John Kerry Fights for “KidsFirst” Health Care Plan

[kerrygoddess]

John Kerry Fights for “KidsFirst” Health Care Plan
March 31st, 2006 @ 1:34 pm

John Kerry addresses the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners today in Washington, DC. The focus of his speech was his “KidsFirst” Health Care Plan. The following is the text of his speech as prepared for delivery and received by The Democratic Daily:

I am deeply humbled by the work you do. Nurses are among America’s greatest heroes — too often unsung heroes.

We might not always say it when we are rushing through the emergency room with a child that has a broken arm; or dashing from the school physical to make it to soccer practice; or when a parent leaves your offices upset with a confirmation that a child has a developmental disability – but we appreciate you. We value you. We are comforted by your expertise and the caring, professional manner that you wrap around us and our families when we seek your services. Give yourselves a round of applause.

The question is whether Washington is going to change the way business is done and give you more than words of thanks – more than applause – and give you the kind of change that helps you do your job.

And if the current leadership in Washington won’t stand with you, the good news is – this is an election year. Let’s make use of it. We need to make your issues the voting issues in our country – and to do that we have to make the every day injustices of our health care system as real for people as the horrific images Katrina left in its wake. Because the truth about health care is more than the faceless, soulless numbers. Any politician can effortlessly recite every statistic about 48 million uninsured Americans, the healthcare premiums increasing at three times the rate of inflation, and the cost of prescription drugs going up over 10% every year. But that doesn’t mean they understand the real human consequences of those numbers like you do.

MORE - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=2484

[PresidentObama]

1. Wonderful speech

As usual from Senator Kerry. Good to see he's still spreading the word about his "Kids First" plan. Healthcare is an important issue, especially among Americans most vulnerable citizens--children. What is the statistic? Like 8 to 12 million children without healthcare out of the 45 million. Thats horrifying.

Great work Senator Kerry. Putting kids first, and putting Americans first.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

7. Did you Kerry fans not get his important email?

or did you simply not see any value in passing the word along as he asked?
read the most current words by KERRY here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2545210 If we can't even do as he asks how can we call ourselves Kerry supporters?

[WildEyedLiberal]

16. No offense, sir

But most of us can multitask. Your thread is already out there, as are a few other threads. Check out the Kerry supporters forum here on DU - it's been posted there as well.

I and many other Kerry supporters have already donated to his cause to elect senators in 2006. It is helpful as well to let DU know what good things he is trying to do in the Senate for us.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

24. I agree wild eyed liberal and you certainly did more than your fair share

without your comments my thread raising funds for candidates Kerry wants to help might have quickly faded into obscurity.

[wisteria]

53. It is only fair that we take care of the most vulnerable among us-

the children. This plan of Senator Kerry's does it very well, taking care of the health needs of children, holding their parents responsible and not costing any additional money. I think it also saves the states money also. The only people hurt by this plan are the wealthiest among us, because the money from this will come from rolling back their tax breaks.

[leftstreet]

2. So kids are more important than seniors?

As a nation, we should make sure our children are cared for as we watch our seniors die off under a Medicare Death Plan?

I hate this DLC crap.

[kerrygoddess]

3. Seniors have Medicare

Kids have nothing! Medicare may not be perfect but it's something. That's not friggin DLC crap.

[Vinca]

6. Fifty-somethings don't

and most of us need to stay well to care for the kids and seniors. I wish Senator Kerry would go directly to the big picture: health care FOR ALL. But, at least he's doing something. That's more than I can say for the rest of them.

[kerrygoddess]

10. Something

No doubt he'd prefer healthcare for all. And this is more than the rest of the Dems are doing. Where is their support on this?

[zann725]

38. Medicare's being cut A LOT this year. No one's talking yet.

For example, "Physical Therapy" which most elderly or Disabled people often need in many forms...previously had NO "cap" per year under Medicare. THIS year, that "cap" is set at JUST $1,700?!!! You know how much physical therapy that will buy for someone in a wheelchair or with a serious disability? And how many less qualified doctors will be turning Medicare patients away for lack of covered "care?"

I'm thrilled that Kerry cares about "Kids First", but we MUSTN'T forget the Elderly and Disabled who under the "new Medicare" (with Plan "D")...are basically now on a plan that focuses on DRUGGING them, over REAL medical care. "Drugging" a sick or elderly person is NOT medical care.

"ALL humans NOW." We all matter...each and every one of us NOW. Grandma and Grandpa, and the wheel-chair guy on the street...and the lack of medical care that put him there.

[David Dunham]

4. Dems need to help Seniors too. Besides, Seniors vote, kids don't.

[WildEyedLiberal]

15. Dems do help seniors

And saying that kids can go to hell and die without health insurance because they don't vote so we don't need to do anything for them is an awfully callous implication.

[karynnj]

8. When he started this effort he explained why

Given the Congress, there was no remote chance to get a bill passed to provide insurance for all. There was a remote chance to get children insured - it costs less and partially pays for itself because prevention (for kids) is cheaper than letting the problems develop.

His 2004 plan was more inclusive - as there would be a far more receptive President who would veto making the tax cuts permanent.

