Feedback Forum

Send us your opinions, reactions, and ideas about "Children's Health Care Showdown"

Submissions for this question are no longer being accepted. Previously submitted comments appear below. Comments may have been edited for content or space.

Poster: Jack W. Martin
Comment: Having a spouse who is an insurance claims examiner has opened my eyes to the adversarial relationship with claimants in a variety of product areas. Government is attacking the wrong end if they want big underwriters in the mix. Write good government regulated policies and then let them step in to administer these as part of a completely universal pool with taxes paying reasonable premiums for the indigent and working poor. If big old Prudential, Kaiser, Blue Cross and others refuse we will have proven it is time for a Medicare-like single payer system. At present, most insurance policies are defective and deceptive products, just like leaded toys from slave wage nations. I could tell you thousands of horror stories about disability insurance claims, let alone medical.

Poster: Kathy
Comment: I am sick to death of paying taxes for other people's children. I never had children, glad of it now. The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS NO BUSINESS IN HEALTH CARE. SCHIP sounds like the prelude to socialized medicine and socialism. Hell, send it to Canada.

Poster: Lynn Marquardt
Comment: Re: EarthRights International I have long thought that if it is illegal for anyone to abuse people or the environment in this country that these laws should extend beyond our borders. Wrong is wrong. Therefore, it should be ILLEGAL to import any product or service the production of which caused abuse of people or the environment anywhere. Lynn Marquardt If you wish for peace, work for justice!

Poster: Greg
Comment: Democracy and capitalism are different things. They may have many goals in common, but a poltical system which serves the will of the majority and an economic system which serves the interests of the owners of capital often conflict. The Governor of Georgia, the Senator from Kentucky and President Bush have on their records the deaths of working class people. And they know this; their Rovian advisers can no longer lie to us with their marketing lingo -- this will not wash the blood off their hands.

Poster: Bonnie I.
Comment: NO. The government should not pay for children's health care. We, as parents, should be responsible for our family's health care. Of course, for the very poor, there should be help. It is also not fair for us, the United States, to pay for illegal aliens' health care. I am sure that this is not a popular response to you at this site. I assure you that I am a caring person who has given a great deal to help children here and abroad. I find it frustrating that we never hear the other side (in a fair way) to this issue. Rather anyone opposed is painted as a monster and uninformed. I challenge you to be fair to this issue.

Poster: Scott C. Palmer (I)
Comment: I don't mind improving health care for children, i do mind placing the financial burden on smokers alone. Prove to me that non-smokers will be paying an 'equal' share of the cost of the S-chip program and i might agree with it, I am a smoker and i resent non-smokers forcing me to pay for their programs. If the S-chip bill/law was funded exclusively by non-smokers, would the Democratic Party still want to pass that law?

Poster: Mary Lillie
Comment: I am so saddened at the direction our country is going. Children are no longer looked at as our future but as a liability that we cannot afford. When we will again become the "we" nation (as in WE The People of the United States) and not the "me" people (as in what's in it for me?).

Poster: Jim
Comment: Why is it that so many Americans think it is the responsibility of the American taxpayer to foot the healthcare bill for irresponsible American parents? If individual states wish to offer healthcare coverage to their respective residents...fine, go for it but don't drag the federal government into this welfare scheme. Take time to read our Constitution. Nowhere, repeat, NOWHERE, is the federal government authorized to sponsor these Constitutionally illegal programs such as SChip.

Poster: Chris W.
Comment: I believe that taking care of our children is important. However I do not believe that putting that responsibility in the hands of the federal government is the answer and here is why: The government is run by politicians, not by experts in the field of health care. They do not work in the day to day activities and therefore do not know the intricate details of how the system works and what REALLY should be done to make the health care system work. We are talking about socialized health care and once it goes into effect for children it will then spread to adults. There will be too much waste of taxpayer money if the government is allowed to have a big hand in health care and this has been proven time and time again in other areas of government.

We need to come up with a solution to this VERY complex issue in which private companies and entrepreneurial individuals run this to drive down costs, increase efficiencies and provide a better overall service to those who need health care. Allowing the government to interfere will only make the problem worse and more complex. I don't understand why so many people in America today think the government will be our savior in so many aspects of our lives.

Poster: Robert Holsclaw
Comment: I believe that health care should be provided to all children and adults. This program should be based upon providing health care without the profit motive of the big insurance companies. They are not interested in the health of people but are primarily interested in profits. I was born in 1929 when the nation was primarily a poor nation. My parents and many others took care of their own health problems in a direct relationship with the doctor.

