Interests of President and Tobacco Thwarted: Kids Win for Now

Statement by Janet Bauer, OCPP Policy Analyst, on the U.S. House Vote on the Children's Health Insurance Measure

(SILVERTON, Ore.) - Oregonians should applaud Oregon U.S. Representatives Earl Blumenauer, Peter DeFazio, Darlene Hooley and David Wu for voting to approve a compromise bill reauthorizing and expanding the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

Unfortunately, because Representative Greg Walden and others voted to side with the President and the tobacco industry and against the nation's uninsured children, the bill passed short of a veto-proof majority. The Senate is expected to support the compromise agreement in a vote later this week.

Leading up to the House's vote, the President reiterated his promise to veto the children's health insurance bill, claiming that it "goes too far toward federalizing health care." The statement, sadly, demonstrates the administration's willingness to risk the health of millions of the nation's most vulnerable citizens simply because the bill does not fit into its rigid ideological framework.

If the President does carry through on his threat to veto the popular children's health insurance plan, it will be up to Congress, including Oregon's Greg Walden, to decide whether to side with the President and leave behind some 4 million uninsured children nationwide, including tens of thousands in Oregon, or to override his veto and strengthen health care for the children of Oregon and the nation.

Representative Walden's vote against children's health care is disturbing because the compromise bill addressed concerns he expressed in rejecting an earlier version of the bill. The compromise bill focuses exclusively on children and targets only the lowest-income uninsured children.

President Bush's alternative plan for children's health care would only invest an additional $5 billion over the next five years - an amount vastly insufficient for the nation and for Oregon. The President's plan would fail to provide sufficient funds merely to continue Oregon's program at the current level, much less safeguard more of the state's more than 100,000 uninsured children.

In the days after the Senate votes on the bill, we will hope that President Bush and Representative Walden will have a change of heart and support health care for our most vulnerable children.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

rewilding LA: Matilija Dam History and Ecosystems

One Killed and Two Injured in Shooting Near South Salem High School

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

MLE September 27, 2007 10:16 am (Pacific time)

Sorry Hank, but I continue to view your reasoning as a cop-out. And I don't mean that as a personal affront to you, just an obersvation that I believe it to be a rather weak excuse on your part. You woulld never see the Oregonian or other major media publication take a press release such as that from the OCCP and run it verbatim (including the headline). I'm not judging the OCCP, but they are most definitely a left-leaning organization that promotes a certain agenda. There's nothing wrong with that, but that should automatically cause Salem-news.com to treat it as such. Again, you'd never see the Oregonian run the headline the way Salem-news.com did. If you fail to realize that, then Salem-news.com should be lumped in with more alternative media such as Willamette Week. Again, if that's fine with you and Salem-news.com management, then so be it. I enjoy Willamette Week, but I don't consider it a source of unbiased news.

Henry Ruark September 26, 2007 6:47 pm (Pacific time)

"Anon": Au contraire, friend. "Copout" is induitably a personal-professional attack without name-signed. IF you are qualified to make such judgment,prove it up by ID-self and background. Without that yr words form only "belly-button" opinion. OCPP material was clearly labeled, per Tim's previous note; as anyone can plainly "see with own eyes". Attack simply denigrates OCPP, which is solid, world- recognized non-profit winning high credibilities over some years. You wish to challenge their authoritative report, do so via reference to essential points, NOT sideline attack. Sure beats corporate "news" now replete in on-air media, disguised as "story" or even "opinion"-content. That's the latest "scandal" in leading jrnlsm-school professional journals, and under probing investigation by licensing and other agencies at national level. Don't seem to recall YOU or OTHERS referring to THAT, well reported in daily press.

Anonymous September 26, 2007 4:42 pm (Pacific time)

Come on Hank, that's a complete cop-out on your part. There's nothing wrong with running the story, but the headline should clearly have read something to the effect of "OCCP Praises Thwarting of President and Tobacco". If you're going to be a news site, write news stories. Otherwise you come across as a propaganda arm for a special interest.

Henry Ruark September 26, 2007 10:07 am (Pacific time)

To all: Those comment-accusations re slant and spin on a statement clearly labeled-and-headlined as from OCPP have a purpose common to neocom propaganda: They "confuse the issue" and "divert attention elsewhere". That's direct verbatim quote from known neocon "war plan". Per longtime practice here, documentation available on request. The statement clearly, unequivocally, without any possible error (except bald accusation by malign intent) comes from an internationally recognized and acclaimed authoritative source for such data-made-into/analysis: Oregon's to-be-praised OCPP.

