Bush Balks At Revised Child Health Bill

President Says He'll Veto S-CHIP Measure That Includes Tobacco Tax Increase

(AP)  President Bush told Republican lawmakers on Tuesday he will not agree to legislation expanding children's health insurance if it includes a tobacco tax increase, a decision that virtually ensures a renewed veto struggle with the Democratic-controlled Congress.

The president also suggested he would not be willing to sign other types of tax increases that Democrats have attached to major legislation, including an energy bill, according to numerous officials who attended a closed-door meeting at the White House.

Bush's remarks represented a hardening of the administration's public position in a running veto showdown over Democratic-led attempts to enact legislation that provides coverage for 6 million children who now lack it. The officials who disclosed his comments did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were made in a closed-door meeting.

The president vetoed one children's health bill, and Democrats failed to override him in the House.

His threat to veto a replacement measure that cleared the House last week has led to a hurried round of negotiations among lawmakers in both parties and both houses.

Their goal is to reach a compromise that can command enough votes to gain the two-thirds majority needed in both houses to override the president's veto, if necessary.

The negotiations were private, but in an ominous sign for the White House, Republican leaders said during the day they might defy a White House veto.

House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio, asked if he might support a bill that the president would not sign, he replied: “That's always a possibility.”

In a similar vein, House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo., said he would “have to see the bill” before deciding.

Their comments were the clearest sign yet that even Bush's most loyal House allies are eager for an end to the impasse, which many Republicans see as politically damaging to the GOP.

The White House has said previously it opposes tobacco tax increases that Democrats included in the health care legislation, but only after first detailing numerous other objections. Additionally, the president's press aides have declined repeatedly to say whether he would sign a bill that raised taxes.

Bush supplied somewhat more emphasis in public comments Tuesday.

“You know, they proposed tax increases in the farm bill, the energy bill, the small business bill and of course,” the children's health bill, he said of Democrats. “They haven't seen a bill they could not solve without shoving a tax hike into it. In other words, they believe in raising taxes, and we don't.

The vetoed bill would have brought the number of insured children to 10 million. The bill covered kids from families who make too much money to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford private health insurance.

The estimated $35 million cost of the measure would be covered by higher taxes on tobacco products, including 61 cents per pack of cigarettes.

Several officials said that in the meeting with Bush, Rep. Joe Barton of Texas asked a question about the president's intentions with the health insurance measure. They said the president responded that he wants his budget director, Jim Nussle, to identify spending cuts to offset the cost of any measure.

They also said Bush appeared to extend his no-tax-increase pledge to other measures. They quoted him as saying that if he signed the tobacco tax increase, it would be difficult to draw the line later on other bills.

Barton could not be reached for comment.

The health insurance bill has emerged as a key flash point between Bush and the Democrats in Congress.

The bill's supporters need to add only about a dozen House Republicans to the 44 who voted Oct. 18 to override Bush's veto. If ongoing negotiations can gain that number, and ideally a lot more, then GOP leaders could embrace the deal regardless of the president's stance, Boehner's and Blunt's comments indicated.

Taxes aside, other sticking points have revolved around Republican demands that poor children gain coverage before others are insured and that strict provisions are included to prevent benefits going to illegal immigrants.

Bush, and most House Republicans, also want to eliminate or reduce participation by adults and families earning more than $62,000 or so.

Boehner said of the disagreement with Bush over how to pay for the program's expansion: “He has his position. The House Republicans have their position.”

House Democratic leaders last week said they had addressed many criticisms of the bill and put the revised version to a vote. Most Republicans, encouraged by Boehner and Blunt, rejected the changes, which some called politically motivated.

The bill passed, 265-142. Opposition from 141 Republicans kept it from reaching a two-thirds majority.

The Senate gave the legislation a veto-proof majority from the start, with the enthusiastic backing of senior Republicans such as Sens. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah.

[gunnerv1]

Seven ***-heads, oh sorry, seven pesos, oh sorry, siete-pesos, welcome back, missed ya like a bad case of southeren white trash clap

[gunnerv1]

25 year olds are not childre and $83,000.00 is not poverty by any streach of the imignation and I don''t care what part of the country this is about!

[forthepeopl1]

"It''''s one thing if someone believes in what''''s going on over there and volunteers, but it''''s another thing to send someone over there on a forced assignment, and I''''m sorry but basically that''''s a potential death sentence," Jack Croddy, a senior Foreign Service officer, said on that call.

