Jennifer Lea writes for jlogged.com, and is co-owner of 
Keep your coins…I want change
With the Texas primaries here (you can vote early right now FIY,) there is a buzz of excitement in the air because this time around TX actually counts. I’m just thrilled that both Democratic parties have a plan concerning America’s health care crisis, so I will be happy with whoever gets the democratic ticket.
I have to give Hillary props because she has worked on Title V from the beginning of her career, which the democrats fought hard for. It enables my child to have every educational right that “normal” children have.
In the four years Bush has been in office he has drastically cut school funding and medicaid budgets for the disabled children of this country. We have a war to finance you know?
Our family was directly affected by this:
Defining ‘Unnecessary’: Bush Cuts Funding For Disabled Children
Bush has continually called for cuts in “unnecessary spending.†From his 2006 State of the Union address:
Every year of my presidency, we’ve reduced the growth of non-security discretionary spending, and last year you passed bills that cut this spending. This year my budget will cut it again, and reduce or eliminate more than 140 programs that are performing poorly or not fulfilling essential priorities.
What kind of spending is unnecessary? In Bush’s view, programs that assist disabled children. The President’s budget will eliminate Medicaid reimbursements for schoolchildren with disabilities, denying them “access to medical services they need to fully participate in school and learn to their greatest abilities.†It cuts funding for medical equipment on buses, transportation to medical appointments, and the administrative costs of identifying children with special medical and learning needs.
If schools are no longer able to seek reimbursement for these services, costs will shift to districts and states already grappling with fiscal constraints. But those who will be most affected are the children and students with disabilities who have already been hurt by January’s drastic Medicaid cuts.
In February, Bush promised to “continue to work to remove barriers that still confront Americans with disabilities and their families.†His budget, however, creates new barriers for disabled children.
- Elena Rocha and Meredith King
Here’s how Hillary’s plan will affect women and children. Two things I have a vested interest in.
“This plan will help all Americans – but it will especially make a difference for women in our country who are more likely to be caregivers and health care gatekeepers for their families. Compared with men, women are less likely to have employer-sponsored health care coverage because they are more likely to work part-time and to take time out of the workforce to care for their children and their family members. They are also more likely to be covered as dependents on their spouses’ employer-sponsored health plans. As a result, women are more vulnerable to losing their coverage if they are widowed or divorced.
Under the American Health Choices Plan, every woman will be covered regardless of employment or marital status. Women who are satisfied with their health insurance will be able to keep it. They will experience no change in their health care except that the modernization and quality initiatives in the plan will improve the quality of care and lower the cost of care for everyone. Women who are not satisfied with their health care or who do not have access to health care will be able to choose from a wide variety of plans at an affordable cost.”
Preserving and Expanding Existing Programs
Certain medical conditions are so costly that private insurance do not effectively finance costs.6 For people with spinal cord and traumatic brain injuries, the cost of care can exceed several million dollars over their lifetime.7 Medicare and Medicaid provide critical health care services for people who are disabled. Medicaid, in particular, serves as a safety-net for people who need assistance with acute and long-term care services, many of which are not covered by traditional acute care health insurance policies.
The American Health Choices Plan preserves and expands existing critical support programs that fill gaps in private insurance. Efforts to cap federal spending, such as a block grant, would have a devastating effect on people with disabilities and their families. Hillary’s plan recognizes that middle- and low-income people with disabilities rely on the Medicare and Medicaid programs for health care and additional support services that are not covered by private health insurance. Her plan preserves these critical programs and expands Medicaid coverage to additional low-income populations.
More on Hillary’s plan here. Barack’s plan can be read here.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 20th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Hey! So just out of curiosity, what do you think about the Convention on the Rights of the Child? About the UN in general? I know Obama just supported the Convention. And I know Hillary has openly said before that she is against children being taught any sort of religion by their parents. I read the Wikipedia article about the Convention and it seemed pretty mild, but then I read this and it’s way uncool with me: http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000000/00000021.asp
February 20th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Well, the convention for the most part has children in it’s best interest. A lot of what was cited on HSLDA is Right wing propaganda. Not saying it is untruthful completely but it doesn’t even show the actual articles. The author just tells you their own conclusion/opinion without giving full information.
