Home › News › County News
Child health program pledged
Governor accuses Bush of creating roadblocks
Download this story as a podcast!
Schwarz- enegger
Spitzer
STORY TOOLS 
More from County NewsSACRAMENTO — Top state officials on Wednesday vowed that universal health coverage for children will be enacted in California, and assailed President Bush for putting up roadblocks that will make it more difficult to achieve that goal.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who along with New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer sent a joint letter of complaint to the White House, said he was perplexed by the new rules proposed by the Bush administration last week that would make it more difficult for children to qualify for government-subsidized healthcare.
"Why would he go after children?" Schwarzenegger asked at a Capitol news conference. "Don't do that. Don't start taking money away from children."
The Bush administration last week proposed rules that would require some children to go without insurance for a full year before becoming eligible and mandate that states enroll 95 percent of eligible children from the lower-income categories before raising the financial threshold of eligibility.
In their letter, Schwarzenegger and Spitzer said the rules "will set state programs back 40 years" and ought to be withdrawn.
"This is not a partisan issue at all," Schwarzenegger said, noting that as a Republican he joined with Democrat Spitzer in making an appeal to the White House.
The proposed rules come at a time when Bush is locked in a political battle with Congress over its planned expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, known as SCHIP.
Both houses of Congress have approved bills to broaden the program and seek to fund those changes with an increase in the federal tobacco tax.
Bush has threatened a veto if Congress sends him a final version of the bill that retains the expansion.
The federal uncertainty comes at a time when the Legislature is depending on expansion of the program — known in California as "Healthy Families" — to cover the approximately 763,000 uninsured children in the state.
That would largely be accomplished by raising the income-eligibility ceiling from 250 percent of poverty ($51,625 for a family of four) to 300 percent of poverty ($61,950 for a family of four).
Eighteen states already allow children from families with incomes above 250 percent of poverty to enroll in children's health programs. Bush's proposed rules are designed to make it much more difficult for states to offer benefits to children of families in that income category.
The Healthy Families program, which now covers 916,000 children in California, has allowed the state to dramatically reduce the number of uninsured children since it was implemented in 1998. Only about 7 percent of California children remain uninsured.
Children's health advocates Wednesday pushed for action that would allow California to guarantee all children have health insurance.
Ted Lempert, president of Children Now, called universal coverage for children "the most important priority" of the health reforms now being debated by lawmakers.
Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez, D-Los Angeles, pledged lawmakers will deliver that and more.
"Agreeing to insure all kids is the best starting place for all of us," he said. "It's not the end game, but a starting point."
Nuñez noted he had no health insurance as a child. "I know that reality," he said, "and I want it to be nonexistent to the children of this state."
Chris Perry, executive director of the state's First 5 Commission, announced her agency would make a one-time contribution of $20 million next year to help the state expand children's health insurance.
Lempert said that contribution is significant because the estimated first-year cost to the state is $100 million.
It means the state can act "if we can cobble together $80 million" — a relatively small amount from a general fund of more than $100 billion.
Posted by jaarmendariz on August 30, 2007 at 7:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe as an alternative to welfarism, Schwarzenegger should instead focus his attention on how to empower our state's private sector economy so that we create the type of head of household jobs that allow families to afford private health insurance policies. Indeed, rather than gallivanting around the world bragging about AB32, his job terminating green-tape legislation, Arnold should pursue total recall of his promise to rescue California from the destructive policies he now promotes.
Posted by shaver_one on August 30, 2007 at 9:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm going to get heat from this comment. But, for the children, I'll take the heat.
Private sector insurance companies have failed, and failed miserably. They cannot, or will not, provide affordable coverage for the children of this state. They refuse to cut their outlandish profit margins so that families can purchase (I said purchase) the needed health insurance that will guarantee a long and healthy life. They refuse coverage of needed treatment. They refuse referrals outside their particular group of doctors...even if those referrals will save lives. They continue to charge premiums that most middle-income, and all low-income families in California cannot afford...especially here in Ventura County.
It's time to take them out of the equation. Call it: Universal Coverage, Single-Payer Coverage, or Socialized Medicine. I really don't care what you call it. IF THIS STATE IS TO SURVIVE, children (the future of this state) must be allowed to have...nay, guaranteed to have adequate and meaningful health coverage. The health of our children is far more important than the health of Kaiser, or State Farm, or Blue Cross, or any for-profit insurance company, HMO, or hospital.
Take them out of the equation. If these companies refuse to offer coverage, than the State MUST. Our children deserve no less.
Please...do not counter this, with talk of all the illegals in the state. This issue has gone far beyond the illegals.
This issue has gone far beyond the 'free market'. This issue has gone far beyond Liberal vs Conservative.
It is nothing less than the future of our children.
Posted by Face on August 30, 2007 at 9:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This needs to go hand in hand with tort reform. Any system that provides billions in jury awarded medical lawsuits will fail. There should be a simple formula for the basis of medical malpractice suites, being a victim of medical malpractice shouldn't be like winning the Irish Sweepstakes.
Posted by Face on August 30, 2007 at 1:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You are right JW, after reading online, I see that the insurance companies have indeed lied for all of these years. We limit damages, and we pay the highest for insurance. I propose for the ballot that the state take control of all health insurance and file actions against all health insurance providers who have provided health insurance in the state since 2003 and give back the premiums paid by state residents for that period.
Posted by Just_wondering on August 30, 2007 at 4:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm with shaver_one...this is for the future of California, our kids. This needs to happen. Besides, this is a cost savings in the long run. For every dollar spent on vaccinations (many of which low income families can not afford) $13 is saved down the line. I would much rather invest in prevention. As far as the illegal arguement, these kids are not here on their own acord and should not be "penalized" because their parents brought them here. Besides, according to Childrennow.org, only 4% of the kids it would cover in Ventura County would be undocumented. Are we really that hateful to exclude 4% of the kids that it would include? All children deserve to have access to health coverage and a medical home. It benefits everyone in the long run
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.