How Insurance Can Affect Election '08
There's a political serve and volley going on in Washington right now that should make for some interesting viewing well into the election, and even affect the election, and it has to do with insurance. Yes, insurance.
Mention the topic of insurance, and other than personal concerns over whether you have it or not, most eyes glaze over.
But the president vetoed a bill yesterday that would have expanded a government-funded health insurance program for children that goes under the acronym SCHIP (state children's health insurance program).
President Bush says it would "federalize health care," and would bring too many middle class kids into the program, who can afford insurance on their own. Congress (with some bi-partisan support) says we need to increase the funding because too many kids are falling through the cracks.
I found it interesting that a recent Associated Press article said the president cast a "quiet veto," but it seems to me to be anything but quiet at this point. Whatever side of the aisle you fall on, these types of issues will continue to get more attention as the election cycle heats up.
As you can see from our candidate profiles in Health Matters in the 2008 Election, insurance is front-and center in many of the candidates health plans, and some even mention SCHIP, especially the candidates that had to vote on it.
The bottom line is that for many of us, we don't want to think about these issues, and we're not interested until the hands are in our pockets. But one thing that kept hitting me in the face as I worked with the editorial team creating this election special: We need to deal with these kinds of problems now. Whether you prefer a solution promoted by a Republican or a Democrat, a solution is needed.
Why? Every time someone goes to the emergency room without insurance, be it a kid or an adult, it costs money. And someone pays. If you think a while about who ultimately gets the bill, you might start to see that hand getting closer to your pocket.
Meanwhile, as I said, this debate is anything but quiet.
The Wall Street Journal is calling the battle over the reauthorization and expansion of SCHIP " a dress rehearsal for the health care fight in 2008" -- a clash over the larger issue of who should make decisions for doctors and customers: government or private insurers.
Following President Bush's veto of the SCHIP bill, which some have called "a gift from the political gods," Democrats have embarked on a grassroots campaign and a barrage of TV and radio ads to win over the 15 Republicans needed to overturn it.
Failure to do so, says the New York Times, could turn that gift into a gaffe, adding to voters' frustration with Democrats and haunting the party's presidential candidates throughout the election.
We'll keep watching.
Sean Swint
Executive Editor, WebMD
Mention the topic of insurance, and other than personal concerns over whether you have it or not, most eyes glaze over.
But the president vetoed a bill yesterday that would have expanded a government-funded health insurance program for children that goes under the acronym SCHIP (state children's health insurance program).
President Bush says it would "federalize health care," and would bring too many middle class kids into the program, who can afford insurance on their own. Congress (with some bi-partisan support) says we need to increase the funding because too many kids are falling through the cracks.
I found it interesting that a recent Associated Press article said the president cast a "quiet veto," but it seems to me to be anything but quiet at this point. Whatever side of the aisle you fall on, these types of issues will continue to get more attention as the election cycle heats up.
As you can see from our candidate profiles in Health Matters in the 2008 Election, insurance is front-and center in many of the candidates health plans, and some even mention SCHIP, especially the candidates that had to vote on it.
The bottom line is that for many of us, we don't want to think about these issues, and we're not interested until the hands are in our pockets. But one thing that kept hitting me in the face as I worked with the editorial team creating this election special: We need to deal with these kinds of problems now. Whether you prefer a solution promoted by a Republican or a Democrat, a solution is needed.
Why? Every time someone goes to the emergency room without insurance, be it a kid or an adult, it costs money. And someone pays. If you think a while about who ultimately gets the bill, you might start to see that hand getting closer to your pocket.
Meanwhile, as I said, this debate is anything but quiet.
The Wall Street Journal is calling the battle over the reauthorization and expansion of SCHIP " a dress rehearsal for the health care fight in 2008" -- a clash over the larger issue of who should make decisions for doctors and customers: government or private insurers.
Following President Bush's veto of the SCHIP bill, which some have called "a gift from the political gods," Democrats have embarked on a grassroots campaign and a barrage of TV and radio ads to win over the 15 Republicans needed to overturn it.
Failure to do so, says the New York Times, could turn that gift into a gaffe, adding to voters' frustration with Democrats and haunting the party's presidential candidates throughout the election.
We'll keep watching.
Sean Swint
Executive Editor, WebMD
Election Home
Compare Candidates
0 Comments:
Post a Comment