Editorial: Vetoing children's health
President George W. Bush is trying to frame his expected veto of a children's health insurance program in terms of fiscal responsibility, but his administration's record tells a different story. This president has no problem spending money the government doesn't have - as long as it's spent on war, not children.
The timing of two legislative initiatives make this harsh assessment hard to ignore. Just as Congress is sending the expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, estimated to cost an additional $35 billion over five years, to the White House, Bush has sent Congress a request for $190 billion to fund the war in Iraq for another 12 months.
Sen. Ted Kennedy did the math, announcing that Bush wants to spend $333 million a day on the war instead of $19 million a day on children's health. It's not that Bush is more fiscally responsible than the Democrats who control Congress; it's just that he has different priorities.
Bush's veto also expresses a political priority: Stopping all efforts to expand government-subsidized health care.
It's hard to come up with a more sympathetic group of beneficiaries than the 10 million children of poor and middle class parents who cannot afford health insurance. The SCHIP expansion has support from the medical community, which understands the value of preventive medicine for children, and even most of the insurance industry. Its biggest backers include the nation's governors, who have found it to be a useful in expanding health insurance coverage.
Bush might argue that SCHIP is a good program we cannot afford. But by branding it "socialized medicine," he draws a line in the sand. Any attempt to use the government to help Americans cope with the ever-rising costs of medical care will be painted red, demagogued with an insult at least a half-century old.
For the record, SCHIP isn't socialism any more than Medicare is. The legislation creates no new federal bureaucracy to make family medical decisions. Children would be able to see whatever pediatricians their parents choose. The only thing that would be changed is that parents who cannot afford health insurance for their children will get the help they need to keep their children healthy.
Under the proposed SCHIP expansion, 10 million children would be covered by health insurance. Their parents will be saved incalculable stress and expense. That the president chooses to unleash "evil-doer"-style rhetoric - and expend just the fourth veto of his presidency - to stop this program is morally indefensible, not to mention politically tone-deaf.
Unless Bush's veto is overridden, and SCHIP backers say they are still 15 House votes short of the the two-thirds needed, Democrats will enjoy pointing out how "family values" Republicans are refusing to help millions of parents take care of their sick children. They will try to hang Bush's priorities around the necks of every GOP candidate in next year's election.
But that's just the politics of this debate. The real-world impact will come down to sick children getting sicker without a doctor's care and families forced into bankruptcy by medical bills they can't pay. Those are the best reasons either Bush should put down his veto pen or Congress should override his heartless action.