Editor September 26, 2007 9:51 am (Pacific time)

"Statement by Janet Bauer, OCPP Policy Analyst" - those are the first words listed in the subhead. Your accusations continue to miss their target.

Earl September 26, 2007 9:43 am (Pacific time)

Editor - This "Story" is listed under US News on google and is in a "story" format on your website. In very small letters it says statement, yes I missed that, but I was supposed to miss that wasn't i?

Earl September 26, 2007 9:34 am (Pacific time)

WOW, this is one of the most politically slanted articles I have ever read. There are no facts in the article except that the president doesn't want the bill. How about providing the facts of why the president doesn't want the bill. Or some fact about the bill itself. You are reporting the news, not giving me your opinion. If I wanted an opinion I would ask my friends what they thought. Poor people of Salem, they need a good newspaper.

Editor: Hey Earl - why don't you pay attention? This is a statement from the Oregon Center for Public Policy and it is presented as such, get a clue before making assertions with no point.

Henry Ruark September 26, 2007 9:00 am (Pacific time)

Poison is poison; that is immutable fact. Nicotine surely now known for poisonous impact on any user. That also is immutable fact, scientifically proven. Big T already also proven as dispenser without mercy, known to hook victims as early as possible, by any means needed: Huge federal-court judgment on record already for that, demanding desperate drive to derive MORE DOLLARS somehow, NOW, to preserve and extend falling profits as many learn continuing health-threat from ANY use. Question then becomes -when cleared from denial by many for whatever ostensible reasons, economic OR psychological-- should our rational, reasonable decision for stronger, healthier society somehow accept poisons sold simply to supply EVEN MORE corporate profit ? WHAT does THAT profit anyone, even proven-greedy stockholders ?? They've had their shot, ever since slave economy in colonial South. IF so, why not same for cocaine, morphine, et al, et al, et al ?? Surely that is "personal choice" also ?? Vote YES to block malign manipulation by Big T. Both your mind and your conscience will thank you, now or later.

tlhwraith September 26, 2007 8:52 am (Pacific time)

How sad that as a nation there is actually a debate as to whether or not the government should ensure healthcare for as many children as possible, if not all. There is a reason why most other industrialized nations consider healthcare a right, not a privilege as it is in this country. However, for some reason, we feel it is important to continue to protect the insurance industry that is leeching us dry and the tobacco industry that is killing us. If you ever wonder why America is in decline, look no further than the agonizing death of common human respect. However, all is OK because it's OK to blow 2 billion a week invading another country for no reason that hasn't shown to have been a fabrication. As the nations we compete with invest in raising the standard of living, we are actively trying to lower it so that the corporate profit margins can increase.

Ethan September 26, 2007 8:48 am (Pacific time)

Corporations don't pay taxes, they just collect taxes. Taxes on cigarette "corporations" are just taxes on cigarette consumers, who can only be taxed so much. What happens when they are taxed so much that they quit. Then who will pay? guess who? YOU!

Mel September 26, 2007 8:47 am (Pacific time)

Bush doesn't care about our kids, it is clear from the way he handles the presidency.

Fred September 26, 2007 7:32 am (Pacific time)

If the expansion of health care for children were REALLY important, then the Washington Weasels should have the common sense to fund it with a stable source of revenue. Rather, they have simply voted to pile a huge tax onto a politically incorrect product and are now busy congratulating themselves for having "done something for the children".

larry ables September 26, 2007 6:53 am (Pacific time)

I don't know what the policies are in Oregon, but those children already receive health care in Texas and I suspect most other states

Mike September 26, 2007 6:48 am (Pacific time)

I agree that the benefits of the bill are truly a good thing. It doesn't change the fact that the way that is to be collected will not only force an industry to it's knees. Costing thousands of jobs in this country and Central America. It will also tax a product so highly that it will not yield the necessary money for the children.

Larry A. Powell September 26, 2007 6:44 am (Pacific time)

Our country is no longer of the people, by the people and for the people. It is for big corporations, politics and greed. Bush has made many of us feel hopeless. He is the worst thing that has ever happened to the average american. He just keeps getting worse.

[Return to Top]