Penny-pinching with health
CHILDREN are getting caught in the middle of a misguided political fight.
On one side is Congress, trying to reauthorize and expand S-Chip, the popular State Children's Health Insurance Program that covers low-income children whose families aren't poor enough to qualify for Medicaid. The House and Senate have passed bills to reauthorize the 10-year-old program.
On the other side of this fight is President Bush, stubbornly vowing to veto any expansion of S-Chip, to halt what he sees as a slide into government-run healthcare.
In his latest parry, Bush is attempting an end-run around Congress. In the political dark of night, while Congress was in recess, the administration sent out notice of restrictive new rules on S-Chip. For one thing, states will no longer be able to extend health coverage to families earning more than 250 percent of the poverty line until they can prove they have covered nearly all -- 95 percent -- of poorer children.
Since no state currently meets this goal, the rule effectively bars any state from reaching unenrolled children beyond 250 percent of poverty. Another rule requires families who previously had private health insurance to go without coverage for a full year before they are eligible for S-Chip. This rule is aimed at preventing families from abandoning private insurance to enroll in S-Chip -- the dreaded "federalizing" of medicine that Bush darkly warns expanding the program will bring on.
It might seem as if parents earning more than 250 percent of the poverty level -- about $43,000 for a family of three -- should be in the middle class, not in need of subsidized healthcare. But in high-cost cities like Boston, a family of three needed $58,133 -- about 350 percent of the poverty level -- in 2006 to meet basic costs, according to the self-sufficiency standard published by the Crittenton Women's Union, a local nonprofit organization.
The fact is that money doesn't pay for as much as it used to, and this can be a rude shock for working parents who think of themselves as productive adults who shouldn't need government help. That's why it's crucial for S-Chip to grow: not as a handout, but rather as an effective way to make sure that in the midst of a high-cost economy, children get reliable healthcare that will help them prosper in all areas of their lives.
Scrimping on S-Chip is bad policy. It is likely to drive up costs by letting children's illnesses deteriorate into more expensive problems. Last week, Senator Edward M. Kennedy pledged that Congress will do the right thing: reauthorize S-Chip and reverse the damaging rules. Already, Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut announced he will file legislation this fall to allow states to expand S-Chip coverage without approval from the federal government. Congress should hurry. That would be best for children. 