We periodically receive self-serving email from an outfit called First Focus. In its mission statement, the organization claims to be "a bipartisan advocacy organization that is committed to making children and families a priority in federal policy and budget decisions." Although I've previously seen scant evidence of its claim to bipartisanship, their newest missive gives one hope:
"Today, a new actuarial study has revealed that the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) is significantly better for low-income families than any health reform proposal pending in Congress."
That's correct: they're now whining about even the Democrat-sponsored "reform" efforts.
As I've pointed out to them before, their focus on poor children, while admirable, seems predicated on the belief that these unfortunates are the responsibility of government, not their parents. And their latest email underscores a complete disconnect from reality:
"...the study finds that the median CHIP plan covers 100% of medical expenses covered by CHIP, exposing children to no out-of-pocket costs." [emphasis added]
News Flash: children aren't exposed to out-of-pocket costs in any circumstance (well, unless you take the gummint view that "children" includes 30-somethings living in their parents' basements). Their parents and we taxpayers, not the children, bear that brunt.
As we've previously discussed, S-CHIP as a whole is problematic: it encourages parents to put their own children "on the dole," in order to save themselves money at the expense of the taxpayer. Are there families who truly need our help? Of course, but there's little evidence that these worthies make up the bulk of those taking advantage of the program.
The bottom line here is that such advocacy groups, while jockeying for their own advantage, are also responsible for derailing whatever "reform" may have occurred. Whether or not that's "a good thing" is another question.
Posts
