My oldest daughter thinks it would be just great if we became rich. Then, she reasons, her dad and I would not say "No" to her many requests to buy this or do that. The other day, on a drive through the canyons, we passed some gorgeous fields that were for sale, and she asked if there was any chance we could buy them.

Perhaps, she suggested, I could "dash off" a book or something to get the extra money. Right.

If I had all the money in the world, I'd still reject most of her requests. But the conversation points out to me a simple truth: Children don't have a lot of say in their family's economic situation.

That's one reason the current congressional debate on the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is so important.

I hope Congress gets this one right, without too much posturing or partisan politics. The program will end this September without reauthorization, and that would be a disaster.

The program is a true safety net, catching children growing up in families that make too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to actually afford health insurance. In Utah, estimates vary, but at any given time it insures about 35,000 kids in families that earn up to 200 percent of the federal poverty line — working-poor families who often have no access to health insurance, which they couldn't afford anyway.

The Utah Department of Health, which oversees the federal-state matching fund program here, keeps careful track of the money so it knows when it can open enrollment, something that occurs periodically. Most of the time, no applications are being accepted.

So many things that affect children are chronic conditions like allergies and asthma that need to be managed consistently. And SCHIP can prevent many medical problems before they get started or nip them before they progress.

The sizable request for additional money would include expansion of SCHIP to provide mental health services and to boost the number of eligible children who can be enrolled. It's a costly proposition but one that experts maintain will save money in both the long- and short-term. Ideas on how to pay for it include a sizable tax increase on tobacco products.

The president wants a much smaller program increase that critics say would be eaten by rising health costs and would actually shrink health-care benefits to children. As for funding, he'd rather address overall health-care access, including for adults, with tax cuts or tax credits.

Not everyone's a fan of SCHIP. Critics say SCHIP is just another step to socialized medicine. I think it's actually more of a step toward keeping our implicit promise to provide for and protect this country's children.

I don't think it's overstating it to say that the entire country, not just the children, benefits from SCHIP. Children who are healthier learn better. They have brighter futures and better lives. It costs much less to provide care as it's needed than to deal with problems that are allowed to fester and worsen. All that ripples out to families and entire communities.

I know the federal piggy bank is not a bottomless pit. Still, the welfare of America's most vulnerable citizens should be a high priority for our elected representatives. They need to act first to assure that a program most agree has real value is not allowed to expire, and they need to see that it provides adequate coverage to those who qualify.

Caring for children is never the wrong thing to do.

---

Deseret Morning News staff writer Lois M. Collins may be reached by e-mail at lois@desnews.com