[JI7]

11. seniors get a much better deal in this country than kids

and Kerry never said it was one or the other. are those who fight for social security or medicare only concerned about seniors ?

but kids are one of the most neglected groups in this country just because they don't vote. i'm glad Kerry is focusing on this area even though it wont get him many votes.

[loyalsister]

39. Yeah- their nursing homes are even paid for

under Medicaid if things get bad enough. Very well cared for. Yes, they get a good health insurance plan, but guess what? They need it.
The reason they have a plan is that we decided we don't just let people die when the natural proccess of life catching up with them begins and their bodies are breaking down.
It is important to make a move to start younger with preventative health care.
But, the whining about what seniors get is silly. It's not like they like it. The thing that really sucks is most of them have to use it!
That would be less so, if they would get a jump on preventative care for adults, as well.

[JI7]

41. it's not whining about what seniors get

i was pointing out to those whining about the thought that kids would get anything that seniors do get more just because they vote.

i never said anything about taking anything away or not improving on it.

but there are a lot of people on here who seem offended at the thought of proposing anything for kids.

[loyalsister]

42. I don't find it offensive

but I do think it is a pitifully low standard plan and if we pretend it is actually doing something big, we will see little risk taking or creativity on the part of democratic leaders.

[WildEyedLiberal]

44. Why don't you stop whining?

This plan would cover ALL kids. Since Democrats have been trying and failing for 40 years to get universal health care, MAYBE we could at least guilt enough Republicans into supporting health care for CHILDREN so that SOME people are covered, which is certainly better than NOBODY.

Jesus. If Feingold had endorsed this bill, it'd be fucking manna from heaven, but since it was Kerry, all the trolls and mouthbreathers are out bitching. Get a fucking life.

[LittleClarkie]

12. You've completely lost me.

You make it sound as if, because he has a plan for one segment of the population, that he wants the rest of the population to rot.

And how is wanting health care for children a DLC plot of some sort. That's a new one on me.

Kerry came out with this plan two years ago, and I see he's still battling for it. But by your logic, if he's fighting this battle, he must want the rest of us to rot. What about Katrina!? What about the censure!? What about the war!? Doesn't he care?!

When you pay attention to one thing at any given moment, does that mean you don't give a shit about anything else? Hardly.

I'm not sure Kerry will ever get this plan off the ground. But the Republicans will look like shit as they vote against it, if it ever gets that far.

[WildEyedLiberal]

14. What the FUCK?

How in the HELL does health care get turned into a DLC bugaboo?

Are you on crack?

[Mass]

18. So we let our kids die? Do you think it is an either or proposition?

[TayTay]

34. No, but saving some money on wellness care on kids does count

The federal government has finite dollars to spend. Right now there are 11 million or so kids who don't carry any insurance. The States are having a very difficult time providing Medicaid coverage for this group and the federal government is making cuts to basic programs.

One of the results of this is that people wait to take kids to the Emergency Room. They are often very sick when they arrive. This costs more money and is bad planning, bad budgeting and overall bad policy. It is cheaper and more humane to provide more coverage at the beginning of an illness, when it can be treated less expensively than to wait to for the need for hospitalizations and such.

Or we could simply play the Republican game of divide and conquer. The argument advanced here says that kids and old people need to fight each other for coverage. So do single people and married people without kids and the young who don't pay for insurance yet and so forth. Is that really how you plan to affect change in this country, by dividing groups that should be working together? Best of luck with that. Let me know when you are down to your last voter, I'll shut off the lights.

[snowbear]

5. Awesome job! His speech sounds like the complete opposite of..

Ahnold's digusting stance on nurses!



Way to go Senator!

[Jeffersons Ghost]

9. they're bashing Kerry pretty hard on this thread right now!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=132&topic_id=2545210&mesg_id=2545253

WillYourVoteBCounted just wrote


Kerry needs to take a hike.

He lost any shred of creditability he might ever have possessed,
when he reniged on his "promise" to count all of the votes.

His promise/lie is one of the main reasons I voted for him,
while holding my nose ever so tightly

This a-hole voted to go to war - I guess some of us are smarter
than he is, we knew it was a lie, what planet is he living on?

Kerry is a waste of air.

[WildEyedLiberal]

17. Ah yes, the trolls

They do come a'callin' when Kerry's name is mentioned.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

25. It only serves to show the power and promise Kerry represents

Trolls apparently don't consider Kerry inconsequential.

[wndycty]

13. Here is a kids healthcare plan you need to lear about

http://www.allkidscovered.com/about.html

[kerrygoddess]

19. It's a state version

of what Kerry is trying to get passed on a Federal level.

[WildEyedLiberal]

20. That's the main reason all Illinois DUers need to vote for Rod again

I do not like him very much - his arrogance to those of us from downstate is pretty obvious, as is his absolute lack of concern for the university - but the kid's health care bill and the pro-women birth control pharmacy law he signed deserve our support. And compared to Judy Baar Topinka - :scared:

[sandnsea]

32. Uhm, expanding SCHIP to all kids

IS Kerry's plan, as was SCHIP in the first place.

