NPR's Simon falsely asserted that SCHIP began "under a Republican president"
SUMMARY: Discussing President Bush's threat to veto a bill expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program, NPR Weekend Edition Saturday host Scott Simon stated: "The president vetoed the last one, but lawmakers said they've made some important changes to the bill, which, as Senator [Mitch] McConnell often reminds interviewers, began as a program under a Republican president." In fact, in a September 27 statement, McConnell credited a Republican Congress -- not, as Simon said, a Republican president -- for the program, which was signed into law by President Clinton.
During a discussion on October 27 of President Bush's threat to veto a bill expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), National Public Radio Weekend Edition Saturday host Scott Simon said in reference to a comment by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY): "The president vetoed the last one, but lawmakers said they've made some important changes to the bill, which, as Senator McConnell often reminds interviewers, began as a program under a Republican president." In fact, in a September 27 statement, McConnell credited a Republican Congress -- not, as Simon said, a Republican president. Indeed, while SCHIP was created in 1997, when Republicans held a majority in both houses of Congress, President Clinton pushed for the expansion of children's health care coverage and signed the program, included in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, into law.
When Clinton signed the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 on August 5, 1997, he said, "First, it strengthens our families by extending health insurance coverage to up to 5 million children. By investing $24 billion, we will be able to provide quality medical care for these children -- everything from regular check-ups to major surgery." Clinton added: "I want every child in America to grow up healthy and strong, and this investment takes a major step toward that goal."
In his February 1997 State of the Union address, Clinton said, "Ten million children still lack health insurance -- 80 percent of them have working parents who pay taxes. That is wrong. My balanced budget will extend health coverage to up to 5 million of those children."
From the October 27 edition of National Public Radio's Weekend Edition Saturday:
SIMON: In line with that, the House of Representatives passed a new version of the SCHIP, the children's health insurance bill.
DANIEL SCHORR (senior news analyst): Yes.
SIMON: The president vetoed the last one, but lawmakers said they've made some important changes to the bill, which, as Senator McConnell often reminds interviewers, began as a program under a Republican president. Now, President Bush says that he'll veto this version in any case. He's concerned it extends coverage to people who don't need it, drives up the price. If Democrats along with Republican supporters of the bill and Mr. Bush are at an impasse, does this create a political problem for both parties?
SCHORR: Not in equal measure. I think that the Republicans have more of a problem than the Democrats do. This is a wildly popular program of trying to take care of kids, and now they want to add another 4 million kids, say, only because they are on the margin between poverty and not poverty, and it's generally supported everywhere, so that the Republicans will have to maneuver between the White House and the Congress.
The Democrats are in a position to say, "Well, either you're going to veto this, or we'll give you another one every two weeks." As long as the issue is alive and on the front pages, it really works for Democrats and not for Republicans.
SIMON: Did Democrats leave themselves open at some point to the charge that they're playing politics and not actually getting a bill done?
SCHORR: Anytime that someone seems to have an advantage, the other side will always say he's playing politics.
Hmm. Misstatement, or just sheer stupidity? Inquiring minds want to know...
Same as the Beck thread... ignorance is no excuse. Intentional or not = same result.
Joke, it was a joke. And they got MM again.
Well, jokes are supposed to be funny. That's a lame and tired counter. Where's the joke?
Good catch. I think he may have mispoken.
its not a mis-statement...it's been making the talk show and internet chatter rounds all week.
I've corrected several debaters I deal with outside here, and they keep making the claim.
Once a zombie meme makes it into the hivemind it is impossible to put a stake throught its heart.
"Did Democrats leave themselves open........they're playing politics.....? Since when is politics played in Congress.
Mr. Simon, could it be the Republans are playing politics because this program would be something good for those who need help? And, woe is me, it would look like a Congress did something good. And the Democrats might get the credit?
If SCHIP began under a republican president, why did this same president veto it ?
He was for it, before he was against it.
McConnell's statement was obviously taken out of context... ;>)
The fact that the Dems and the Repubs in Congress actually re-created the SCHIP Bill (which means it WAS bi-partisan) and Bush's bubble of handlers had him claim it as "Dems playing politics with kids health" is just another example of who this president really is: if not THE worst ever, then certainly one of the worst!
