CQ, September 20, 2007: Bush, Democrats Swap Blame for Expected Veto of Children۪s Health Bill
President Bush said Thursday that congressional Democrats would bear the blame if a health insurance program for poor children is not renewed by Sept. 30, which would halt the flow of federal money.
Democrats, some Senate Republicans and child advocacy groups condemned Bush۪s remarks, and refused to abandon their efforts to expand the program to reach more children. House and Senate leaders remained close to a deal on a renewal of the program close enough that Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., publicly confirmed several elements of it but made no formal announcement Thursday.
At a news conference Thursday morning, Bush renewed his vow to veto a measure that would expand the State Children۪s Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, by $35 billion over five years, to $60 billion. The expansion would be financed with a tobacco tax increase, including a 61-cent boost in the cigarette tax, to $1 per pack.
Bush said the measure would result in “millions” of children shifting from private health insurance to the government program and would raise taxes on “working people.” He said Democrats should instead send him a “clean” extension of SCHIP to ensure that its funding continues to flow in the new fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1.
“Members of Congress are putting health coverage for poor children at risk so they can score political points in Washington,” Bush said.
Democrats, conditioned to Bush۪s criticism, sounded unconcerned. “If the Republicans think that it is a winner to say that, We prefer not taxing cigarettes so that we don۪t have to insure children,۪ that۪s a fight we welcome,” Pelosi said in her own news conference. She confirmed major elements of the compromise bill by likening it to a measure (HR 976) the Senate passed Aug. 2 by a 68-31 vote.
“So I believe that they are veto-proof in the Senate,” she said.
The bill likely does not have enough support in the House to overcome a veto, so lawmakers will probably pass a short-term extension of the program to keep it funded in at least the first weeks of fiscal 2008.
Republicans who support the compromise were even harsher toward Bush.
Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the ranking Republican on the Finance Committee, helped negotiate the compromise. He asked Bush on Sept. 19 for a meeting to discuss the bill. Instead, Bush called him Thursday morning. “They agreed to disagree for now,” a Grassley spokeswoman said. But Grassley was not expecting the president to lead his news conference with a diatribe against the compromise SCHIP bill, and he angrily criticized Bush in an interview with reporters afterward.
“The president has been served wrong information about what our bill would do,” Grassley said, noting that Bush said the bill would allow families earning up to $83,000 to enroll their children in SCHIP. Lawmakers negotiating the bill say that is not true.
“His understanding of our bill is wrong,” Grassley said.
Bush has proposed a far smaller expansion of SCHIP of $5 billion over the next five years, to about $30 billion. Democrats and the Congressional Budget Office say that is not enough to continue coverage of the 6 million children already enrolled.
“Instead of expanding SCHIP beyond its original purpose, we should return it to its original focus, and that is helping poor children, those who are most in need,” Bush said. He said he has directed Health and Human Services Secretary Michael O. Leavitt to “work with states to mitigate the damage that will result if Congress allows this program to lapse.”
States will still be able to spend any federal SCHIP money they have left over from prior years after Sept. 30, but they will not receive new money until a new bill is enacted. Leavitt estimated that 12 states would quickly run out of money.
Extensive Dismay
Grassley was not the only lawmaker upset about SCHIP on Thursday. Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., chairman of the Ways and Means Health Subcommittee, sent a letter to other Democrats criticizing House Democratic leaders for agreeing to drop extensive Medicare provisions that were included in the House version (HR 3162).
“The Medicare and Medicaid portions of [the House bill] have been abandoned for rhetorical and/or political reasons that are unclear to me,” Stark wrote.
Those provisions include new Medicare subsidies for low-income seniors and a reversal of cuts in Medicare reimbursements for physicians that are scheduled to take effect in 2008 and 2009. Those changes were to be paid for by cutting spending on Medicare Advantage, a Republican-favored program in which private insurers, rather than the government, provide benefits to seniors.
Stark promised to seek passage of all the provisions in the future. “I am sure there was no intent to betray the trust you placed in our committee,” he wrote.
First posted Sept. 20, 2007 11:46 a.m.