[PresidentObama]

21. So let me get this straight.

Kerry freepers like to complain that John didn't "fight" in the 2004 election, yet when he brings up an issue of importance or proposes something that will better America and FIGHTS they bash the shit out of him. What the hell?

Seriously. You are entitled to your own opinion. In my opinion, Kerry fought hard in 2004. If you don't feel that way, feel he's not a voice for you, and that you don't want him as your President. So be it. But bashing one of your own, and lashing out on a mission to tear down one of our parties toughest leaders and fighters is totally 100% uncalled for.

The plan is Kids First. Of course it's not going to address Seniors. If you want Senator Kerry to take up that issue, call his office for peep sake. I'm sure his office will listen to your concern.

JESUS!

[OzarkDem]

27. How about non-elderly adults?

That's the most critical area of need for health care coverage.

We need to encourage our leaders to do more than nibble at the edges of good health care policy and come up with something more comprehensive and substantive. Its a very important issue, one that deserves to be addressed fully, not piecemeal.

[wisteria]

52. It is appropriate that we take care of the children . They are

the helpless ones who can not take care of themselves.They look to us adults to nurture and protect them. As for the group you mention, being in that group of non-elderly adults, I can honesty tell you I know how to take care of my health needs. Older adult in general also are not as susceptible to illnesses as children are. We have built up our immune systems and we have been given the proper shots to protect us for devastating illnesses such as polio and the measles.
It is also so important for children to get a healthy start in life. A healthy start can mean the difference between success or failure in school and in life.
It would be wonderful if health care were free and available to all citizens. Perhaps, we will get there one day.For now though, powerful forces in America resent Universal Health Care and view it as socialistic and un American.This plan from Senator Kerry help the most vulnerable Americans-our children- and it serves as a start in the right direction.

[Mass]

54. I certainly would prefer a global solution too like Kennedy's

but that does not justify attacking like that a proposition that advances the issue. I dont understand what is your goal.

You want a global solution. Call your senators and congressmen and tell them to support Kennedy. Attacking Kerry will not help fulfill your goal.

[wisteria]

22. Thanks for posting, I was wondering what was going on with KidsFirst. n/t

[politicasista]

23. Thanks for posting this n/t

:kick:

[OzarkDem]

26. Some people consider this pandering

Health care advocates don't agree with this approach. First, comparatively few children are without health insurance, compared to adults. Providing health care coverage for children is relatively cheap, they don't get sick often and their health care needs are more preventive (vaccinations, etc.).

In addition, its pandering to the sympathy of the public (who opposes health care for kids?) without making any substantive improvements in access to health care.

This is the one area where Kerry really disappoints. Its pure political calculation, without concern for actually formulating a comprehensive health care strategy. Its a problem he's had since 2004. I'm not sure why, perhaps he just has bad health care advisors.

[blue cat]

28. I've been a pediatric nurse for 20 years

and I have to completely disagree with you. This is a start, and many, many children don't have health insurance and suffer because of it. This is the right thing to do. The health care advocates - the MD's that I know think this is the right thing to do. Just like the anti-choice advocates chip away at abortion rights, we need to take baby steps to getting all insured. It will never happen for all at one time, but this is a start in the right direction.

[OzarkDem]

29. And I work in oncology

and I see women die needlessly all the time because they didn't have a way to pay for breast cancer treatment. How does someone afford $300,000 worth of care without health insurance?

While campaigning to get affordable health care for all won't garner as much sympathy as targeting children only, its still the right thing to do.

Good public policy should always prevail, there's no excuse for halfhearted attempts.

[karynnj]

31. This isn't what he's campaigning for but legislation he is working

to pass. Given the Congress, this will be tough - but as a stand alone plan it has benefits. Of course, insuring all is the right goal - and it's in his 10 point plan. The question is should he try to pass legislation now - which is his job as a Senator or simply put out position papers on why everyone should be insured.

[sandnsea]

35. He offered to have the federal govt pay for that

He offered every business in the country the opportunity to join a national program that would have put the expensive catastrophic into the federal govt, and taken them out of their insurance pool to keep their rates down. In turn, they would implement a wellness program to catch illness before it became catastrophic. Eventually, we'd be doing primarily preventative care instead of expensive treatment.

But oh no, that'd be a big government program and we can't have that. Let's choose Bush's two-tiered health plan that herds everybody into one health clinic per county, and not call that rationed care or government health care.

:eyes:

[OzarkDem]

46. Shouldn't he introduce it now?

Doesn't it stand as much chance of passing as the bill for kids only?

[sandnsea]

51. Obviously not

The people voted, we have a Republican president and congress. We can't even get people to care about all kids having health coverage, let alone people who can work and provide it for themselves.

[OzarkDem]

60. So why bother

with kids care? Its not going to pass either, in a Congress that just finished cutting all Medicaid funding by over $40 billion.

Surely, Kerry knows that it won't pass either and his choice to push for it anyway makes it looks like pandering.

Out here in the real world, people are dying every day from lack of health care. I grow weary of hearing the women who call me every week who are diagnosed with breast cancer but can't get a doctor to see or treat them. They shouldn't have to keep dying.

The topic needs to be addressed seriously by Congress as a whole, not just nibbling at the edges by individuals looking to score points for 2008.

