Sickness Isn't Ideological

The utter catastrophe of the Iraq war should be enough to indicate the moral bankruptcy of the adminis- tration of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. However, as we know, there are many other symptoms that clarify that sorry state.

And perhaps the most dramatic new one is the determination by President Brainless to veto bipartisan legislation to renew the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. As noted in this story…

About 3.3 million additional children would be covered under the proposal developed by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Republican Sens. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa) and Orrin G. Hatch (Utah), among others. It would provide the program $60 billion over five years, compared with $30 billion under Bush's proposal. And it would rely on a 61-cent increase in the federal excise tax on cigarettes, to $1 a pack, which Bush opposes.

Grassley and Hatch, in a joint statement this week, implored the president to rescind his veto threat. They warned that Democrats might seek an expansion of $50 billion or more if there is no compromise.

They also said that Bush should drop efforts to link the program's renewal to his six-month-old proposal to replace the long-standing tax break for employer-based health insurance with a new tax deduction that would help people pay for insurance, regardless of whether they get it through their jobs or purchase it on their own.

However…

The president said he objects on philosophical grounds to a bipartisan Senate proposal to boost the State Children's Health Insurance Program by $35 billion over five years. Bush has proposed $5 billion in increased funding and has threatened to veto the Senate compromise and a more costly expansion being contemplated in the House.

(Note to the WaPo: I have to admit that I’m confused by these numbers. First you state that the proposed Senate increase over five years is $35 billion, then $60 billion late on. Sorry, but I’m lost).

The point, though, is that Dubya’s $5 billion proposal in response is a slap in the face.

See, Dubya wants everyone to sign up for private insurance, which on balance is more costly and provides less coverage, and we can’t possibly leverage the government here to provide better coverage for less money, can we now? After all, that isn’t part of the Grover Norquist strategy of making government so small that you could “drown it in a bathtub,” right?

This Center for American Progress post has all kinds of good information on this isue, particularly the following...

Several parties, including conservative think tanks and insurance industry stakeholders, have advanced proposals that would have a significant impact on the benefits low-income children may receive. In particular, two of their suggestions should prompt a reconsideration of how Medicaid, SCHIP and private coverage benefit packages meet low-income children’s health care needs to various degrees: that some portion of SCHIP reauthorization funding should be used for tax credits or other mechanisms to finance private coverage; and that state SCHIP programs should place more emphasis on enrolling children in private or employer-based coverage.

Neither of these approaches will strengthen the SCHIP program’s ability to provide low-income children with critical health coverage. Policy choices that would use SCHIP funding for tax credits or programs to purchase private coverage would leave low-income children and their families with coverage that does less to meet their needs yet requires greater out-of-pocket contributions from these families. Instead, policymakers should seek to bolster efforts to provide children with appropriate coverage that meets their medical and developmental needs.

And how’s this for logic near the end of the WaPo story, by the way (something else Dubya doesn’t like)…

Bush said he is opposed to a bipartisan legislation that would allow the Food and Drug Administration to regulate the manufacturing, marketing and sale of tobacco products, which could lead to stronger warning labels and limits on nicotine and other ingredients.

"We've always said that nicotine is not a drug to be regulated under FDA," Bush said.

This is such astonishing idiocy that it literally makes my head hurt (unbelievable that these reporters just transcribe this stuff without asking him if he's lost his $#@!ing mind, though I'm sure they already know he has). And finally, I want to take note of this…

In the 15-minute interview, Bush also rejected the charges by former Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona that the administration's political appointees routinely rewrote his speeches, blocked public health reports for political reasons and screened his travel.

In this article, Dr. Carmona notes that he was told to mention our preznit three times on every page of his speeches. Well, as a “tribute” to our head of state (and in respectful remembrance of yet another life sciences professional who was marginalized by this cabal), I will endeavor to mention Bush three times in every blog post from now on (though I admit that I will have to be creative). How’s that?

And regarding Dr. Carmona again, if you thought Bushco couldn’t go any lower, read this letter that recently appeared in the New York Times…

As one who has made his living in science education for 30 years, I expected to be distressed when I read the article about yet more political interference by the Bush administration in a science-based agency. I was thoroughly appalled, however, to learn that “administration officials” discouraged Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona from attending the Special Olympics because of that charitable organization’s longtime ties to a prominent family, the Kennedys.

It was my honor to work with children in the Special Olympics years ago, and I’m deeply saddened, but hardly surprised, to learn that those who trumpet “traditional family values” would deny assistance to disabled people in the name of political pettiness.

Joseph D. McInerney
Lutherville, Md., July 11, 2007

Our president is truly scum.

Update 7/30: This is a typically great column by Paul Krugman on this subject.