hand I've read where between the VA, Medicare and Medicaid, the government is already covering around 2/3 of the population. I don't know if that is true or not, but if it is, seems fairly simple to expand it to include the 1/3 missing. If we could divert some of the taxes we already pay for stupid shit to healthcare, I probably wouldn't scream too loudly.

But on the other hand, I am a believer that the government should get the fuck out of our lives as much as possible and providing mandatory health care just doesn't jibe with that belief.

Would those that engage in riskier behavior (such as smoking, doing drugs or...Hell, living a dangerous lifestyle such as not wearing condoms, rock climbing, etc...) pay a bigger share in taxes for their health care than those that don't?

If not, why the hell should I have to pay for their medical care if I don't engage in those risks?

Seems like a lot of people suddenly think the government should be there as a safety net. Hurricane hit? Federal bailout. Get sick? Federal bailout. Lose your job? Federal bailout.

Part of being free is also taking responsibility for your life and not expecting the government to always be there to bail you out.

The main thing is that I don't see why smokers should be held responsible for children's health care, it seems pretty arbitrary to me.

How about a tax on fast food? Maybe then parents would be more likely to prepare a home cooked meal for their children rather than just buying them a happy meal. That seems like killing two birds with one stone considering how big of a problem child obesity is. And kids with diabetes and other problems are probably a big reason why we need more health care.

Yep. I completely agree. Like I said before, I disagree with the concept of Sin Taxes in the first place. I just didn't think the argument "But they're poor and unhealthy!" was valid.

A tax on fast food would be fantastic. It's just too bad that Wendy's, McDonalds, Burger King, Arbys, KFC and every other major FastFood corp. have insanely large lobbying groups on the Federal, state and (proably) local levels.

I dislike fast food, and rarely eat it myself. So, a fast food tax wouldn't effect me at all. (I, on occasion enjoy a Cigarette... A guilty pleasure, but what can I say. )