[sandnsea]

80. As I'm sure others have told you

Kennedy has introduced comprehensive Medicare for all legislation, as well. Kids get cancer too and have no control over the type of health coverage they have. I don't know why you're harping about Kerry. Go convince your own Senators and Congressmen to change their minds. He's not the one standing in the way of a health plan for everybody.

[OzarkDem]

82. Kerry's plan is a diversion

from Kennedy's and other more substantive legislation.

He's not standing in anyone's way, but he isn't lending his effort.

Coverage for kids isn't likely to pass. If it does, the GOP will pay for it by turning around and cutting coverage for someone else.

Dems need to sit down together as a team and come up with a good strategy to start restoring access to health care for Americans.

[sandnsea]

86. With your strategic planning, we wouldn't have SCHIP

WIC, medical for pregnant women, or even medical for seniors. When people get these programs, they like them and fight like hell to keep them. We've got all seniors covered, all disabled people and with Kids First, we'd have all kids and in many cases, parents of low-income kids too. We'd be 3/4 of the way, and the people paying the bill, working adults, would say "hey, me too" pretty quickly.

Again, stop bashing the Democrats who are on your side and go change the minds of the ones who aren't even in the same book, let alone the same page.

[blm]

81. It's not campaigning, it's submitted LEGISLATION - big difference.

When he was campaigning his healthcare plan received the highest rating of ALL the candidates for being the most comprehensive and most doable.

[karynnj]

30. The reasons you give are WHY it's feasible

Because the costs are low to insure the kids that don't have insurance, the COST side of a cost/benefit analysis is low. Prevention, such as vaccinations, lower long term costs and lead to healthier children. Kerry, on this and other children's programs(like education), has argued that a small cost now reaps a large benefit.

In 2004, he pushed a plan that would have insured 95% or 99% (2 different fact checks)of the population. If he were President, he could push this and if he and Congressional leaders got enough Republican support, that would be a major improvement. Since he lost, he spun off this one piece because he (and his staff) consider it the most likely to succeed. The combination of low cost, high benefit, and emotional appeal should make it more possible than his full plan. That even it has not succeeded shows the Republicans' values.

Incidently health care as a right is one of the 10 points in his 10 point plan.

[sandnsea]

33. Biting my tongue,

A. He is the one that wrote the health care bill for children that became SCHIP in the first place. All these governors who blather on about all the children covered in their state wouldn't be able to do that without his ideas and leadership 10 years ago.
B. He has an excellent health care strategy and spoke about it at length in 2004. It was innovative and comprehensive and would have provided health care for everybody.
C. Covering ALL kids creates a society of adults who have never known the agony of not being able to see a doctor, dentist or optometrist. They will grow up and demand health care because it will be unconscionable to them not to have it. If we can't get this generation of idiots to see it, at least we can make sure the next generation does.
D. Kids First is most certainly supported by health care workers. It's supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics, Nat Assoc of Public Hospitals, Nat Assoc of Children's Hospitals, and the Nat Assoc of Community Health Centers. It has the support of all the major unions and several family organizations as well.

That's all I can say that is anywhere near nice.

[kerrygoddess]

36. "Health care advocates don't agree with this approach." REALLY?

I see some healthcare advocates who do listed here:

[loyalsister]

40. It depends on how low their expectations are

n\t

[WildEyedLiberal]

45. So let's not support any health care for kids and let them keep dying

Yes, that's a much better plan.

Grow the fuck up and stop being jealous that Kerry is proposing things that actually help real people.

[OzarkDem]

47. Baloney

Kids aren't dying from lack of health care. In fact, next to seniors, they're the most likely to have health care.

Kerry just needs to come up with something more substantive than this. Don't you think kids would like to have their parents alive, too?

A good bill to provide catastrophic coverage for all uninsured Americans would be a better choice.

Seriously, its time we demand our legislators do something more substantive in the area of health care access. Its a national crisis and a complete disgrace. Nibbling around the edges with proposals like these does more harm than good. It creates a warm, fuzzy feeling in the public, but really accomplishes little in the overall picture.

I'm not singling Kerry out for criticism, but all legislators who fail again and again to come up with real solutions and fall back on pandering to voters.

[karynnj]

48. In the campaign, Kerry did have the government

taking over the catastophic coverage - arduing that eliminating it from company or private insurance would lower those costs and result in more companies affording it.

I think he is pressing legislation on what he thinks has a prayer of a chance to pass. I'm sure if he runs in 2004 he will have the plan he had in 2004 or an improved plan. Maybe if we have sizable gains in 2006, he will back Kennedy's plan or a comprehensive plan of his own.

[OzarkDem]

49. I'm sorry but we have to push our leaders on this

Health care is one of the biggest areas of concern for Americans today. Kerry and others face no risk whatsoever in pushing for substantive legislation in this area.

American's aren't interested in what he (or other Dem candidates for 08) are going to say when they run. They want real relief and real leadership now.

The only ones who will end up looking bad are Republicans, and they're already in enough trouble over the Medicare Prescription drug fiasco.

The US health care system is a disaster, its in crisis. The public knows it and they expect our leaders to do something about it.

