From this Sunday's Wichita Eagle, in an article about the state of Kansas's work toward health reform for children:
In the end, the Kansas Legislature chose wisely by approving a health reform package that will make health care more accessible to children in working-class families, provide expanded medical and dental services for low-income pregnant women, and more adequately fund safety-net clinics across the state that provide medical care for uninsured Kansas families.If only Todd Tiahrt & Sam Brownback would get on board...
[...]
Children are a relatively inexpensive population to insure because they are less likely to have developed costly medical conditions. By insuring children from the start, before the onset of such conditions, health care providers can encourage healthy habits and treat medical concerns before they become costly conditions.Furthermore, federal resources available to the states provide 72 percent of the funding for the Kansas children's health insurance program. Combined with monthly premiums paid by the families of those children enrolled in the program, the cost to the state is minimal.
Some argued during the session that federal resources would not be available to extend the eligibility level for our state children's health insurance program. That is highly unlikely, considering that Congress -- including our own Sen. Pat Roberts and Reps. Jerry Moran, Nancy Boyda and Dennis Moore -- wholeheartedly has supported reauthorization at a level that will more adequately address uninsured children in working-class families.
Clearly, much remains to be done to improve access to health care in our country, but most Kansans will agree that a path to reform that puts children first is good for children and good for the future of Kansas.
8 comments:
i still can't believe enough republicans were heartless enough to vote against the children's health insurance program...that's ridculous!!
i just don't understand why the KDP can't find anyone worth anything to run against Tiahrt...last year would have been a great time to run a strong candidate, and they gave us nothing.
do they even have anyone this year?
of course the government and the taxpayer should take care of it.
We can't afford what we have now but let's fund more
one of those pesky things about being a good person- sometimes you have to take care of others because it benefits the common good.
you don't like universal health care, fine- every single American child deserves the chance to go to a doctor when they're sick.
that is the government's responsibility.
Problem is many states are covering adults in the program while leaving children not covered.
Many Republicans want priorities set for who is covered under the children's insurance plan .... like children and the lowest income first. Democrats want to expand the coverage to more adult and not prioritize.
Government has responsibility to take care of those who can't take care of themselves.... not those who won't take care of themselves.
aww...great spin on that...what works in kansas won't work in new york...the limits set in kansas won't work in new york. "needy" in kansas is "homeless" in new york.
the republicans showed they would much rather give our tax dollars to profitable companies then to poor families...not that we needed more evidence of that.
yeah and democrats believe government is the only one who can fix problems .... more government is usually the problem
the same bad song and dance we've heard from the right for 50 years...and a fundamental difference. Government SHOULD help people, not corporations.
Post a Comment