Even Nixon at 26% approval was smart enough to resign!
I honestly think that SCHIP will prove to be more politically damaging to the Repubs than Iraq is/was.
How I wish the requirement that you have to show ID to get SCHIP benefits wasn't taken out.
Why - so we can continue to use our tax money on people who arent here legally and do not deserve to reap the benefits of the taxpayers?
Idiot.
With that level of reading comprehension it's no wonder your contributions are such mindless propaganda.
Dexteritas said he wishes the ID requirement had NOT been taken out. He favors the ID requirement.
And you called him an idiot?
Did one of the stupidest most moronic posters this site has ever seen just call someone else an idiot? Moronman. You are BEYOND stupidity. You are the paragon if ignorance. You must have been left over from the first primordial oooze of ignorance. Your white hot stupidity shines like the SUN. I laugh at you so much it is making my stomach hurt
Changes to the SCHIP bill:
Requiring more aggressive verification of Social Security numbers of SCHIP applicants, a move meant to satisfy concerns that illegal immigrants could use bogus Social Security numbers to receive the health benefits. Under the Dems proposal, applicants would have to provide more secondary documentation of citizenship if the Social Security Administration cannot confirm the applicant is a citizen.
No funding for families making 300% of the federal poverty line, which amounts to about $62,000 a year for a family of 4.
Childless adults on SCHIP would be cut off within 1 year of passage of the legislation.
One has to wonder what the NEW objection will be.
it'll be the same one only louder. It's the 1st step to socialized medicine, and us lazy dishonest middle class types will drop the coverage we paid for to get free coverage.
300% was always the Federal cut off point - states have the option of allowing an additional 100% making the total 400% above FPL. Families in excess of $80K per year would still be eligible in some states.
If childless "Adults" have to be off the program within a year - that means adults with children are still eligible. the "C" in SCHIP stands for "Children".
This bill is minimally different that the one originally vetoed and carries the same large price tag.
If they cut off eligibility at 60K total income, limit to 18 year olds and below, require proof of citizenship it can be done for $17B. It would then easily pass.
Yup, i agree. It would actually serve for what the bill was intended to do. Now, if only they can get all the illegals off it, it would be much more beneficial.
I am not philosophically against negotaiting such cosemetic changes. I would argue against an 18 year old cutoff. I have health insurance but if you are putting your kid through college and they still live at home they ought to remain covered. It benifits the whole country to encourage higher education. The cutoff you mention doesnt look too bad to me in terms of money but I would index it for local cost of living that is a specific amount of the poverty level.
It only benefits education if the person over the age of 18 is actually IN COLLEGE.
Can you EVER add to the discussion or is stupidity the ONLY arrow in your quiver? My health insurance will cover my daughter till she is twenty or while she is still in school or a university. It wouldnt be hard to add that to any bill which was my POINT. To those people here with NORMAL IQ's this was obvious. I keep forgetting that points that would be clear to any reasonably bright six year old are FAR beyond your comprehension level and someone needs to hold your hand and walk you through them, you insufferable moron.
Bets.
Enough of the fake outrage. MM is taking a page from the O'Reilly/Limbaugh playbook. Since when did Scott Simon become a cog in the right wing noise machine? As the transcript makes clear, opposition to SCHIP is a no-win approach regardless of who enacted it. If Simon's statement were actually true, it would make Bush look even worse than he does already.
I have to wonder what MM was thinking in making such a big deal over this clip though. This was clearly a mistake that Simon and NPR will no doubt retract on next Saturday's broadcast. (It's typical that NPR retracts errors on the show where the error occurred, so don't look for ATC to mention it.) Al Franken has made some great points about how the right tries to score points with phony outrage over misteps by progressives. Here we have a progressive organization showing outrage over a statment on NPR that doesn't even promote the right's position on an issue.
Come on David, when you've got truth on your side, you don't need exaggeration and hyperbole. Stick to the important stuff.
Scott Simon obviously mis-spoke. No big deal; it happens once in a while. I would still take a gram of NPR over a metric ton of any cable "news" network (fox "news" not eligible to enter).