Gilchrest sides with Pelosi again
This afternoon, the Democrats tried but failed again to override President Bush's veto of their larded-up and onerous version of the SCHIP reauthorization. And guess who voted for the override?
Yep, you're right, Wayne Gilchrest. Sad thing is he had 41 other GOP partners (including Delaware's Mike Castle), but fellow Free Stater Roscoe Bartlett wasn't one of them.
Something tells me that there's two First District GOP opponents very interested in that vote, not to mention an upcoming candidate forum where it just might be mentioned if a certain blogger gets to ask the question. You think?
Hat tip: the lovely and talented Marylander Michelle Malkin.
Crossposted on monoblogue. Be sure to read the next story down on Red Maryland too.
6 comments:
I'd love to see that...What do you think they are going to say?
See, Wayne Gilchrest's vote today just showed how out of touch he is with the First Congressional District? If Wayne Gilchrest spent any time in the District, he would know that District voters don't care about children.
Or maybe they'll say, vote for us, we won't support efforts to keep kids healthy.
We're pro-life but only between conception and birth, after that, the walking germs must fend for themselves?
Since when did hating on kids become a "conservative" issue? God help the GOP.
Opposing SCHIP expansion is "hating on kids"? Wow, if anyone actually believes that then it shows that person has no knowledge of the substance of the SCHIP debate.
SCHIP was designed as a program to help children in low-income families obtain health coverage. Many states, however, cover children well into the middle class and some even cover adults with their SCHIP dollars. That is a blatant violation of the intention of the program.
Bush wants to pare back SCHIP so that it only covers low-income children. Since there is only so much taxpayer money to go around, it makes sense that those who are given health coverage by this money are those who most need it.
Apparently this common sense attitude means that one is "hating on kids."
And Bush's SCHIP says that a state has to give the health insurance to all the poor kids first. So if a State does want to give health insurance to those 400% above the poverty level, it can as long as it has given it to 95% of those below that 400% level.
That to me is something Demcorats should be pushing for. You know, helping the poor first.
So the Republican principle here is reward the poor and punish those who have worked their way out of poverty and into the middle class.
Seems to me, the middle class is the group of people struggling most to make ends meet...
And some on this blog wonder why Republicans are losing in MD....
"Reward the middle class", huh? Why should we expand an entitlement program to middle class families that can afford private health insurance?
It's true that in Maryland we have very high health insurance premiums, but that's because our legislature has over-regulated the insurance market to such an extent that it drives up costs and drives out insurers. If liberals really want to help the middle class afford insurance, they would start removing some of these regualtions. Instead, they increase the cost of health insurance and then want to use taxpayer money to help the middle class afford it.
Anonymous,
Under your logic we should get rid of Welfare and Medicaid for the poor. I'm all for that.
I would only provide services to children of the needy, but that is my personal preference.
Post a Comment