AS A FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICERS THEY HAVE TO DO WHAT THEY ARE TOLD TO DO JUST AS OUR TROOPS...NO DIFFERENT,

BUT IT IS FUNNY TO SEE THEM NOW SAY TO THE GOVERNEMNT F/U/C/K/ OFF,CRYING LIKE BABYS NOW THAT THEY HAVE TO GO OVER...EVERYTHINGS OK UNTIL SOMEONE TELL A EMPLOYEE OF THE GOVERNEMNT TO GO OVER TO WHAT BUSH/CHENEY SAY IS THE SAFEST PLAY ON EARTH...FUNNY I CANT STOP LAUGHTING..HA.HA.HA,HA,

[usaprophet]

Ron Paul represents a different Republican Party from the one that Iraq, deficits and corruption have soured the country on. It''s ironic that other GOP candidates are scared to death of his message, BECAUSE his is more conservative than theirs. Being anti-war IS conservative. Another key difference between his message and the others is that he is a strong defender in The Constitution, which protects our civil liberties. The other Republican cadidates, who are mostly NWO Oligarchs, want to erase your liberties. They''ve tried hard to exlude him from the spotlight, along with the mainstream press. In late June, despite a life of antitax agitation and pious churchgoing, he was excluded from a Republican forum sponsored by Iowa antitax and Christian groups. Ron Paul does not represent your Father''s style of Republicanism. He represents your Founding Father''s style. He stands for a certain idea of the Constitution; the idea that much of the power asserted by modern presidents has been usurped from Congress, and that much of the power asserted by Congress has been usurped from the states. Though Dr. Paul acknowledges flaws in both the Constitution (it included slavery) and the Bill of Rights (it doesn%u2019t go far enough), he still thinks a comprehensive array of positions can be drawn therefrom: against gun control; for the sovereignty of states; and against foreign-policy adventures. His message draws on the noblest traditions of American decency and patriotism.

[pakaal]

Instead of cutting back on insurance for children (Bush''s plan), Congress wants to insure more children. Yeah, absolutely crazy. Who wouldn''t rather have Bush''s "Fewer Children Left Insured" policy? Particularly when Congress is trying to offset the money spent by using taxation of a vice!

PS USAProphet: Ron who?

[usaprophet]

To those who don''t vote: Voter disenfranchisement and apathy infects the heart of our democracy. Get off your couch, put your remote control down, and become active in your nation''s political process. The pathetically few people that do vote in this country, a.k.a., "the ruling class", who currently get to decide under what kind of conditions (and Laws) you and your family will live, are certainly involved. I can assure you of that. In fact, the ruling class would be much happier if you would just continue to stay home and watch TV in your pleasantly distracted and brainwashed, stupor. That way they can continue to elect their political ****** to office, and continue to maintain their grip on 100% of the political power they currently own in this country. If you voted (God Forbid), it would cancel-out their vote, and they would lose control. They can''t have that. Can they? If you don''t vote, my friends, you''re nothing but an unwashed "Pleb" to those that do, and the ruling class should rightfully consider themselves superior to you in every way. They do, after all, have all the power, while you have none. If you''re too apathetic and powerless to do anything for yourself more time-consuming than driving down to Mickey D''s to buy a milk shake in order to sieze control of your life, and your country''s destiny, then perhaps you deserve to be ruled over like the "Pleb" that you then are. The time to act is now. The time for political revolution has come. The time for Ron Paul is NOW!

[cinemanetwork20]

the only thing good i can say about president bUSH is that we only have to put up with him for 15 more months TANK GOD

[cinemanetwork20]

THE ONLY GOOD I CAN SAY ABOUT PRESIDENT BUSH IS THAT HE ONLY HAVE TO PIT UP WITH HIM FOR 15 MORE MONTHSTHANK GOD

[siete-pesos]

not one southern state will vote for hillary.

the south prefers upstanding, christian , faith professing republicans

and top notch leadership like george bush, jr.

the south would like to find another prez like george bush. jr.

the southern states are considering drafting rush limbaugh to be the republican candidate.

he has all the qualifications...

fat, bigoted, republican, christian, drug user, demogogue.

oh well, that''s the south for you, folks!

[oscarez]

Bush does not care about the health of American children just as he does not care about the health of children in Iraq. He does not care about the epidemics of cholera which is killing thousands of Iraqi children. Cholera that did not exist in Iraq until the USA invaded destroying the clean water supplies and sanitation. If poor kids health care in the USA cost to much I guess helping kids in Iraq would be impossible. I''m sure Bush sleeps like a baby every night.

