I’ve blogged about socialized medicine (aka, "Universal Healthcare") a number of times here at the ‘Grok (here, here, and here for examples). And you know that the lure of "free" healthcare will appeal to a lot of people now that we are in an economic downturn.
The problem is, once done, it will be a seminal change in the relationship of people and their government – our healthcare will be at the beck and call of the bureaucrats and politicians in charge. That precious "private patient / Doctor relationship" that the Liberal Progressives wail about when it comes to abortion will be decimated when government, and not doctors, will be in charge (think Obama’s new HHS Secretary Tom Daschle’s idea of a Federal Health Review Board that will be in charge of ALL procedures and medications in the US – public AND private!).
Obama is a smart guy (mostly) – it is doubtful that he will retry the frontal attack that HillaryCare attempted back in the 90s. Instead, in typical community organizer fashion, the attempt to put Universal Healthcare will be nibbled into existence.
The platform? S-CHIP – a program that was originally intended to provide health insurance coverage by the government for low income children. It again, will become a battleground issue as the original intent will be distorted again by "government creep".
| Number in | Income as a & of the Federal HHS Poverty Level | |||
| Family | 100% | 200% | 300% | 400% |
| 1 | $10,830 | $21,660.00 | $32,490.00 | $43,320.00 |
| 2 | $14,570 | $29,140.00 | $43,710.00 | $58,280.00 |
| 3 | $18,310 | $36,620.00 | $54,930.00 | $73,240.00 |
| 4 | $22,050 | $44,100.00 | $66,150.00 | $88,200.00 |
| 5 | $25,790 | $51,580.00 | $77,370.00 | $103,160.00 |
Here’s the problem: States can be allowed to set the percentage of Poverty Level for inclusion into the program. You can be sure that Liberals are going to go for the highest percentage they can get. After all, while they may say that they want government to help, the sad truth is that once completed, this take over of parental responsibility will mean more people dependent on government!
Disagree? Ask yourself – when is someone beyond Poverty and when is it a political ploy? I can see covering those at the Poverty Level, and a bit more. But is it fair, if I am earning $60,000/year, to have someone earning $40,000/year to pay, through their taxes, for my kids’ healthcare?
Should I not, being solidly in the middle class, be responsible for the welfare of my children?
Hint: those pushing this tidbit of socialized medicine believe that parents are not ones responsible for their children – government is. Therefore, in their eyes, this income level is just a game to be played for now…their goal is to make family income and parental responsibility irrelevant.
Let’s see how this plays out here in NH…