My thoughts on the UN in general? I have mixed feelings about it. It’s original purpose was to foster good relations among nations, and for a while it did. But now in so many ways it is failing and continuing to fail. I mean, they did nothing to stop racial genocide from happening Rowanda, Darfur, Kosovo… It is run primarily by self-interested capitalists who couldn’t care less about humanity. We used to pull some big weight with the UN, but the truth is that the UN no longer follows our lead. But since when does the US let the UN tell them what to do?
I am not 100% pro-Hillary’s politics (I’m not 100% pro ANYONE’S politics, and doubt you could find a person that is,) but she or Barack will be the next president of our country. I DO want to vote for the best possible candidate. (Still deciding who that is.)
First of all Bill Clinton did not submit COTROTC to the Senate for its advice and consent, when posed the opportunity. I seriously doubt it will ever come to fruition, and if it does I doubt even more that people are going to be reprimanded for teaching their child any faith they choose to be acceptable. I mean the UN allowed thousands of people to be hacked to pieces with machetes in front of T.V cameras while armed UN guards stood by and did nothing in Rowanda, so the thought of them actually taking some sort of action against parents in the U.S. seems laughable.
The fact is you can’t MAKE your child follow any religion with or without the government telling you what you can and cannot do.
Right now there are people literally being thrown in the streets to die because they cannot afford health care. Children with disabilities who are not able to play outside at school because budget cuts won’t allow for safe playground equipment….my child.
If you even knew the fresh hell we have gone through just get our child insured… This should be a non-issue. People should not have their lives destroyed because they have a disability, sickness, etc… they have no control over. I would not wish uninsurability on anyone.
I guess what I am trying to say is that I have bigger fish to fry than worrying weather or not some home school family is going to be drug through the streets for telling their kid that Jesus loves them…because it will never happen. Clearly that is a law to protect children of religious cults like Heaven’s Gate, Jim Jones, or the Branch Dividian’s.
If I’m wrong in this then I’ll be in jail right with you because I will continue to teach my children what I believe to be right, just, and fair to all people even when it is not the popular opinion.
February 21st, 2008 at 12:07 pm
“The fact is you can’t MAKE your child follow any religion with or without the government telling you what you can and cannot do.”
Really, is that in the Bible? (joke)
Because free choice is as well, and that seems to be going the way of the dodo for the “betterment” of society.
Evil is always sold in pretty packaging. It seeks to exploit our weaknesses in order to lure us into it. This is the major problem I have with politicians. Most, probably more than a preponderance, lie. Period. The BIGGEST problem I have with both parties is the ideology that the government knows how to do things better. Besides bombing the hell out of our enemies, I haven’t seen much more that they can competently handle, but that’s beside the point. The main point is that BOTH parties are trying to fulfill the “give me more right now mentality” that our nation is slowly sinking into. They want to be the answer and give people hope for the future. I totally understand your views based on your circumstances, but I simply don’t trust them. I think that there should be safety nets to help people in need, with truly exceptional circumstances. But the typical response is extremist in nature; “Because there are these people here who need this program, everyone must have it.”
The fact is that the redistribution of wealth is what all these policies are based on (it will cost money and you have to get it from somewhere). Individually, they sound nice to different groups that benefit from them, but collectively it creates more and more of a dependence on government for everyday life.
For the healthcare issue, it needs to be addressed. I don’t think a wholesale national healthcare system is the answer, I just think we have grown comfortable with living with it. There are many facets which contribute to the current situation. I don’t think we have considered alternatives within the free market system we have.
So, no, you cannot make your child follow a religion, but the government forces you to live a certain way everyday. Did you put on your seatbelt this morning when you dropped your kids off to work?
BTW, I watched the History channel the other morning about Nazi policy before the war (no, I am not calling anyone Nazi). The party directed their doctors to administer poisons to children with childhood illnesses (thus weaker genes), because it was best for society (the doctors told the parents they were giving them “cures”). Furthermore, they simply executed people with mental disabilites citing publicly that they were in pain and that it was best for society. People with issues ranging from genetic abnormalities, hereditary illnesses, and even alcoholism were sterilized. This was best for society.
I’ll quit rambling, lol.
February 21st, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Tim,
You say the programs create a “dependance on government”. I like to think of it more as guidelines on how I want my tax money spent.
You also said that we’ve grown comfortable with the current health care system. I’ll NEVER be comfortable with it.
