Thursday, October 4, 2007
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
a voice for the people
today has been one of those hectic, chaotic days that happen more often than what i'd like.
to top off the night, i was reading an article about the recent veto from president bush.
he's an idiot. am i allowed to say that? oh well, i just did.
i admit, if i were old enough, i would have probably voted for him (the first time).
anyway when i was reading the article, i undoubtedly thought my head was going to explode.
the bill, which would have spent $35 billion over five years, would have doubled the number of children eligible for the state children's health program, providing health care to 10 million american children for the next 5 years, costing the u.s. $7 billion in annual costs, was vetoed by bush.
granted, $7 billion does seem like a lot of money, especially to someone who will never see that much money in their life time (me). but how does $7 billion compare to the deteriorating war in iraq?
it's pocket change.
the war estimates at a direct cost of $300 million a day, which translates into a couple of billion dollars a week and results in over $200 billion a year, according to an recent new york times article.
"The president and Republicans in Congress say that we can't afford this bill, but where were the fiscal conservatives when the president demanded hundreds of billions of dollars for the war in Iraq?" asked Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Illinois (cnn.com).
according to the article on www.cnn.com, the program gives coverage to parents who make too much to qualify for medicaid but not enough to buy private insurance for their children.
hhmmmm...well that covers about every family I know.
critics have said their concern is that parents might be prompted to drop private coverage for their children to get cheaper coverage under the bill, according to cnn.
hmm...well considering our tax dollars are paying for it, it does make sense.
i don't think the program should be abused, but available to those in need. children are helpless and totally dependent on their parents (the government) for such things as health care.
"I think that this is probably the most inexplicable veto in the history of the country. It is incomprehensible. It is intolerable. It's unacceptable," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, who pleaded with Republicans to help overturn the veto.
i thought the government acted as a voice for the people:
a washington post-abc news poll conducted September 27-30 found 72 percent of those surveyed support an increase in spending on the program, with 25 percent opposed. The poll's margin of error was 3 percentage points.
i guess i was wrong.
"The people are the only legitimate foundation of power, and it is from them that the constitution charter...derived. The government is and should be the servant of the people, and it should be fully accountable to them for their actions which it supposedly takes on their behalf."(an essay published by James Madison, the fourth president and known as the father of the constitution, in the Federalist Papers in 1788).
the veto is the fourth of bush's presidency. after not using his veto power at all during his first four years, the president has vetoed three other bills in his second term: two on stem-cell research legislation and one on a war funding bill with a democratic timetable for withdrawing u.s. troops from Iraq.
whhheww- i feel better.
thanks for listening to todays rant =)
to top off the night, i was reading an article about the recent veto from president bush.
he's an idiot. am i allowed to say that? oh well, i just did.
i admit, if i were old enough, i would have probably voted for him (the first time).
anyway when i was reading the article, i undoubtedly thought my head was going to explode.
the bill, which would have spent $35 billion over five years, would have doubled the number of children eligible for the state children's health program, providing health care to 10 million american children for the next 5 years, costing the u.s. $7 billion in annual costs, was vetoed by bush.
granted, $7 billion does seem like a lot of money, especially to someone who will never see that much money in their life time (me). but how does $7 billion compare to the deteriorating war in iraq?
it's pocket change.
the war estimates at a direct cost of $300 million a day, which translates into a couple of billion dollars a week and results in over $200 billion a year, according to an recent new york times article.
"The president and Republicans in Congress say that we can't afford this bill, but where were the fiscal conservatives when the president demanded hundreds of billions of dollars for the war in Iraq?" asked Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Illinois (cnn.com).
according to the article on www.cnn.com, the program gives coverage to parents who make too much to qualify for medicaid but not enough to buy private insurance for their children.
hhmmmm...well that covers about every family I know.
critics have said their concern is that parents might be prompted to drop private coverage for their children to get cheaper coverage under the bill, according to cnn.
hmm...well considering our tax dollars are paying for it, it does make sense.
i don't think the program should be abused, but available to those in need. children are helpless and totally dependent on their parents (the government) for such things as health care.
"I think that this is probably the most inexplicable veto in the history of the country. It is incomprehensible. It is intolerable. It's unacceptable," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, who pleaded with Republicans to help overturn the veto.
i thought the government acted as a voice for the people:
a washington post-abc news poll conducted September 27-30 found 72 percent of those surveyed support an increase in spending on the program, with 25 percent opposed. The poll's margin of error was 3 percentage points.
i guess i was wrong.
"The people are the only legitimate foundation of power, and it is from them that the constitution charter...derived. The government is and should be the servant of the people, and it should be fully accountable to them for their actions which it supposedly takes on their behalf."(an essay published by James Madison, the fourth president and known as the father of the constitution, in the Federalist Papers in 1788).
the veto is the fourth of bush's presidency. after not using his veto power at all during his first four years, the president has vetoed three other bills in his second term: two on stem-cell research legislation and one on a war funding bill with a democratic timetable for withdrawing u.s. troops from Iraq.
whhheww- i feel better.
thanks for listening to todays rant =)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)