[Mass]

50. Nobody is saying this proposition is the end of the road.

When Kerry introduced it, it was one point among things to be implemented and one of his campaign promises that he intended to keep by proposing a bill, even if there was NO chance for it to be adopted with this Congress.

There is a proposition that is a lot more comprehensive by Senator Kennedy (see my post lower). No reason for Kerry to reinvent what his senior colleague has already done. The proposition is much more broad, but it starts by exactly the same point: taking care of our kids, because it is GOOD policy. Having a good preventive healthcare system for kids is the key of the healthcare of the next generation of adults.

But of course, people end up so busy attacking those who have propositions that could be adopted now and relieve a little bit that THEY lose track of the big picture. Rather than ranting after Kerry's proposal, which is good and never pretended to be complete, you should be calling your senators and representatives so that they endorse Kennedy's proposal.

[OzarkDem]

61. If Kennedy has a plan

Then Kerry needs to get behind it. Having everyone go in a different direction only weakens the effort to bring about true health care reform.

[Mass]

63. Are you interested in blasting Kerry or in healthcare?

By now, I dont know.

The speech is a speech in front of an association that has asked Kerry to come and speak about it and other issues. Do you have a major issue with him talking in front of a nurses association?

I dont see your point and at this point, I dont want to see.

Personnally, I welcome anybody who wants to improve things. Too bad if you cant understand that! If I did not, I would blast Feingold because his solution is not impeachment. That does not make any sense.

[ProSense]

65. Is this the first time you're hearing about Kennedy's plan? Do you know

who the co-sponsors are? There is a lot to fix within this system, KidsFirst is part of the solution. People are dying every day, including children.

[Mass]

66. Actually, the bill has no co-sponsors at this point.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.2229:

[ProSense]

70. There are several plans in the works that have a chance to pass

Senators have introduced a number of health care bills. This one has 17 sponsors:

S.16
Title: A bill to reduce to the cost of quality health care coverage and improve the availability of health care coverage for all Americans.

[OzarkDem]

73. Then, as Dems, its our job

to demand our leaders get together and come up with a more comprehensive plan to cover uninsured people. Then we need to stick with it and keep pushing it.

The public will support it and so will the GOP if they see that voters will kick them out of office if they don't. It doesn't have to be universal health care, but it has to be something that covers more people and does a better job of preventing the collapse of our health care system.

[ProSense]

75. This isn't all or nothing. Passing KidsFirst would be a huge victory. n/t

[OzarkDem]

77. That's not what I said

The current health care system is in crisis. We can't pass a comprehensive health care reform bill right now, but we can come up with a more comprehensive plan to address the health care emergencies facing us right now.

Yes, plans like kids first actually do more harm than good, because they create an illusion that something significant has been accomplished, when it hasn't. It allows lawmakers to craft a tiny solution, and pretend its a big one, then walk away from the bigger problem without solving it.

Uncompensated care for children represents only a very small portion of the growing burden on the health care system. Providing coverage for kids, while a compassionate act, will do little if anything to alleviate growing problems of the uninsured. If we find ways to provide some level of catastrophic coverage for everyone, it has a much more signficant impact.

In breast cancer advocacy, we refer to it as "pink ribbon" legislation - something that has great PR appeal, but little significant impact on solving problems or improving the system. Even worse, it allows GOP'ers to walk away from bigger problems by hiding behind this bill.

[ProSense]

78. Ensuring coverage for all kids "will do little if anything"?

It will ensure that all kids have coverage, that's huge.

You are framing it as all or nothing.

[OzarkDem]

83. Collateral affects

and it will probably end up displacing more people from health care coverage to pay for it.

On edit: SCHIPS is a Medicaid program, and states have to contribute on average about 40% of the cost. Adding more people to Medicaid at the state level at a time when state budgets are hard pressed (Medicaid Part D is really killing them right now) will result in states shoving more people out of Medicaid coverage, usually by lowering eligibility levels.

So the effort to add more children (including those from families well above the poverty level) to SCHIPS will probably end up causing more adults who are at or below the poverty level to lose health care coverage or have bigger "spend-downs" or "co-pays".

Piecemeal health care reform only makes things worse. Any good health care reform bill has to have some level of cost containment, gets the most bang for the buck and doesn't pass along a lot of extra costs to states who will make up for the cost by removing even more people from Medicaid rolls.

[sandnsea]

87. Ass backwards

States will be able to move many seniors and disabled off of Medicaid because Medicare will pay for their prescription drug costs now, the reason many low-income adults end up on Medicaid in the first place. That will free up more money for states to implement health plans for more low-income families, like Oregon has already. If your state hasn't, then you're talking to the WRONG PEOPLE.

[kerrygoddess]

37. “Kids Come First Act” Bill Summary of S.114

“Kids Come First Act”
Bill Summary of S.114
Currently children in America are not getting the health care they need:


1 out of every 4 children is not fully up to date on basic immunizations;
Half of all uninsured children have not had a well child visit in the past year;
1 out of every 3 of children with chronic asthma do not get a prescription for medications they need;
1 in 5 has trouble accessing needed care; and
1 in 3 went without health insurance for all or part of 2002 and 2003.

