My published op-ed concerning SCHIP in the Birmingham News.

I did the best I could to keep my letter under the Editor's mandate of 200 words. Mine was ~230. There were 5 letters today about the President's veto of SCHIP, 3 for,2 against plus an article on the front page of the Commentary section entitled, "Kids' health insurance is a necessity." Once again, no one wants kids to go without health insurance. We just think there is a better, more effective way to do it. Click here to read my problems with SCHIP.

The News titled my letter,"A middle-class entitlement." See if you can tell the difference between my original letter, which is below, and what was published in the paper. Mistake? Accident? Typo? Attempt to soften my position? The paper says they will edit for brevity,spelling, and grammar. I doubt that was the case but I do know the Bham News is a regional paper owned by the New York Times.???

-- I write in support of President Bush’s veto of the reauthorization (H.R.976) of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). I believe the rhetoric in Sunday’s paper is misleading, unfair and I will state some facts in order to clear up any confusion about the President’s decision.
-- Initially, President Bush proposed increasing SCHIP funding by 20 %( $5 billion) and Senate Republicans proposed a 33% increase ($8 billion). Despite these increases, supporters of the veto have been branded as “unChristian, unsympathetic and kid-haters.” The “tax and spend” Democrats then passed a bill with a $35 billion expansion that includes illegal immigrants, adults, and families making up to 82k a year. Every dollar spent on immigrants and middle class adults is a dollar taken away from the poor kids SCHIP was designed to help.
--The GOP version of the bill returned to its original mandate, which is to provide insurance for underprivileged children. The Democrats bill would have taxed the poor and put future state revenues in jeopardy in order to pay for a middle class entitlement. I agree with the President that we should collect fewer taxes and provide insurance to those who really need it the most. Should a childless couple making $50k in Alabama pay higher taxes to provide insurance for a New York State couple making $82k when the Alabama couple is having trouble affording insurance themselves? I think not.