The latest news from CNN :

Bush quietly exercised the veto at 10 a.m. before leaving the White House for a trip to Lancaster, Pennsylvania, to discuss the federal budget and taxes.

Bush said he opposed the bill because it is a step toward “universal coverage, which he opposes on philosophical grounds”. Which is the argument wing nuts alway use when then want to deny basic healthcare coverage to people who can’t afford it.

Does anyone really believe that rich, or even middle class people are going to lose their private health insurance just because the government pays for some poor children to see the doctor?

 
  • Ron

    From Wikipedia :

    “It also would have increased the eligibility from couples earning up to 200% of the federal poverty level to couples earning 300% of the federal poverty level, approximately $62,000 for a family of four.”

    Unless I am missing something, when is making $62,000 a year considered poor for a family of 4? Thats well above the median household income in the United States. Besides, $62k a year is an arbitrary number. You might be living in poverty on that salary while in California, but I’d bet that same household income is quite comfortable in, say, Wyoming.

  • Think about it this way:

    62 / 4 = 15.5

    Would you consider $15.5K poor?

  • Ron

    I see what you are trying to say. However, using that logic, then, a family making $100k a year with 4 kids is poor?

    100/6 = 16.6.

    or what about a family making $77.5k a year with 3 kids?

    77.5/5 = 15.5k.

  • The 2007 HHS Poverty Guidelines add $3,480 for each additional person in the 48 Contiguous States and D.C.

    Alaska and Hawaii have different number.

  • Pingback: Random Musings » Blog Archive » Danger to My Freedom()

  • Pingback: The Right Decision on SCHIP | GOPublius()

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!