The Kids Come First Act is a true federal-state partnership where the best elements of shared responsibility contribute to an affordable, reliable comprehensive system of care for all children.

The bill focuses on three main areas: how to get states to expand coverage; how to get parents to share in the responsibility of covering their children; and how to eliminate enrollment barriers that prevent eligible children from signing up for coverage.

Why expand coverage through Medicaid and SCHIP?

Expanding SCHIP and Medicaid is projected to reduce rates of avoidable hospitalizations by 22 percent. Children enrolled in public insurance programs were also found to have a 68 percent improvement in measures of school performance.

Americans support this approach.

According to a recent survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Harvard School of Public Health, eighty percent of Americans say they favor expanding state programs like Medicaid as a way to increase the number of insured Americans.

State Fiscal Relief and Coverage Expansions

At the center of this proposal is a new plan to offer states fiscal relief in exchange for expansions of coverage to more children. Under the Kerry plan, the federal government pays for all Medicaid outreach and coverage costs for children under age 21 with incomes at or below poverty level ($15,670 annual income for a family of 3). In exchange, the state agrees to pay for its share of a SCHIP or Medicaid coverage expansion to children under age 21 with incomes at or below 300% of poverty ($47,010 annual income for a family of 3). By raising the age of a child to include young adults under age 21, this will cover more than 11 million children who are currently uninsured.

It is in states’ economic interest to participate. There are 20 million children enrolled in Medicaid today, for whom the states pay on average half the costs of care. Under the Kerry plan, the states would pay nothing those children below poverty, resulting in more than $10 billion in savings to states every year. In addition, the federal government will continue to pay its enhanced matching rate for SCHIP expansions, so it will still only cost states an average of 36 cents on the dollar to pay for the proposed coverage expansions.

Encouraging Family Responsibility

This bill requires parents to insure all children under age 19 and requires proof of their coverage to avoid forfeiting their federal child tax exemption to finance automatic enrollment into the SCHIP program. It also sets forth meaningful policy changes to help families achieve this coverage mandate by:


Allowing higher income parents the right to buy into the SCHIP program for their children at cost;
Allowing parents to use the SCHIP subsidy to purchase qualified employer sponsored coverage; and
Providing tax credits to higher-income parents to maintain coverage affordability. Parents will not be required to spend any more than 5 percent of their adjusted gross income on health care premiums for their children under age 19.

Eliminating Barriers and Expanding Access

In addition to expanding eligibility, there are programmatic barriers that must be removed in order for all children to have access to comprehensive, affordable health care.

Under this bill, states are required to make enrollment simpler, automatic and more continuous. We must find and enroll the nearly 6.8 million children that are eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP coverage but are currently uninsured. Studies indicate that as many as 67 percent of children who were eligible but not enrolled for SCHIP had applied for coverage but were denied due to procedural issues. The Kerry plan will change that.

To save money during tight economic times, states have done everything from cutting outreach and enrollment funds to keep the rolls down, to actually freezing enrollment in their SCHIP programs. They have implemented eligibility cut-backs, required families to re-enroll on a more regular basis, and instituted higher co-payments and premiums as a deterrent to enrollment.

Making Children’s Health Care a Priority

Senator Kerry has long been passionate about ensuring every child in America has access to health care. Providing health insurance for every child in American will be his major domestic priority.

Senator Kerry was there at the beginning of the fight to provide the largest investment in children’s health care since the creation of Medicaid. His 1996 bill, the “Healthy Children, Family Assistance Health Insurance Program,” was the precursor to the successful S-CHIP program, which became law in 1997 and provides funding to cover 5 million children.

Now, he plans to tap into his large national base of supporters to generate support for children’s health care. In fact, Senator Kerry chose his first e-mail message to his on-line list of nearly 3 million supporters to be about the Kids Come First Act and his plan to provide health care coverage to every child in America.

Senator Kerry is making it clear that he is committed to fighting for this, and he will hold congressional Republicans accountable for inaction or delay. He will push for hearings on his bill in the Finance Committee. He will force a debate in the Senate at every major opportunity. And he will attach the Kids Come First Act to any moving target, giving the Republicans a simple choice – make progress on children’s health care, or show they have other priorities.

http://www.johnkerry.com/petition/billsummary.php

[Mass]

43. Kidfirst is a good beginning - Medicare for All is the larger picture.

I am lucky to have two senators who work on the healthcare issue.

If Kennedy has been more consistently involved in these issues, Kerry has not been absent either. He authored the bill that led eventually to S-CHIP.

By offering KidsFirst and by co-sponsoring the Small Business Healthcare Act and other acts., he kept one of his promises of the election ,

http://sbc.senate.gov/democrat/record.cfm?id=252698

It is a good thing.

However, it is dramatically clear that more is to be done before this country has a healthcare system equivalent to comparable countries. Teddy Kennedy offered recently a comprehensive plan to bring Universal Healthcare to this country: Medicare for All.

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0112-37.htm

.

I call this approach Medicare for All, because it will free all Americans from the fear of crippling medical expenses and enable them to seek the best possible care when illness strikes.

