Reader comments
CHIP veto riles advocates

I am completely disgusted with our president's inability to act in a bipartisan manner. Republicans should be outraged at the image he has and continues to give their party whether they believe in most of the points of the republican agenda or not.

Unfortunately, there is little solace in knowing that he will go down as the worst president in US history. We are the generation that will be spending our lives fixing Bush's messes.

Advocates are blind to what this bill really would do. First, well off families that can easily afford insurance will drop their own insurances and join this program....thus enriching themselves even more at taxpayer expense. That's you and me, folks!
And secondly the greedy crooks will be coming out from under their rocks, rubbing their greedy, thieving hands together in anticipation of how easy it will be to rip off billions of these dollars to line their own pockets with, with no care or concern about the truly needy children in our society that need this help, and again to the enormous detriment of us, the taxpayers. Bush, for once is doing the right thing for the right reasons!

Ah ha..Now I see why the Dems havent impeached Bush. The moral majority "values voters" must have proof positive (as actions speak louder than words) that the only real "values" this administration is concerned with are the sum totals of all their corporate profits! Lou Dobbs, your right!

Once again the left asks for too much, and is then outraged when the adults in this country tell them 'no.' A reasonable request to extend the program would have been quietly signed, and gained them no political points.

Grant, I'm wondering how a man that was elected for a second term could possibly "go down as the worst president in history." Children who aren't getting medical attention under the present system would have the same trouble under any system--their parents. Ask the Shriners if they would ever turn down any child who needed help.

when are we going to start being accountable for ourselves and stop taking handouts?

I have to disagree.. I feel that once again Bush has made a decision soleley based on the fact that this decision and reason for this decision will once again keep the middle to low income tax payers attention away fron his lack of leadership, and nees to control the world. Our so called president is a tyrant of sort and is only for the wealthy... Thats why he appointed a V.P. who actually has as much money as he does.

Brack...you are not informed on what the requirements for CHIP are. A "well off family" will not be able to qualify for CHIP, therefore, they cannot accomplish what you have asserted.

Additionally, there are already crooks taking advantage of every program private or public. Why deny the children of America reasonable health care because of the �bad apples?� You have a very weak argument. Get your facts straight and then really consider the issues.

Brack is right. Ezra Taft Benson, who knew what was going on in Washington, said that these "do-gooders" were possessed with "a fervid but false solicitude for the poor, whereby they gain mastery and control over them."
We have allowed greedy crook insurance moguls to raise the cost of medical care outrageously to line their pockets. (And I have lived long enough and kept track well enough to know that this is true.)
The constitution does not allow the federal government to meddle in welfare at all. It is to "promote the general welfare" not provide it by taxing us out of house and home. Go Bush.

It sounds like you are not informed. This new bill would take the poverty level up to 80,000 dollars. So you are wrong when you say a well off family will not qualify. I make half of that and have two kids and I am doing fine. Plus this bill will give free insurance to all the illegal aliens. So please reconsider and realize the President is doing the right thing again.

Brack's right and I have proof. My sisterinlaw is on this program and they make more than our family (over 60,000). While on it, they bought a house (22,000 down) qualified for 2 NEW cars and wear all new clothes. Does that sound like "low income"!? They have health insurance offered through their job but turned down the child's part because the govt is cheaper-- and then they laugh about it and try to encourage others to take advantage of loopholes too. Our family is self employed and pay out the wazoo for private health insurance because I chose to have my children and I will be responsible for them. I believe there are many who are truely in need of this program but unfortunatly they are being hurt because of families looking for a free ride like my inlaws. Pres. Bush is trying to find solutions to make sure those who truely need the help get it and others who can take responsibility for their own families do it!!

I find it ironic that so many people are for or against a bill that they themselves have never read. They base their opinion solely on what others tell them they should believe.

Ezra Taft Benson said politicans gain votes promising what is not there's to give by people asking what is not there's and commandment not to covet is broken.

I know people who get school lunches and other thing's because they expect it don't know how to manage money and if free let's take it. No free lunch someone else just foot's the bill.

The "promote the general welfare" statement is in the preamble of the Constitution. It, the preamble, states the purpose of the document. The Consititution then goes on to outline the powers and duties of the federal government. And there are not very many of them. The Constitution does not grant the government the power to do anything it wants so long as it promotes the general welfare.

The expansion of the SCHIP program (and the President vetoed an expansion of the program) would only move the country one step closer to socialized medicine and all of its problems. Those republicans who supported the program are, in my opinion, filling the role of "useful idiots" in the Lenin model of government.

Where can I find the proposed bill and the current requirements for CHIP?

I think it's important to know how this bill would change the program. If middle-income families are receiving aid for health insurance, it certainly seems like social health care. However, if this new bill would prohibit children from getting health insurance whose parent's can not afford it, I think it is something we all need to be concerned about.

Amen George. Hatch is an embarrasment to Utah. People need to learn to be responsible for themselves and thier children. This is about the first good thing Bush has done!

People take advantage of programs all the time...it is not right, and they are wrong for doing it. However, this does not supersede the fact that CHILDREN who are uninsured need to be insured and have decent medical care...end of story. This principle stands regardless of all the deceitful adults in our society that "ride the loop holes" and take advantage. For those of you who are saying my sister is doing this and my friend is doing that, it is your responsibility to call them out on their deceitful way. That is the only way to curb all the free riders. Finally, all of you opposing CHIP are using arguments that imply the adults. This is about THE CHILDREN.

I don't know who is right here.
All I know is that I'm a middle class mom who makes barely enough money to not be categorized as 'low income', but not enough money to afford the medical needs of my children. I put off many doctor and dental visits because I simply can't afford it on my tight budget.
But yet many illegals can take their kids to the Doc anytime w/o having to pay a thin dime. My taxes pay for their kids to get the medical care I can't afford to give my own! That outrages me.
I'm a US citizen, I work, I pay taxes, but my insurance premiums and co-pays and deductibles are so so high, I can't afford to do all that I need for my kids health. Something has to change.

Thank you Chris Cannon, Bob Bennett, and Rob Bishop. At least they had courage enough to say NO. This is set up to be funded by an increase in smokers. How can we be honest with ourselves by saying on one hand, "smoking is bad" but on the other that "we need to recruit 20 million more smokers to pay for this new government program?

Chuck is right. I think that if the program would have been reauthorized as it was then it would have received overwhelming support. But to expand it in such a dramatic way isn't going to work.

We all want children to be insured but creating another government program isn't the answer.

President Hatch, please stop trying to implement socialism in America. We don't want it!