February 21st, 2008 at 7:38 pm
I’ll never be comfortable with the current health care system either, and it seems the only ones who are have “great” insurance and have never experienced a catastrophic illness, or accident. Once again, I would NEVER wish such a thing on anyone ever.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:49 am
How much of your tax money is being spent, btw?
Also, I mean society as a whole doesn’t think about the true costs of medical expenses.
Last night one of the debaters said that mandatory involvement in a health care system is needed. They further explained that we would not have the social concord that we have with social security and Medicare if there was not compulsory contributions.
How many people contribute to those programs and also contribute to a private retirement program?
I am not going to change anyone’s minds with facts or economic models. People make up their minds primarily from their world view, which is usually based on events in their lives. I just think that one needs to study economic and social policy in other nations and see exactly what the effects have been in those nations of more national mandatory pay-in systems.
It’s just like a break down of tax revenues in America. Many people don’t comprehend that there is a large group of filers (and even larger of non-filers, I’ll wager) who not only pay no income tax whatsoever, but they get what is called a refundable credit, i.e. money they get back as a refund that is more than what they actually put in. Therefore any tax “breaks” to this group of people does not reduce any liability, but actually increase the amount of money they receive from others who do pay into the system.
There is a fundamental issue with this in that I believe it violates the fourth amendment to the constitution, in that:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
In criminal law (remember my past dalliance with such matters) papers and effects include money. Now what is reasonable, well that’s a debate. Is it reasonable to provide some public funds for truly needy peoples? I believe so.
Again, referencing the above information about tax revenues, this is all pure hard data from the IRS. There is no spin on these numbers.
Congratulations on the bike too, btw. Is AMBUCS a public or private program?
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:22 am
Let me tell you Tim, when Lucas had NO insurance we suffered an 800.00 hole in our budget per month for an average of three months. This is just for basic care. No hospital visits. If Lucas had a 150,00.00 hospital bill in that time we would never have been able to pay for it, but we ALL would PAY for it, if you get my drift. It is NOT cost effective to have uninsured people in our nation. Period. Aaron and I pay right at 400.00 per month for private party health insurance. We are responsible for every penny of health care costs until our 5000.00 deductable is reached.
For my family, I can’t possibly see how we would end up paying MORE than we already do.
The private sector has failed people like us who fall between the cracks. We are not poor enough, and yet have no reasonably acceptable options. Welcome to the small business owner middle class.
It is time to for the government to step in and do something when the private sector has failed so miserably. I KNOW a person who had a good job, great insurance…the whole shebang. Her husband was hit my an uninsured driver, and he was injured so badly that they blew through the 2 million dollar insurance cap in NO time. Good, hard working, people and now, in their 60’s, they are forced to live with their daughter.
There has to be a better way. We are America. It’s ridiculous.
I’m all for paying my own way, and someone else’s too, if I am able. But no insurance company would touch us with a ten foot pole. What about people like us? I’m asking honestly. What do we do?
February 22nd, 2008 at 12:35 pm
You’re probably right. Sorry.
February 25th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
I am so ready for change too, Jen. When Bob’s plant folded for the SECOND time to go work in a cheaper country, we became one of the millions of un/underinsured people in the United States.
We too, fall through the cracks. With Bob having Rheumatoid Arthritis, and other issues, and Reanna, who we are raising having kidney surgery,asthma,and epilepsy.. Well you get the story. I am watching the Pres. debates, and wonder will there really be change or will it just be lip service.
Read my lips…shakes head sadly…no insurance anywhere.
vick
February 26th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Vicky, e-mail me privately. I may be able to point you in a brighter direction. Especially with Reanna.
Bless your hearts.
February 27th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Healthcare is a serious issue, especially for women and children. We’re not talking about “socialized” healthcare here. We’re talking about UNIVERSAL healthcare - as in everyone can have access to it. Instead of insurance companies cherry picking the healthiest people to give it to.
Insurance companies must stop robbing people and then refusing to pay up. They have to stop discriminating against the sick. Only the government can make them stop it, as individuals were just the victims of insurance companies’ discriminatory practices. As a nation, we’re the deciders of laws and regulations.
Well done Jennifer. You held your ground nicely.
March 5th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
I gave up, really. I actually thought universal health care was what they had in Star Trek, but I obviously don’t really know that much about it.