OPPapers.com

Healthcare

The Democrats in Congress have chosen to drop a bill proposition in fear of a veto from President Bush. The bill is aimed towards expanding the current Children’s Health Insurance Program. The legislation has already been vetoed twice before by President Bush who stated that the bill could lead to “government-run healthcare”. The problem facing the Democrats is that they will not have enough congressional votes to override Bush’s veto. The Democrats are disappointed and seem to share the same feelings as the chairman of the Democratic Caucus, Rahm Emanuel, who said that “those who opposed this bill can face the voters and explain why they believe ten million kids should not get health coverage.”
This article relates to social welfare policy because the proposed legislation would take care of children by providing government funded healthcare, a basic life necessity, and perhaps an inalienable right in some eyes. Healthcare is a large element of social welfare policy surrounded by many bipartisan perspectives on what the role of government is regarding the funding as well as the participation of such a large and complex social structure.
When looking at this legislation, it is obligatory to examine the ups and downs of this bill. Positively, the bill would allow a large number of children to be granted health coverage despite their parent’s insurance status. Additionally, it would certainly be difficult to have to look a child in the eye and tell him or her that they are being denied health coverage. It seems so sad to think about all of the children who may not have guaranteed health coverage without this bill. The possible negative aspects of this bill are an increase in taxes to fund the bill, and depending on personal beliefs, more government control on a generally privatized area of our society.
My personal beliefs on this issue side with President Bush’s veto on the bill. I think he looks at the larger picture, in that passing a bill of...