Contribute
Support Left in the West to continue our work:
Blog Ads


-->
Syndication

RSS

Email Updates

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


Event Calendar
July 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* * * * 01 02 03
04 05 06 07 08 09 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
* * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Full Disclosure
Matt Singer works for Forward Montana. He also is a partner in DP Productions, a small, Montana-based T-Shirt company.


Search




Advanced Search


Can We Afford $600,000 Per Year for Children's Health Insurance?

by: Matt Singer

Mon Apr 16, 2007 at 14:37:26 PM MDT


The Montana legislature is hammering out a deal on taxes. Here's the basics. Over the biennium, a $1 billion surplus is predicted. We're looking at $150 million in permanent tax cuts.

The cost of expanding the Children's Health Insurance Program in the way the Senate approved costs a whopping $600,000 each year for the next two years.

Relatively speaking, it's tiny. It's also health care for children, which really is an investment (just the same as early maintenance work on a car is an investment).

There's a lot of arguments against insuring children. None of them are very strong. We all end up picking up the tab for uninsured children who end up in the emergency room. Children who don't get regular check-ups are likely to be less healthy as adults, meaning they're more likely to be uninsured emergency room visitors as adults. And while it's nice to play the personal responsibility card, it's ridiculous to think a 5-year-old should be responsible for her or his own health insurance.

This battle is in the House now. Hopefully we can put an end to this and raise the eligibility levels for CHIP.

Matt Singer :: Can We Afford $600,000 Per Year for Children's Health Insurance?
Tags: , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Given those types of projections for a surplus (0.00 / 0)
and the income levels in this state, it should seem like a no-brainer to increase funding and raise eligibility levels. 

Lets hope those guys have put on their thinking caps and put away the partisanship.  Do what's right for the people who put them there.

And for any skeptics, let's look at it this way - uninsured people mean higher costs for my healthcare.  Hospitals have to make it up somewhere.  If more people were covered, my healthcare would cost less.  At the very least, I'd get more for my buck.


Can we afford not to? (0.00 / 0)
With children's health at a 30 year low?

terrance@sinceslicedbread.com
www.sinceslicedbread.com


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Bookmark and Share

Poll
Should Congress focus more on creating jobs or reducing the short-term deficit?
Creating Jobs
Reducing the Short-Term Deficit

Results

Blog Roll
  • 4 & 20 Blackbirds
  • A Secular Franciscan Life
  • Big Sky Blog
  • Cece-in-MT
  • David Crisp's Billings Blog
  • David Sirota
  • Discovering Urbanism
  • Ecorover
  • Granny Insanity
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Intelligent Discontent
  • Lamnidae
  • Lesley's Podcast
  • Livingston, I Presume
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Montana Main St.
  • Montana Maven
  • Montana Netroots
  • Montana Politics
  • Montana With kids
  • Patia Stephens
  • Piece of Mind
  • Pragmatic Revolt
  • Prairie Mary
  • Rebels Are We
  • Speedkill
  • Sporky
  • The Alberton Papers
  • The Fighting Liberal
  • The Montana Capitol Blog
  • The Montana Misanthrope
  • Thoughts From the Middle of Nowhere
  • Treasure State Judaism
  • Writing and the West
  • Wrong Dog's Life Chest
  • Wulfgar!

  • Powered by: SoapBlox