Examiners

Jay McDonough
Progressive Politics Examiner
Most Recent Post
Shameful outbursts now common at McCain/Palin rallies

California News

Daily News - 27 mins ago
Los Angeles Times - 49 mins ago
Los Angeles Times - 1 hr 2 mins ago

Multimedia News

Elections 2008: On the trail
20 photos
Demonstrators protest against Republican pres...
Future gadgets now
20 photos
A model demonstrates Nikon Media Port 'UP300'...
Hoops here it comes
20 photos
Detroit Shock forward Katie Smith, front, col...
Madonna starting to show her age
20 photos
Madonna performs in concert during her 'Stick...
Pool fashion gets weird
20 photos
Models wear creations by French fashion desig...

Democrats spurn Bush’s overture on children’s health insurance bill

Oct 5, 2007 12:00 AM (368 days ago) by Susan Ferrechio, The Examiner
This story ranks Not ranked
Related Topics: WASHINGTON

WASHINGTON (Map, News) - Congressional Democrats on Thursday set afire an olive branch extended by President Bush on a bill to fund a federal children's health insurance program.

Bush, who vetoed the bill on Wednesday, told a Pennsylvania crowd he is willing to increase his funding proposal for the program if it will lead to a deal with Congress.

But both House and Senate Democrats insisted there is no room for compromise.

House Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called Bush's overture “an insult” and said he is a president out of touch with reality who used his “macho pen” to hurt children.

This story continues below
Advertisement

“If he thinks he can waltz in here, with his secretary of Health and Human Services, and sweet-talk us, he can’t. We’re not going to compromise. If he’s hoping for that, he’d better hope for something else,” Reid said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said, “We have compromised all we can compromise,” but then added, “We’re always willing to talk.”

Congress last week passed legislation that would increase spending for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, known as SCHIP, from $25 billion to $60 billion over five years. The bill, which aims to provide insurance for poor children who do not qualify for Medicaid, far exceeds a proposal by Bush to increase spending by $5 billion over the next five years.

Bush told the Lancaster, Pa., Chamber of Commerce that he rejected the bill sent from Congress because it expands federal health care eligibility to children well above the poverty level.

But he also indicated a willingness to spend more than the $5 billion in his initial plan.

“I’m more than willing to work with members of both parties from both houses,” Bush said. “And if they need a little more money in the bill to help us meet the objective of getting help for poorer children, I’m more than willing to sit down with the leaders and find a way to do so.”

The two sides have little choice but to work out a deal. Funding for the program expired on Sept. 30, and a short-term extension ends on Nov. 16.

The House has scheduled a vote to override Bush’s veto on Oct. 18, but Democrats are not expected to get enough GOP support to reach the necessary two-thirds majority.

Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, R-N.C., an opponent of the bill, said Democrats are serving their own political interests by holding out on a compromise.

“This just shows they are using this bill as a political weapon,” McHenry said.

sferrechio@dcexaminer.com

Add a Comment


Name: (required)
Comments:
characters left
Comments are regulated by the Terms of Use.

Comments from Examiner Readers

6:09 AM MST on Thu., Oct. 4, 2007 re: "Democrats move to override veto of children’s health care measure"

Art B said:
Bush is right. The social security entitlement is broke. The medicare entitlement is broke. So lets create another one, which will soon be broke. We never hear anything about how much this will cost (clue -- lots). There arent enough smokers to pay for it and even if there were, what did they do to deserve this kind of punishment? How many non-payers will get "equal" benefits (I suppose they consider "parents" income to decide who pays, since ALL children are not able to pay by definition). The principal of all govt aid is that the more you "have", the less you "get". So to "get" the most, you need to appear to "have" nothing. What incentive is there for folks to get an education, work hard, and save their money for a better life if its just going to be taken from them and given to folks who have not done these things? Communism 101.

175 agree | 170 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Advertisement