[usaprophet]

People have gotten wise to the fact that vaccines are contaminated with DNA fragments, viruses, fungus, mercury, and a cocktail of other poisonous toxins. Fleets of reputable studies have been published globally detailing the wide swaths of destruction caused by vaccines, including autism. So, now the establishment is on the offensive, attempting to bully us into submission. Big Pharma is one of the biggest businesses in the world. It is among the top three purchasers of advertisement in print, TV and radio. Thay have major pull. President Bush recently vetoed a Bill which would have forced Big Pharma to remove mercury from vaccines. If that''s not bad enough, parts of the so-called Patriot Act contains provisions that essentialy remove the spectre of civil liability against Big Pharma with respect to vaccines. This was done in the name of protecting Big Pharma in case they had to quickly develop a vaccine to combat some unforseen form of biological terrorism. No other candidate for President understands health issues as well as Dr. Ron Paul does. He not only supported the Bill which would have removed mercury from our vaccines, he voted against the Patriot Act as well. Dr. Paul., an OB/GYN physician, who has delivered over 4,000 babies, has been the national leader in preserving our Health Freedom. He feels that Americans are justifiably concerned over the government''s escalating intervention into our freedom to choose what we eat and how they take care of our health. Go Ron Paul!

[usaprophet]

Dr. Paul., an OB/GYN physician, has been the national leader in preserving our Health Freedom. He feels that Americans are justifiably concerned over the government''s escalating intervention into their freedom to choose what they eat and how they take care of their health. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in order to comply with standards dictated by supra-national organizations such as the UN''s World Food Code (CODEX), NAFTA, and CAFTA, has been assuming greater control over nutrients, vitamins and natural health care providers to restrict your right to choose the manner in which you manage your health and nutritional needs. He introduced the Health Freedom Protection Act, HR 2117, to ensure Americans can receive truthful health information about supplements and natural remedies. He supports the Access to Medical Treatment Act, H.R. 2717, which expands the ability of Americans to use alternative medicine and new treatments. He opposes legislation that increases the FDA''s legal powers. FDA has consistently failed to protect the public from dangerous drugs, genetically modified foods, dangerous pesticides and other chemicals in the food supply. Meanwhile they waste public funds attacking safe, healthy foods and dietary supplements. He also opposed the Homeland Security Bill, H.R. 5005, which, in section 304, authorizes the forced vaccination of American citizens against small pox. The government should never have the power to require immunizations or vaccinations.

[fizzie319]

Abbe,

Reading the proposal right now, and its not mentioning anything about cutting Subsidies:

TITLE VII%u2014REVENUE PROVISIONS
Sec. 701. Increase in excise tax rate on tobacco products.
Sec. 702. Administrative improvements.
Sec. 703. Time for payment of corporate estimated taxes

This is all the information that is given for funding the program unfortunately... Does anyone have any more information on it?

http://www.rules.house.gov/110/text/senate_hr976.pdf

This is the childrens health bill... If anyone has any other links please post...

[abbe91]

"That is called Mediacare and Medicaid, ...
Posted by jowand at 09:24 AM : Oct 31, 2007"

No, this isn''''t. TheSe are direct spending programs.

[tucano2]

The so-called child health bill is nothing more than another attempt to transfer Billions of American Citizen taxdollars to Illegal Aliens, and the entire program needs to be eliminated.

[abbe91]

What about cutting subsidies from public taxpayer money to healthcare private companies, then ? If I''''''''m not mistaken, this was in the original proposal ...
Posted by abbe91 at 06:49 AM : Oct 31, 2007

"That is called Mediacare and Medicaid, ...
Posted by jowand at 09:24 AM : Oct 31, 2007"

No, this isn''t. There are direct spending programs.

[terrapin78]

Bu$h and Repugs in Congress had a meeting after getting thrashed in the 2006 election and agreed to not let any Democratic initiated legislation thru. So the Dem led Congress looks like a Do Nothing Congress like the previous, Repug led Congress.

That is why Bu$h has begun vetoing legislation. IMO, less to be "fiscally responsible" than to try and foll Americans that Congress is doing nothing.

Does not work on me. My eyes are open! No rose colored glasses.

[tejasdemo]

Go to hell Bush, Cheney, and all the slimeball Republicans who didnt sign off on this legislation.

[mudrose-2009]

That is called Mediacare and Medicaid, what do you want goverment doctors and nurses?
Posted by jowand

Certain elements that will not support themselves and expect everything free which actually means it will be on the backs on the upper and middle classes to subsidize them want free doctors and nurses. Only problem is they won''t be free and they won''t be available and good, quality health care will be something of the past or only something that the haves will be able to get. Sorta defeats the purpose of universale healthcare, now doesn''t it.

[sgtrds]

what do you want goverment doctors and nurses?

Posted by jowand at 09:24 AM : Oct 31, 2007

Yes.