So the SCHIP political hot potato is back in the Dems hands

from JoeUser Forums

Give 'em credit for trying, and certainly there will be many that buy into the 'but the children' mentality, but the economy won out on this one for now as President Bush's veto of the SCHIP expansion was upheld by the U.S. House of Representatives despite pleas by the liberal side.

The Democrats may have an election issue with this one, but then again, as many others have said and I've also said in the past, the memory of the voters in this country is pretty darned short.  Even as congress critters go out and campaign on this issue and others, the voters that actually do show up at the polls tend to vote only on what matters to them, and not so much on issues that the politicians tell them they should be concerned about.

I'm neither happy nor sad that the SCHIP expansion veto stands, but I am happy that the political system worked here and that will of the majority wasn't necessarily shoved down the throats of the minority.  SCHIP could be expanded if *both* sides sat down and negotiated on the right and proper way to do it and pay for it.  Unfortunately neither side really wanted to negotiate, though I place quite a bit of blame back over on the Democrats and liberals as they were cocksure that they were going to push through their version of things.  Not that the Democrats will actually negotiate in the future as they know that Bush is a lame duck with not much time left, but there is always hope.

politics
6,308 views 18 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Anyone have some dip to go with the chips?
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
I don't understand how they call it bi-partisan but yet dems won't budge? Everything must be politicized. I just don't understand.
Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Whether he is a lame duck or not they still need his signature to make law for another year and three months.  I just think he's a little late to the party to start being a fiscal conservative now.  I guess it's better late than never.   I think it would be easy to reach a compromise but both sides have to be willing to give.  There will be more vetoes over other spending bills.  I think the next one is an energy bill. 
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think it would be easy to reach a compromise but both sides have to be willing to give.


Loca, one side was willing to give. A 200% of poverty level compromise offered by the GOP.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top

I think it would be easy to reach a compromise but both sides have to be willing to give.

Bush has already stated he was willing to increase the S-CHIP by several billion dollars (which I don't agree with), but it's the democrats who are using this as voting propaganda.

You already see the media taking the democrats side on this.

 

Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
If we live in a nation in which the majority of people think that it is the responsibility of tax payers to pay for health insurance for other people's children then it will be a clear sign that this country is no longer the country it once was.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

I just think he's a little late to the party to start being a fiscal conservative now. I guess it's better late than never.

It is better late than never. 

And on another point, although I do not have a link, I heard (on the radio while working) that 52% of Americans polled (dont know by whom or how) agreed with the president on this one.  And are blaming congress (generic, not a party) for the failure of this issue.

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
And are blaming congress (generic, not a party) for the failure of this issue.


That's a fair assessment as members of both parties are guilty of favoring it.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Both sides have to be willing to compromise. Really.

I see a bazaar, with a vendor negotiating a price with a customer.

-I'll give you $10 for it.
-Well, it's worth $50.
-Yeah, maybe $15.
-$50
-$20
-$50
-$25
-$50
-$40
-How about we split the difference at $45?

Yes, that is how they want to compromise. One side gives and gives and gives and then the other side says, "Hey, from here, we should compromise. We'll give this, what will you give?"
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Here's a link to the Gallup poll

WWW Link
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Thanks Loca.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Here's a link to the Gallup poll


Thanks for the link. As I said, I only heard a blurb on the radio. But it does show that who demigogues the issue the best will win the day. The people think the democrats can do bests, but say they did the worse. It appears that if they are sincere (doubtful - but then that can apply to the republicans as well), they can win the issue. They have not shown any inclination to do so yet.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Is it just me or does it seem like the polls answers to 2 and 3 contradict 1? If what I am seeing is correct then that would suggest misinformed populace?
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
What? A misinformed populace? In America?
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
What? A misinformed populace? In America?


What's America?   
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
The capital of America is 'A'.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Here’s an easy fix for this and any other entitlement program:

1. Fund it at its previous level (I suppose a little govt. charity can be good)
2. Anyone wishing to pay more (to support the proposed level) can do this through their own taxes by sending in a payment pledge or check a box on their tax return.
3. Sit back and see how much real support this bill gets.

What this would do is allow anyone that wants to fund a bill do so, without dipping into my pocket. This lets the big talkers put their money where their mouth is, those that give should get all the credit for it. People will give for causes they personally believe in. These congressmen (and some celebrities) are pretty generous with my cash. People that want the “Great Society” can pay the extra for it. Personally I want the basics from the govt., no frills. If this approach were taken (sure it’s simplistic, idealistic, and mostly wishful thinking) to govt. spending I think we would all have a little extra $ in our pockets and govt. would be watching its precious pennies. Politicians and celebrities whining on behalf of their pet cause while their cash is in a tax shelter have zero influence on my opinion.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top

2. Anyone wishing to pay more (to support the proposed level) can do this through their own taxes by sending in a payment pledge or check a box on their tax return.

That would require liberals actually putting their money where their mouth is, and we all know that won't happen.