SCHIP On His Shoulder...

On Wednesday, President Obama signed the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) bill into law declaring, "This is good...with one of the first bills I sign...we fulfill one of the highest responsibilities that we have. To insure the health and well being of our nation's children." It was a peculiar phrase, "we fulfill." One might wonder whether the president with "we" was referring to his and the First Lady's responsibility to keep the First Kids healthy and well. But I have a sneaking suspicion "we" has a rather corporate implication, viz. the federal government.

So, what's the big deal with ensuring some poor, underprivileged American kids get ample access to quality health care? In a phrase, "socialized medicine." We have no further to look than to our Anglo brethren in the north to find evidence of the failure of socialized medicine (that the Canadian economy is a wholly-dependent division of American GDP is the only reason the Canucks' health care system hasn't utterly collapsed). But a treatise on the vices of socialized medicine is a subject for another time. Let's dive quickly into why this bill of socialism, in particular, is a recipe for disaster.

First, the notion that SCHIP provides coverage for "poor, underprivileged kids" is simply not true, no matter how much grandstanding the Obama administration commits on behalf of the disenfranchised. The original version of SCHIP, if you recall, was foisted upon the people by the Bush Administration during the 1997 session. In that version, Republicans had forced in a concession by the House Democrats of an $80,000 income cap. Families earning more than that would not qualify for benefits under SCHIP. When SCHIP was hurriedly reintroduced in the wee hours of this session, the income cap was mysteriously absent. Republicans in House had not been consulted nor even informed. Now signed into law, ALL children qualify for SCHIP coverage--including Bill Gates' three children.

As Michael F. Cannon reveals, SCHIP fails in its intent to cover underprivileged children because "out of every ten children added to the SCHIP rolls, six already had private coverage." As with most federal intervention into the private and local realms, the unintended consequences are as great or greater than those intended. With one swipe of a pen, Obama has guaranteed that 60% of children enrolling in SCHIP will do so by pulling their insurance premiums out of the market and thereby deprive a starving economy of revenue. But hey, no fear; these 6 of 10 will be getting better coverage through SCHIP, right? Wrong. This brings us to the second failure of SCHIP.

Cannon quotes economist Robert Kaestner: “The proposition that health insurance is the cure for adverse health outcomes among poor and near-poor children has not been adequately demonstrated.” Never mind the not-so-poor 60-percenters, the poor kids targeted by SCHIP aren't even guaranteed to get improved, "quality health care." One wonders then, if SCHIP cannot offer a reasonable presumption of improvement in health care for the poor and uninsured, why were Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et. al. so hell-bent on passing it? More on that later.

SCHIP fails as well in much the same way federal welfare programs do. Highlighted by the 1996 titan battle between Gingrich Republicans and the Clinton Administration, Welfare to Work was whittled down after it was exposed that overly robust unemployment benefits actually encouraged folks to sit at home rather than beat the pavement looking for gainful employment. SCHIP similarly provides a stiff disincentive for parents of children enrolled in the program to seek better, higher paying jobs with which to afford private insurance. The economic impact is obvious.

Cannon cites the 1996 elimination of medicaid for non-citizens as case in point for how limiting federal benefits actually encourages folks to seek them out in the private sector. He explains that after 1996, non-citizens "sought out jobs that provided benefits, and were so successful that the employer-provided insurance completely offset the loss in government benefits. In fact, in the states that offered the fewest benefits, the immigrant insurance rate rose."

Last, in the dark of night with cloak and dagger, House Democrats also stripped SCHIP of its original citizenship requirement. Yes, they did that. So, not only does the newly passed boondoggle offer insurance coverage for all American children, it provides insurance for all non-American children. In recent years over 80 hospitals have gone out of business in California alone under the weight of uninsured emergency care, which hospitals are required by law to provide without question. Other states have witnessed similar phenomena. It's no surprise then that illegal immigrants flock to these states, knowing full well that every sneeze, sniffle, and ear-ache will get treated at the emergency room for free.

Though the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill was ultimately defeated, fear not ye open-borders fanatics: SCHIP will draw in the masses of illegal immigrants from wide and far. With it, the Obama administration seems intent on stimulated not just the U.S. economy but the Mexican and Latin-American economies as well...albeit with U.S. tax dollars.

Liberals love to paint conservatives as cold-hearted, nasty, selfish beasts. But let's be honest. We, all of us, want nothing more than to see our nation's children healthy and strong. Clearly, SCHIP doesn't do the trick. The question, then, isn't if we should provide the best health coverage for them, rather the question is who should provide it. And that brings us full circle to a question about the legitimacy of socialized medicine. After all, the intent of this rather worthless legislation is not what meets the eye. Obama and company have aimed at nationalized health care ever since HillaryCare went down in flames ten years ago. And SCHIP, my friends, is the proverbial camel's nose under the national tent.

More on the dangers of nationalized health care later...