Orrin Hatch is tired of funding CHIP

[Anonymous]

Why is anybody citing Obamacare? The Republicans want to wreck that, too, AND cut CHIP, AND cut Medicaid. What the hell is left?

So you say poor people should stop having kids they can't pay for. Fine, I agree. But then the Republicans also want to ban abortion, and cut all the insurance programs that cover hormonal birth control. So then what?

The hypocrisy and total contradictions in all these positions is mind-numbing. How can anybody be this stupid as to think this can all work at once?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I came to this country with virtually nothing and over the decades I worked multiple jobs during the first several years because I had a family to feed and clothe and provide housing. Not once did I think that the government was obligated to take care of my children because I was not able to make enough money. Over the years, I did well for myself and put three children through college - two through medical school and one did her MBA. They are all self-sufficient as are we (their parents).

There were years when our Sunday treat for lunch was eating at McDonalds because that was all that I could afford.
.

And I suppose if one of your three children during these lean years was diagnosed with a brain cancer, you would have just held his hand and said, Son, grin and bear. Die with a grin on your face. 'Cause Daddy's too proud to go on CHIP".

[Anonymous]

But we should not forget that conservatives are Christians and, therefore, are morally superior. No comment here on their hypocrisy!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think Hatch has a point- why can't kids be in some kind of work-study program for health care? Not kindergarteners of course but slightly older, why not? Would give them better work ethic than their parents and break the cycle.

What part of the kids on CHIP largely have working parents is lost on you? Many of those people work harder than you could ever imagine wiping butts, cleaning up after entitled people, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They've been living there for DECADES.

Section 8 is for people making minimum wage, the working poor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't let the kid "die in the gutter".

You take it away.

I wish. There are thousands of responsible, self-sufficient couples who would die for the chance to adopt a needy child. I wish we COULD remove children from irresponsible parents who can't take care of them. But unless the poor parents are outright abusive, we can't. Unfortunately.

This is...not true. There are thousands of kids in foster care available for adoption.

TENS of thousands. And not enough foster homes for them to go into.

And more every day, thanks to the opioid epidemic. Some of these kids will grow up to be productive citizens, but they’ll be rare exceptions. Problems for a future Congress, and a future GDP, and a future tax system, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've been living there for DECADES.

Section 8 is for people making minimum wage, the working poor.

The other problem comes about when they are placed in the "hottest" areas, where rents are expensive, which is what has happens here. They should be in more moderately priced neighborhoods. Whoever said they're entitled to live like the upper-middle class?

As long as they are relocated to apartments that are clean, have air conditioning and heat, and with fully functioning kitchens and bathrooms, I think that is fine. They are being subsidized by taxpayers and should be appreciative of the help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hatch was the Republican sponsor of the CHIP bill in 1997

''Children are being terribly hurt and perhaps scarred for the rest of their lives'' when they have no health insurance, Mr. Hatch said.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/14/us/hatch-joins-kennedy-to-back-a-health-program.html

Guess when you're 83 years old you forget about things like that.

I never understand posts like these. People can’t change their minds?

[Anonymous]

Hatch said today that the US didn't have money to pay for CHIP (but I guess it does have money for a $1.5T debt explosion for billionaires)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think Hatch has a point- why can't kids be in some kind of work-study program for health care? Not kindergarteners of course but slightly older, why not? Would give them better work ethic than their parents and break the cycle.

Maybe they could go to work making iPhones. Why should Chinese 9-year-olds have all the fun?

[Anonymous]

That's funny because I'm tired of Orrin Hatch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't let the kid "die in the gutter".

You take it away.

I wish. There are thousands of responsible, self-sufficient couples who would die for the chance to adopt a needy child. I wish we COULD remove children from irresponsible parents who can't take care of them. But unless the poor parents are outright abusive, we can't. Unfortunately.

This is...not true. There are thousands of kids in foster care available for adoption.

Everyone wants a healthy white infant. Not exposed to drugs in utero. No disabilities. Nobody want a disabled kid, or a crack baby or a meth baby or a screwed up minority 10 year old. And most kids who are fostered are nit healthynwhote babies. In fact, they are the kids who need CHIP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That's funny because I'm tired of Orrin Hatch.

+1. Hang it up, already, old man. We can no longer afford to pay you to sit in Washington doing nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hatch said today that the US didn't have money to pay for CHIP (but I guess it does have money for a $1.5T debt explosion for billionaires)

We pay more per capita on healthcare than any nation on the planet including every modern industrialized nation that provides socialized medicine to cover healthcare for kids. To say we don't have the money is utter bullshit. Our problem isn't lack of money, it's not being managed and allocated properly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't let the kid "die in the gutter".

You take it away.

I wish. There are thousands of responsible, self-sufficient couples who would die for the chance to adopt a needy child. I wish we COULD remove children from irresponsible parents who can't take care of them. But unless the poor parents are outright abusive, we can't. Unfortunately.

This is...not true. There are thousands of kids in foster care available for adoption.

Everyone wants a healthy white infant. Not exposed to drugs in utero. No disabilities. Nobody want a disabled kid, or a crack baby or a meth baby or a screwed up minority 10 year old. And most kids who are fostered are nit healthynwhote babies. In fact, they are the kids who need CHIP.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/07/children-ohio-opioid-epidemic/

Largely because of the opioid epidemic, there were 30,000 more children in foster care in 2015 than there were in 2012...In Texas, Florida, Oregon, and elsewhere, kids have been forced to sleep in state buildings because there were no foster homes available...Federal child welfare money has been dwindling for years, leaving state and local funding to fill in the gaps.

Those are 2015 data. It’s worse now and getting worse still. I guess the problem goes away...when the kids die? Or grow up to be problem adults.

Yeah, good time for a tax break. That’ll make everyone feel better.