A cut in the hospital emergency room could in todays health care system could cost you a thousand dollars. Inflation and the profit motive have destroyed the people/doctor relationship. People can take care of a lot of their own health problems and if needed get an appointment directly with a doctor without an insurance company deciding on what level of health care should be provided. Get rid of the middle man!! The patient and the doctor can decide on the level of healthcare needed!

Poster: Joe
Comment: I watched your program on the SCHIP controversy last night. What a bunch of socialist propoganda! Putting crying children on TV to pull at the heartstrings of Americans to further march down the road to socialist tyranny! The founding fathers would never approve of the federal government sending taxpayer money to the states for this reason. This is a state and local issue only. If the citizens of the states want health care for children then they need to petition their state legislatures and governors for such a program!

Poster: Wm. Crosson
Comment: Hello, Why is the debate on universal health care never, to my knowledge, paired with national security? The reluctance of a person to pursue health care because of financial reasons could let illness spread through a population. Financial considerations should never be a reason for a government to deny universal health care for the people within its borders. Notice I have used �people�, not �citizens�. Universal health care should be provided to non-citizens also. Germs do not consider a person�s citizenship before attacking or spreading.

The next time you eat at a public place ask yourself, �Does the person cooking, or serving, my food have access to healthcare? Would that person go to a doctor if they were experiencing a fever? Did they have a doctor look at that rash on their hand? Can they afford to purchase the full prescription of medicines the doctor recommended, or will they get a partial prescription?

Poster: Ross
Comment: Our government (we, the people) should not be providing health insurance for any person. Our government (we, the people) should be providing health care for all persons in our nation. Health insurance makes wealthy corporate insurance Chief Executive Officers, and Chairmen of the Board, and Board Members, without having to actually maintain healthy clients.

Poster: Jeffrey Slott
Comment: I must protest this broadcast of 11/09/07 and the scene where the diabetic girl's mother states that if her child did not receive her morning insulin she would be dead by nighttime. This is totally deceptive information. I have been a Type 1 diabetic for 40 years. While it is certainly not advisable to miss any insulin injection, there is no way that doing so will result in a nearly immediate fatality. Death from hyperglycemia (high-blood sugar) could only occur if a person was to consistently refrain from insulin injections for a good many months, maybe even a year.

There is more of an immediate threat from hypoglycemia (low-blood sugar) than its opposite... Not only that but when I heard that the family must spend $900 a month on the care of the girl, I was flabbergasted. I only spend at the most forty (40!) dollars a month on my diabetic needs. I follow a strict diet, take my insulin injection religiously once a day (because it's the proper thing to do, not because I would be dead by 8 pm if I didn't) and exercise properly. According to my doctor, I am in EXCELLENT health.

Poster: Jennifer-Oakland, CA
Comment: This situation is outrageous! How can an administration consent to spending billions of dollars on useless wars around the world and neglect its own citizenry who are in need?? Many of the children who are being negatively affected by the president's veto of the S-Chip bill are members of families where the parent(s) are indeed working, but who are not receiving health care insurance due to exorbitant costs.

In truth, the children are often the only ones fortunate enough to receive heath insurance, while parents forsake their own health care to ensure the care of their child(ren), present company included. This is both sad and risky. Other nations have made health coverage work for their citizens for years such as Canada and some of the European and Scandinavian countries. So much research has been conducted on this topic, with solutions proposed by persons much more knowledgeable than myself. What's with us America? Why can't we get our stuff together on this very basic human need? The future will be dire for us ALL, rich and not so rich alike, if some kind of pandemic breaks out, when an ounce of prevention could have set a more humanistic future. This really makes me sick. Thank you for presenting this to us on NOW.

Poster: Barbara Power
Comment: Not providing health coverage for children in need is a human rights abuse that should be treated and publicized as such. This is criminal neglect. This is a premeditated act which inflicts pain and suffering on those who are in need and who have no political voice or power. I speak out on many issues. I am fair to those in Washington--but this tops all of the abuses of power I have borne witness to by this administration.

Poster: Su
Comment: Everyone should have access to publicy funded health care! Other nations have health care for their citizens, and it is a shame that USA does not take care of their citizens and have health care for everyone, irregardless of their income.

Poster: Eileen
Comment: Children are our future, and with an ever increasing need for good workforce they are our best investment. It just makes sense to insure the health of all our children.

Poster: Scott Firestone
Comment: I watched your report and wondered what country I live in. The inhumanity of letting our own children suffer while smearing the victims and proposing bills to make them suffer more. What have we come to? And how have we gotten here?

