Children's Health Bill Facts
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
Clearly, Robert D. Novak [op-ed, Sept. 27] hasn't read the bill to renew and improve the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
This bill does nothing to raise income eligibility levels in SCHIP. It does not change the original law that requires administration approval for any eligibility level above 200 percent of the federal poverty level or 50 percent above a state's Medicaid income cap. It only sets the level -- a lower level -- of federal matching funds for states that win future approvals. This administration already approved New Jersey's higher coverage. This administration already rejected New York's proposal to cover children whose families earn up to 400 percent of the poverty level.
This bill not only maintains the ban on new coverage of childless adults but removes childless adults from the program altogether. The age limit for coverage is 19, not 21. And this bill has now passed Congress not along party lines, but with a bipartisan vote.
It's fine to have a philosophical debate over the merits of the State Children's Health Insurance Program. But opponents should be intellectually honest about what our bill does and doesn't do.
MAX BAUCUS
U.S. Senator (D-Mont.)
Chairman, Committee on Finance
CHUCK GRASSLEY
U.S. Senator (R-Iowa)
Ranking Member, Committee on Finance
Washington
