Even In Conservative East Texas, Newspapers Editorialize Against SCHIP Veto, Gohmert’s Vote

I was surprised to find a guest op-ed decrying the SCHIP veto in the Longview News-Journal over the weekend, given the paper is in the midst of deep-red East Texas. The op-ed, by Longview attorney Sarah S. White, was very well done, and pulled no punches when it came to Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-Tyler):

Fixing and funding SCHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program) should have been a no-brainer.

Unfortunately, President Bush chose to use his fourth-ever veto to stop the bill, and a recent override vote in Congress narrowly failed. But Bush assures us that our children do have access to doctors — as long as there are still emergency rooms.

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler, was one of the members of Congress who voted against SCHIP reauthorization this month — despite recent polls showing about 80 percent of Americans support it nationwide.

Gohmert declares, “Low-income children should not be left without health care …” But he excuses his no vote by criticizing “earmarks” in the bill and claiming that it “included a dramatic expansion of the program to many children who are not from poor families …”

I guess it all depends on what you mean by “poor.” A single parent with one child who makes $13,690 per year qualifies as poor in America. That child would actually qualify for Medicaid. But CHIP was designed for children from families whose incomes are just above that level — it subsidizes private coverage for low-income working families so that kids can go to a primary-care physician, not just the ER. Earmarks, unfortunately are routinely added to all kinds of bills for such pork-barrel projects as Alaska’s infamous “Bridge to Nowhere.” Congress could and should end the practice of earmarks altogether — as one of several necessary steps to make itself accountable to voters again. But they make a lame excuse for voting against SCHIP.

Gohmert and others seem to be trying to scare us Americans into just accepting the status quo — expensive and inequitable private health insurance policies (if you can get one). Yet you don’t hear them propose abolishing the generous government plan for their health care — a plan most Americans would feel fortunate to have.

Good stuff. I wonder if White would consider a run against Gohmert?

Bookmark It