Las Vegas News, Sports, Business, Entertainment and Classifieds

Las Vegas Review-Journal - Opinion

Friday
Mar 19, 2010
Partly Cloudy
Partly Cloudy 56° Weather Forecast

RECENT EDITIONS
Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

Opinion


EDITORIAL: For 'the children'

Perhaps one of the most cynical political ploys of recent times is to couch an expansion of government as necessary to "protect the children."

Yet it's a tried-and-true tactic -- particularly for tax-raising Democrats. What elected official, after all, is willing to stand up to such poppycock -- and risk the resulting opposition campaign mailer, portraying him as an enemy of the weak and infirm?


Most Popular Stories
  1. Only the private sector can create wealth
  2. Net neutrality
  3. Open court
  4. Taxpayer liability may be lowballed
  5. Another federal incursion
  6. Immaculate conception, Washington style
  7. Opportunity knocks



To his credit, Sen. John Ensign is apparently one of the exceptions. On Thursday, Sen. Ensign was one of four Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee to courageously vote against raising tobacco taxes to expand a middle-class welfare program.

Created in 1997, the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) was sold as an effort to ensure that poor kids had heath insurance. In Nevada, it's known as Nevada Check-Up.

But right from the get-go, the eligibility standards were designed to create as big a dependent constituency as possible -- thus making it more difficult to eliminate or reform the program. It's a game at which Democrats excel.

Children in poor families are already covered by Medicaid, of course. So eligibility was set at 200 percent of the poverty line -- meaning an only child qualified for taxayer-subsidized health care if his parents earned as much as $34,340, regardless of whether they had private insurance.

Since then, several states -- thanks to waivers inexplicably granted by the Bush administration -- have expanded the program to provide coverage to children from families with higher incomes, and even to adults.

The new measure, passed 17-4 by the Senate committee, would expand the program by $35 billion, bringing spending up to $60 billion over the next five years. To pay for this, federal taxes on tobacco would jump by 61 cents per pack of cigarettes, up to a whopping $1 a pack.

While the Senate version of the measure if far preferable to the House version -- it would at least eventually drop some adults who don't have children from the program, for instance -- this still amounts to not only a major tax hike, but another baby step toward the Democratic dream of a government takeover of our health care system.

This isn't about "the children," at all. If it were, the focus would be on making sure that eligibility for SCHIP was confined to uninsured kids whose parents were barely scraping by yet weren't eligible for other federal assistance. Instead, the program continues to expand as, "The Democrats are playing a game of reverse Robin Hood with this legislation," said Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss.

Good for him -- and for Sen. Ensign.

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Leave Your Comment 6 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Current Word Count:

Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

Report abuse

NLV Resident wrote on July 20, 2007 08:46 PM: From the Welfare Division website:
"The goal of Nevada Check Up is to provide preventive and comprehensive health care coverage for Nevada's uninsured children. The program provides affordable health care coverage to uninsured children of low-income families not covered by private insurance or Medicaid."

I applied for Nevada Checkup back in 2001 when my daughter was uninsured and needed tubes in her ears. I was denied because I earned $43 too much each month. To this day, I am paying for her surgery.

Nevada Checkup is not for insured children...it is for uninsured children of "low-income" parents.


Report abuse

Aaron wrote on July 20, 2007 04:23 PM: I don't endorse ALL that Ensign and Lott have done, just this one thing. As far as I'm concerned, every pork-enabling representative should be voted out of office IMMEDIATELY. Every so often, they'll do one thing for their constituents and that's laudable. Otherwise, get rid of them and start over. Unfortunately, most voters don't bother looking at the records of those they vote for. I do. I don't vote for "earmark specialists" or any representative that thumbs his or her nose at those they're supposed to represent (meaning US, not some special interest groups).


Report abuse

Randy wrote on July 20, 2007 11:35 AM: Aaron - another website that you should visit is 'Citizens for tax justice'. Do a search on "corporate income taxes" and enlighten your mind.

These two documents are especially enjoyable.
www.ctj.org/corpfed04pr.pdf
www.ctj.org/html/enron.htm


Report abuse

Randy wrote on July 20, 2007 11:20 AM: Oliver Twist rides again!!
Has the Republican party decided which poor child in this country is going to be cast in the role of Jack Dawkins -The Artful Dodger?

Once again the RJ glaringly displays their elitist philosophy. No one in this coutry deserves anything - unless he/she is a Republican. The Republicans get everything, anyone else gets nothing.


Report abuse

What?! wrote on July 20, 2007 08:54 AM: ...now if the Legislature would require local governments/agencies to post legal notices in a special area on their respective websites and stop paying the R-J $1,500,000+/year to print such notices, we taxpayers would have even more money in our pockets!

Aaron,
I applaud your outcry, but go to "citizens against government waste" or "taxpayers for common sense" and look at the earmarks these 2 guys these guys ask for; Lott has his "railroad to nowhere"...no, these guys aren't saints.


Report abuse

Aaron wrote on July 20, 2007 04:03 AM: All the health nazi proposals are "for the children." Question 5 was "for the children" even though a lot of the businesses targeted are bars and taverns where children are not allowed. I applaud Ensign and Lott for standing up against this "reverse Robin Hood" legislation.