Poster: Jane (Virginia)
Comment: How many would be in favor of SCHIP if they had to pay higher taxes for it? As long as it's just the smokers paying for it, people are crawling out of the woodwork to press Congress to pass it. I side with the White House this one and only time. Now if he would do this with all those other bills, that would be great! But Democrats act like they're trying to win a race with the Republicans to see who can spend and waste the most money. They�ve allowed greed to run rampant, they�ll eventually have to raise taxes to pay for our nation�s debt, and look, they've already got you screaming for them to raise taxes - except it's just a certain group that will be paying it. If it was everyone who had to foot the bill, would you still be such bleeding hearts? As a smoker, I've been paying for SCHIP since 1997 and I haven't heard one single thank you from anyone. Now the Democrats want us to pay a minimum of $1 more per pack to cover "the children."

Poster: Lee Mar
Comment: How about insurance for adults, they are older and far more likely to become ill? Children with sick, bankrupt or dead parents can't stay healthy. Of course children need insurance, as does everyone else. Every presidential candidate should be asked their views on "Sicko." A tax credit for a basic government standardized policy from competing private insurance companies would solve the problem, with a stroke of the pen. Make American business more competitive, then adjust the personal tax rates.

Poster: d. schwartz
Comment: Why are government employees, from the president on down, entitled to more health and welfare benefits than the minimum received by the children of those they serve?

Poster: Franklin Lane
Comment: It is interesting to note that the Bush administration supports the right to life but it does not provide the means for children to have an equal start or to share equally in the medical resources of our country.

Poster: Valerie-Ann Rumpf
Comment: It makes me so mad that we as a country claim to put our children first, but because children can't vote, certain members of Congress assume that children don't need these programs. I honestly believe that what they did was stupid, because in the end, we're all going to pay in terms of higher costs for health care anyways. I would rather pay and give kids that really need health insurance, have coverage, than have to pay because someone was uninsured and went to the ER simply because they did not access to preventative/ routine care.

Poster: Ingrid H.
Comment: Children are our best assets -- our future. It is our duty and privilege to provide them with at least the most basic needs.

Poster: Concerned in PA
Comment: Perhaps if this program was better managed and did not permit the abuse of certain states expanding it, on their own, to cover adults we might get somewhere. PLUS why tax only cigarettes, why not tax all of the other commodities that directly contribute to this nation's poor health? Suggestions would be Fast Foods, Soft Drinks and the worst of all, Alcohol. Fair is Fair. No reasonable person wants to see children go without proper health care, but if taxpayers are paying for it, let's make sure everybody contributes, equally.

Poster: Andrew Robson
Comment: If we had universal health care (single payer), all these problems would disappear. If everyone is within the system, losing a job (or the myriad other situations that lead to having no health insurance) is irrelevant. We are the only wealthy country on the world where loss of health care is even possible. We should be ashamed, and we should demand universal health insurance.

Poster: Lawrence Wiles
Comment: I watched the show portion on SCHIP. You provided a very one-sided view of the situation. I have empathy for the family laid off, but at no time did there seem to be a great deal of initiative on their part. Both parents getting jobs even if part time. I in my past have had to work several jobs to close the gap. However, not once did I expect someone else to pay my way. The young single parent with day care problems, etc., did not once mention the father and his need to be financially responsible for his child. She is part of the mindset that "I deserve a child and all the things that come from having a family." Getting attached to the nanny government teat is a way of life. The show failed to be honest about the funding request from the President. He raised the amount, but not to the liking of the socialist. Only in the minds of Democrats and socialists is not funding to your liking a cut even if it is higher than a previous level. The young man used by the Democrats to be their poster child is a perfect example of how thing are going wrong. His parents started a business, but did not properly fund it to include insurance. Their business model should have included insurance provisions, not sticking their snoot into the trough of the welfare state.

Poster: Bill
Comment: I pay 25% of my gross income for my insurance. I have paid taxes my entire life - over 40 years. Why should I be burdened with paying more taxes to cover insurance for children of parents who make more than me! I cannot afford many health-related expenses that I need as it is & split pills too! Is this the future this country wants for taxpayers?

Poster: Patricia
Comment: Every child...actually, every person, should have basic health care coverage in a country with the riches and opportunities that we have. I have lived with Type 1 diabetes for 30 years and can empathize with those families struggling for coverage of services for their sick children. Children with chronic conditions like diabetes fall through the cracks when there are not assurances of coverage...and the current economic and political realities provides NONE.

Poster: James
Comment: Health insurance should not be provided to all children. Only those at or below the poverty line.