Pat Roberts, Sen, KS
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:6:./temp/~r110qD2Qui:e23471:CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2007 -- (Senate - September 27, 2007)
……..I appreciate the administration's passion and persistence on having a broader health care debate. However, holding a children's health insurance bill hostage is not the right way to achieve this goal. I support the goals of reforming the Tax Code to promote the purchase of private health insurance. Let me repeat that, Madam President. I support the goals of reforming the Tax Code to promote the purchase of private health insurance. But I have yet to see a plan from the administration that can actually pass the Congress.
In fact, I have yet to see an actual plan from the administration. I have yet to see bullet points from the administration. I have yet to see any plan that can be articulated in some fashion to sell to the American public or to the Members of this body. We don't even have an acronym for this plan. My word, you can't do anything around here without an acronym.
The administration has also raised concerns that this bill is a march toward the federalization of health care. I would argue that is simply not true. I would never support a bill to federalize health care. I remember that battle a decade ago. There is no way I want to go down that road again.
I think it is important to point out what I think is a paradox of enormous irony in regard to the claim that this bill is a step toward the federalization of health care. In reality, this administration has approved waivers--approved waivers--to cover adults under a children's health care insurance program. Let me repeat that. Under this administration's watch, we now have 14 States covering adults under the Children's Health Insurance Program.
Now, this administration and others expressed grave concern that SCHIP is the next step to universal health care. Yet this very same administration is approving waivers to cover adults under a children's health program. And, unfortunately, a number of these States are covering more adults through their SCHIP program than they do children, even while high rates of uninsured children still remain. This is not fair. This is not right. It is wrong.
I don't mean to pick on other States, but let's take a look at a few examples. New Jersey now covers individuals up to 350 percent of the Federal poverty level and spends over 40 percent of its SCHIP funds on adults. This is even while over 100,000 low-income children in the State remain uninsured. This isn't right.
Earlier this year, Congress had to pass a stopgap funding measure to plug 14 State SCHIP shortfalls. Of the 14 States that got this emergency funding, five--five--cover adults. One of these States was Illinois, which spends over 50 percent of its SCHIP funds on adults. Wisconsin covers more adults than children under SCHIP--75 percent to be exact. And the administration just approved an extension of their waiver to cover adults. Minnesota covers more adults on their SCHIP program than they do children. The same is true for Michigan, and the same is true for Arizona.
Now, I am not trying to pick on these States. I can go on and on because, again, there are currently 14 that cover adults on a program that was meant for children. And how are these States able to cover adults under the Children's Health Insurance Program? Again, through waivers approved by this administration. This is certainly not fair to States such as Kansas that have been playing by the rules and targeting our programs to low-income children. I am beginning to wonder if we have the wrong name for the State Children's Health Insurance Program. I don't think it was intended to be the adult health care insurance program.
The greatest paradox of enormous irony, however, is that this bill actually stops the waivers this administration has been so generously granting to States to cover adults by not allowing more adult waivers to be approved. Let me say that again. The greatest paradox of enormous irony is that this bill actually stops the waivers this administration has been so generously granting the States to cover adults by not allowing more adult waivers to be approved. This means future administrations that may want to use SCHIP as a means to expand government health care to adults will be prevented by law from doing so. As a result, this bill ensures that the Children's Health Insurance Program remains just that--a program for low-income children.
This bill also phases out childless adults currently being covered with SCHIP funds and lowers the Federal matching rate for States that currently have waivers to cover parents and now must meet certain benchmarks in covering low-income children. As a result, this bill brings excessive spending on adult populations in check.
The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that spending on adults would be over $1 billion higher under current law over the next 5 years than it would be under this compromise. This bill is more fiscally responsible than the administration's approach or an extension of this program by $1 billion.
Most importantly, this bill ensures that we are putting kids first and returns the program to its original purpose--providing health care coverage to low-income children.
Now, on the income eligibility front, the administration unfortunately is claiming this bill does things that the bill simply does not do. It is sort of an ``SCHIP In Wonderland.'' For example, the President claimed in a speech last week that this bill expands SCHIP coverage to families making over $80,000 a year.
I just have to ask the speech writer for the President, are you reading the same bill I am reading? Are you reading the same bill that we are discussing on the floor of the Senate? You can twist the facts, but facts are stubborn things, Madam President.
In fact, this bill reduces the matching payment incentives that States have had for so long to cover individuals at higher income levels. In addition, by the year 2010, this bill--this bill--denies Federal matching payments to States that cover children above 300 percent of the poverty level if the State cannot meet a certain target in covering low-income children in either public or private insurance plans. And let me emphasize private insurance plans.
I think it is important to remind the administration that a State can only cover children above 200 percent of the poverty level if the administration approves the State's application or waiver.
I repeat: A State can only cover children above 200 percent of the poverty level if the administration or any administration approves that State's application or waiver. This is current law and this bill does not change that.
GPO's PDF
More importantly, this bill actually provides incentives and bonus payments for States to cover children under 200 percent of the poverty level in order to truly put the focus of this program back on low-income children.
The bill also addresses the importance of including the private market in the SCHIP program. Let me repeat that for all those who want a private approach in regard to private markets, in regard to insurance: The bill addresses the importance of including the private market in the SCHIP program. In fact, the American Health Insurance Plans, also known as AHIP--that is their acronym--on Monday announced their support for this compromise bill. AHIP is the national trade organization which represents over 1,300 private health insurance companies.
The compromise makes it easier for States to provide premium assistance for children to get health care coverage through the private market--that is the goal of the administration and that should be our goal as well--rather than relying on SCHIP. That is in this bill. This is an important choice for families who would prefer a private choice in health care.
This bill also requires the GAO and the Institute of Medicine to produce analyses in the most accurate and reliable way to measure the rate of public and private insurance coverage and on best practices for States in addressing the issue of something called ``crowdout.'' That means children switching from private health insurance to SCHIP. So we have a study to determine exactly how we fix that.
In the ultimate paradox of enormous irony, it seems the administration is threatening to veto a bill which does exactly what they want us to do in focusing SCHIP on low-income children and making sure the program does not become the vehicle for universal health care.
This bill gets adults off the program. It targets it to low-income children. It ensures appropriate steps are taken to discourage crowdout and it encourages private market participation.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(990 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