The battle to achieve Medicare for All will not be easy. Powerful interests will strongly oppose it, because they profit immensely from the status quo. Right wing forces will unleash false attack ads ranting against socialized medicine and government-run health care.
...

The Democratic Party's proudest moments and greatest victories have always come when we stand up against powerful interests and fight for the common good - and this coming battle can be another of our finest achievements.

To make the transition from the current splintered system, I propose to phase in Medicare for All, age group by age group, starting with those closest to retirement, between 55 and 65. Aside from senior citizens themselves, they have the greatest health needs and the highest health costs, and need our help the most.

The first stage of the phase-in should also guarantee good health care to every young child. We made a start with the Children's Health Insurance Program in 1997. It does a major part of the job, and it's time to complete the job now.

Note that the plan, that is written by a Senator that has spent his life working on these issues, incorporate the same preoccupation concerning children and expand it. Clearly, the issue is important, because having kids' health taken care of will help reduce healthcare costs in the future by having healthy adults. Simply, it is not the end of the road and I know my two senators know it.

[WildEyedLiberal]

55. All of you who oppose this bill are NOT liberals.

The essence of being a liberal is helping the helpless, the vulnerable, the marginalized of society. You who oppose this are no liberals, but rather selfish, cruel, petty, vindictive opportunists and you are part of the problem in this country. You are as bad as Republicans, if not worse, because you should KNOW better.

I was born with congenital heart failure due to a prolapsed aortic valve and a hole between my chambers. I've had three open-heart surgeries, all before I was 18. I was certainly not alone - I went to St. Louis Children's Hospital for my procedures and every year for an annual check-up, and the waiting room in the cardiology clinic was always filled with little kids with crappy hearts. I didn't even get to see the other parts of the hospital, like the kids' oncology unit - fortunately, most of the kids I saw in the cardiology clinic didn't have terminal illnesses with all the neverending care that those demand.

If my dad's employee health care plan hadn't paid 100% coverage of my operations, I don't know what my family would have done. Open-heart surgery costs something like half a million bucks - what on EARTH would have happened to me if my dad had been laid off, or had a crappy job which didn't provide coverage and didn't pay enough to ensure decent health care for a chronic condition such as mine? Do these people realize how exorbitant the out-of-pocket premium is for people like me with a nasty pre-existing condition? I am anathema to insurance companies because they KNOW they'll have to dish out money for an expensive procedure for me down the line, so they want to charge something to the tune of a thousand bucks premium.

I was fortunate. A lot of people aren't so lucky. NO child should die at age three because their parents couldn't afford to take them to a specialist to diagnose a serious condition that, left untreated, will be fatal. John Kerry is a hero for proposing Kids First so that NO family ever has to go bankrupt to pay for life-saving medical treatment for their child.

[loyalsister]

56. You have misread this entire thread

I don't think anyone here actually opposes this. I just think that the perspective is a bit skewed in the wrong direction.
Ever hear of Jerry's orphans? Adults with MD who are abandoned by Jerry Lewis because the MDA is only interested in caring for children because poster children play well for fundraising for the charity.
As Kerry's plan stands, they're on their own after they "age out." Kerry's Orphans.

IMO Healthcare is not about charity it's about providing opportunity so that a person who experiences ordinary difficulties with their health or chronic disability will not miss out on an education, AND it should empower kids as they grow INTO adulthood.
Health problems should not derail academic, vocational pursuits, and it for damn sure should not interfere with the ability to provide for a family.
Under such a plan, we run the risk of an assumption that they are healthy as adults because they had check ups. The health care problem- solved.

Charity and caring for the vulnerable as a "liberal" construct is very destructive in relation to disability. For those who consider people with disabilities a capable population that needs extra tools to negotiate life, pushing paternalism and "caring for the most vulnerable" as the reason to provide health care does not sit well with most advocates.
It's about opportunity for a minority population with some extra health care requirements to function well!
For some the idea is related to diversity and inclusion. Can we agree that these are liberal ideas?

Health care across the board increases opportunity for all. Kids won't benefit from it unless their parents are healthy. Healthier parents improves their economic standards reduces the need for a Dr. in the first place.
This bill is a token. I don't oppose it, but I think that it is beneath him.

[JI7]

57. she didn't misread anything

there ARE proposals out there. this is just one thing and just a start . Kerry or nobody ever said that this is the ONLY thing that matters.

but it sure does go a long way. as Sandnsea mentioned once people grow up with health care they will demand to always have it. right now many people fall for the right wing fear tactics about how Dems want big govt controlled health care and govt will make all the decisions.

with this people will grow up knowing this is not true.

and it helps parents who have to struggle to pay bills because their child may have a health condition that requires costly care.

this is just one piece of legislation. there are others out ther elike the Kennedy bill which you can support.

the Republicans control congress now. and they control the presidency.

we are trying to do what we can. but nobody has ever said it's just about giving kids health care.

[WildEyedLiberal]

58. This is complete, unmitigated bullshit

You oppose health care for ANYONE unless its health care for EVERYONE, which - NEWS FLASH - various Democratic presidents and congresses haven't been able to pass, not for lack of trying, for 40 years. Health care for children is a START. If this covers 10 million children who are not now covered, it's a GOOD thing, and you cannot be a liberal unless you agree with that.

