Conservatives: Would you support an optional government health-insurance program for Children Only?

As in, they get rid of pre-existing state and federal child health care programs (like CHIP) and got a public option for everyone under 18.



Since the bulk of the super-expensive specialized care (heart surgery, emergency reconstructive cosmetic surgery, etc.) have Adult patients, those things could stay through private insurers.



Also, it's pretty clear that adults could 'game the system' and obviously can get a job to afford private insurance. But why should sick 5 year-olds be penalized for their parents' bad financial decisions or inability to pay for health care? It's kind of heartbreaking to see children waiting in an Emergency Room for treatment. Plus ER visits cost more in the long run, I think.Conservatives: Would you support an optional government health-insurance program for Children Only?I would support it if and only if it were paid for entirely through patient premiums. If it's solely for young people they should be pretty low (to borrow from your argument) and if you remove the profit motive then it will also lower costs (at least according to a lot of arguments I've heard from those who support this). So give them one year of SCHIP funding to start off, which will make it revenue neutral, and then fund it entirely from the premiums people using it will pay. I would not have a problem with that.Conservatives: Would you support an optional government health-insurance program for Children Only?
I believe their stance on that is: "**** kids with childhood diabetes."Conservatives: Would you support an optional government health-insurance program for Children Only?If it's administered by the states, and the fed stays out of it, I would.
Well, since you mentioned CHIP, which is actually SCHIP,I would support it for children whose parents can't provide their children with health insurance, with incentives to insure our children privately.Conservatives: Would you support an optional government health-insurance program for Children Only?As far as I know children are covered under several State programs. It would be too easy for the Feds to "expand" a program like that to cover adults.Conservatives: Would you support an optional government health-insurance program for Children Only?
I'll support anything as long as they are siphoning your paycheck and not mine.
Parents who cannot afford to purchase insurance for thier children must be sentenced to community service, same as we do with those who cannot afford to pay child support.Conservatives: Would you support an optional government health-insurance program for Children Only?
hello, it already exists. It called Medicaid Any child can apply for this. I know this may be hard for you to understand so i will go slow.. Dont beleive everything MSNBC says NO-ONE is refused service at hospitals.
Why don't the people who want it, like you, voluntarily give the government half of their income? If liberals were willing to do that, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
"Conservatives: Would you support an optional government health-insurance program for Children Only?"



No I wouldnt. I would oppose it. Its no good to create another government program by pulling at my heartstrings, disguising it as "for the children". Thats just compassionate statism youre trying to implement.



"But why should sick 5 year-olds be penalized for their parents' bad financial decisions or inability to pay for health care?"



Why should the taxpayers be penalized for the parents bad financial decisions?



"It's kind of heartbreaking to see children waiting in an Emergency Room for treatment."



Yes it is, but in an ER they get treated anyways.



"Plus ER visits cost more in the long run, I think"



Wrong. Its government programs that cost more in both the short and long run,
Some would. Some would not. It depends on the lies they have fallen for you see.



The right loves to spread lies, half truths and smears about the reforms.



Why does no other developed nation have the US model of healthcare? Because in the US model, insurance companies use death panels to deny care to those they are meant to cover. And then they raise costs [1]. Not only does the USA spend more on healthcare than any other nation [2], it finds itself bottom of the table when it comes to preventable deaths due to treatable conditions when it comes to developed nations [3]. The sad thing is that rather than focus on these things, the right spreads lies and half truths about the reforms and how healthcare works abroad [4]. Even sadder is the fact that the reforms are so simple [5]. But, if you think that my points are wrong, e-mail me with proof.