Bush Should Place Higher Priority on Providing Health Coverage for the Uninsured, Editorial Says

Although President Bush has called access to health insurance for low-income families in America "a goal worthy of our nation," that goal is "not as worthy, it turns out," as a 10-year, $1.35 trillion tax cut or an $18.4 billion increase in defense spending, a Los Angeles Times editorial states. Because of the tax cut and a slowing economy, federal budget surplus projections have fallen "so much" that HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson said last week the government could not expand CHIP "as planned," the editorial adds. Thompson said that the Bush administration will still "press" for refundable tax credits -- $1,000 for individuals, $2,000 for couples -- to help Americans purchase private health insurance. The editorial says that tax credits might help some uninsured Americans, but because a health insurance policy for a family of four costs about $5,000 to $7,000 per year, the credits still "leave a big gap for low-income families." The editorial adds that the insurance industry, which supports tax credits, also favors expanding government programs such as CHIP, pointing out that the industry "knows that providing government subsidies for those too poor to afford private premiums makes economic sense." Americans without health insurance often use "already overcrowded emergency rooms" for primary care, and the public "bears the costs" through higher premiums or delayed care. According to the editorial, the federal government should provide basic health care for the uninsured to promote "public health" and "social well-being." The editorial concludes that expanding CHIP would "cover more people in a more efficient manner. It shouldn't be lost to the shrinking surplus and a careless tax cut" (Los Angeles Times, 8/29).