Bush Cabal Denies Children Health Care

Image from www.oldamericancentury.org
(You want to know why you have lousy health insurance or no health insurance? Watch this exclusive Okie Funk video. Turn up the speakers.)

The health care system in this country is broken, and it needs massive and sustained reform.

When Democrats and Republicans joined together recently to vote to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) from $5 billion to $35 billion over five years, they did so out of this pressing and vital need. The bill’s underlying philosophy is that we, as Americans, should at least take care of our children in terms of health care so they can thrive and become our future.

Many working people these days cannot afford health insurance. Those who can afford it often pay exorbitant co-payments and deductibles. Most Americans, even those with health insurance, are one major medical crisis away from financial ruin. Many working Americans go without adequate health care because it is simply too expensive.

The American health care system is based on feeding the greed of many doctors, insurance companies and health management organizations. European models of health care have proven to be much more successful than our system. They are less expensive and provide better care to their patients. Doctors in European countries are also well compensated.

Yet Imperial President George Bush, with support from his warmongering cabal of right-wing extremists, vetoed the bill on purely ideological grounds despite wide majority support. The bill, according to the president, could lead to socialized medicine. Note the word “could.” There is nothing in the bill, which simply insures more children, that argues for socialized medicine or universal health care. There is no trick here, no gimmick. People need health care. SCHIP is a program that helps people ensure their children. The program’s expansion would mean more children qualify for help.

Consider this: Taxpayers spend more in three months for the Iraq occupation than they would spend over five years for this one program. (Look at this site for more comparisons.)

The Oklahoma Congressional delegation voted against SCHIP, of course, on the same ideological grounds as the president they so adore. The Daily Oklahoman has relentlessly editorialized their support for the veto. To his credit, U.S. Rep. Dan Boren, the only Democrat in the delegation, has said he will now reverse course and vote to override the veto in the House. The House will vote on the veto override tomorrow, but the effort is expected to fail. There are apparently enough votes in the Senate to override Bush’s callous disregard for basic humanity.

But should we blame just the politicians? Bush’s veto, if sustained, will go down in historical infamy, for sure, but it also will be remembered as the one event that clearly showed Americans lost their moral foundation at the turn of the twenty-first century. We deny our children adequate health care, test them relentlessly under No Child Left Behind, leave them massive financial deficits, and make them grow up under the philosophy of endless war. That is who we have become under the Imperial Presidency of George Bush.

(Update: The House fell 13 votes short Thursday of overriding Bush's veto)



I can agree with you that our Health Care systenm is broken. But the problem is not that government is not in it. The problem with health care is that it cost too much.

I certainly don't have an answer, but I don't think our government does or ever will either.


I agree with you that health care simply costs too much for the average American. But if government cannot or will not or should not fix the problem, then who will do it? Everyone involved protects their vested interests, from doctors to insurance companies. Thanks for the comment,

Health care needs to be stood on its head in America. We have smart people here. We need our smart people, ethically driven, to come up with something that is the envy of the entire world. It can be done. Government can probably help mediate this change.

Why don't we start with the two health care parties with the largest vested real interest: The patient and the doctor. After that, any added interests will increase the cost by, at the very minimum, increased overhead.

Other main interests: government and insurance. There are agents which both take money out of the health care cash flow. The drain these addtional agents cause directly affect patient care.

In fact, the rules alone for insurance and government programs require massive amounts of resources to administer.

Again we have to go back to the patient / doctor relationship and simplify where we can. If a person is in need of health care, they go to the doctor, and the doctor treats you. In the exchange, money necessarily needs to change hands.

And this is where we get all balled up. Mainly because at this point, people can't afford the insurance coverage, not health care.

I'm still working on these thoughts.

I agree with your points here. I especially like, "Why don't we start with the two health care parties with the largest vested real interest: The patient and the doctor. After that, any added interests will increase the cost by, at the very minimum, increased overhead." The questions: How do we reduce costs? What costs can be eliminated from our current system? Won't insurance companies and health management organizations fight any effort to reduce their profits?

I am currently working on a research project addressing the subject of universal health care. Most Americans would support a national health care system, contrary to what the media, the insurance industry, and the government tells us. Americans know that health coverage is tied to employment and those who currently have coverage are at risk of losing it at any time should they lose their employment. The inability of the House to override Bush's veto of increased funding for SCHIP should be a wake up call for all Americans who have so blindly supported this sad example of 'leader'.

Thanks for the comment. Those who profit financially the most from our health care system have demonized universal health care because it would be less money for them. They use some of their "profits of suffering" to influence national politicians to vote against our interests and keep the status quo. It is long past time for major reform.

This is exactly where I get stuck.

I don't know how you get the profit motive out of it.

I've got this great idea that we ought to simplify the entire process - Put the entire bloody (no pun intended) system in the garbage.

I don't think we can fix what's broken with the current system. We need to start from scratch. The system we have has priced many people out of the market.

Everyone should have at least some basic health care, but I'm not sure how to get the "universal" out of the equation. Universal sounds very galactic to me. I don't think it can be done adequately at that level. We'll be bailing it out in 20 years.

Again, shouldn't it be "individual" health care? Between the patient and the doctor? (Amazing: I'm a conservative and idealistic. :))

I don't pretend to have the answers, but I find myself needing to keep talking about it and studying it. We'll most likely need to have a tea party before we get ANY of the politicians' attention.

Dear DocHoc,

You are welcome, for my financial support of your own kid's healthcare.

Actually, thank you for your donation of my Indian health care. Ive been under the knife twice this year, hospitalized a third time (5 days with a double bleeding ulcer), so hey, thanks alot-- but do you think that I'm going to change my personal habits, to lessen your tax bill?
Uh, the fact that I earn $36G yearly should make no difference to you, huh? Oh, plus bonuses! Thank you, CDIB!

Listen, your tax debt-fun is only beginning! I want even more of your income, Professor!

But wait, would you endorse, would you even consider a 'voluntary tax' to pay for my health coverage? If you believe that everyone's health is a governmental guarantee, then you will choose to pay for that belief.

I don't. Therefore, I'll stay tax exempt in that regard.

You don't dare refuse a voluntary tax for my health care!

Why can't you simply argue the issue? Do you believe the health care system is fine as it is? Then good. Say so and give your reasons. Should we change it? How should we change it?