You have a pretty fucked up definition of "liberal." Liberalism has ALWAYS been about helping people, about improving the greater good. This bill will help the greater good. You have really fucked up ideas about childhood illness, too. You think this is about taking kids to the doctor when they get a sniffy nose? Did you even read my fucking post?? There are millions of kids in this country with chronic, debilitating illnesses which have JACK SHIT to do with their parents' health or status. I guess you think it's okay for kids with chronic health problems to suffer? That's not too goddamn liberal.

I'd sure as fuck like to know where you assume that this bill is the end of the line. It's a START. Many, many Democrats have tried to push through universal health care bills for the past 40 years and failed. This would be a smaller victory than universal coverage but it would be a victory and it would be a foot in the door which is more than anyone else has managed to do. I guess you're opposed to ANY expansion of coverage unless it's full coverage? You're so petty and spiteful that you'd deny coverage to kids until coverage for everyone can pass? Because let me clue you in: this bill has a much higher chance of passing than a universal coverage bill, because voting against anything helping kids is political suicide. But you don't care about that, do you? You don't want ANYONE to be helped if YOU can't be helped. That is the ANTITHESIS of what liberals are.

"IMO Healthcare is not about charity it's about providing opportunity so that a person who experiences ordinary difficulties with their health or chronic disability will not miss out on an education, AND it should empower kids as they grow INTO adulthood." That doesn't even make any fucking sense at all. "Empower kids?" "Get an education?" You can't very well do that if you fucking DIE before you're ten years old from leukemia or cardiac insufficiency, can you? What the fuck? My open-heart surgeries didn't fucking "empower" me, they saved my life. If my parents hadn't had insurance, I'd be dead or we'd be bankrupt, both of which would have been perfectly acceptable to you, I suppose, since I was under age 18. :eyes:

Your post is a load of incoherent bullshit, and no one who actually belongs on this website would ever claim that any sort of health care coverage for anyone is a bad thing. Take your crap elsewhere.

[Mass]

59. Nobody said the healthcare problem was solved with this plan.

Certainly not Kerry, certainly not the OP or WEL. You are the one who makes the assumption.

This is a first proposal, that goes with other proposals made in the senate by other Democratic Senators. Had you bothered to read the speech rather than lashing at the bill, you would know that.

But of course, it is so hard to read. Blasting is so much easier.

We can and must do more.

We need to make it legal to import affordable prescription drugs from Canada.

We need to make it legal for Medicare to negotiate with drug companies for lower prices.

We need to put medical decisions back in the hands of doctors, nurses, and patients - not insurance company bureaucrats.

We need to address our nursing shortage by fully funding the Nurse Service Corps Scholarship Program, the Nurse Retention and Patient Safety Enhancement Grants, and the Nursing Faculty Loan Programs under the Nurse Reinvestment Act we all fought so hard to enact.

We need to cut health care costs for small businesses.

We need mental health parity.

We need to address our growing childhood obesity epidemic.

We need to reauthorize the State Child Health Insurance Program.

And we need to give families access to the same private health insurance that members of Congress give themselves. It’s time we stood up and made it clear that every family’s health care is just as important as a politician’s in Washington.

But we have to start somewhere. That’s why KidsFirst should be the first health care debate of 2006. To make a stand on health care, let’s start by standing next to America’s children.

Now that we have our coalition built, in 2006, let’s force a vote on KidsFirst. Let’s hold Congress accountable. Let’s bring parents and doctors and nurses together to get this right for our children.

As you can see, he knows it will not solve the issue. He knows it is the first block of a work . And, after having seen what happened in MA, he also knows it will be difficult.

Lashing out at people who offer solutions to real problems, as partial as they are, is not going to help.

[loyalsister]

88. I work in policy I know how this works

If you put something out there and get it done and act like it is an accomplishment, the opposition that didn't want to go that far in the first place, says "you got your pet project isn't that enough?" Talking points evolve and people begin to accept "health care for kids" as all we need to do to solve the problem.
I work on this issue at the state level and I have seen it in various manifestations time and again. Not having high standards is the death knell to an agenda.
A better way to write this bill would be as a phase in with kids being covered first.
Instead, he writes it so it can pass and he can take credit- eyes on 2008. I'll never vote for the guy again. I want someone who knows what they're doing in this area.

[OzarkDem]

69. And "charity" health care is non-existent

when it comes to serious illness (like cancer, heart disease, etc), there is no such thing as "charity care". Its a myth.

Not every illness can be treated at the free clinic. Anything beyond that level of care comes at a price. It has too, because higher levels of health care are too expensive for hospitals to write off for the growing number of uninsured. These days, even the most impoverished uninsured person still has to pay on a sliding scale, and those are getting less helpful.

For instance, in our state, if a woman is diagnosed with breast cancer and has to undergo the standard 12 month regimen of surgery, chemo and hormonal therapy and radiation, she will incur expenses in the area of $250,000. She won't qualify for Medicaid unless she quits her job and becomes homeless. Even if her income is near poverty level (let's say $21,000 yr), she will still only get a 30% discount on the cost of her care. That leaves her with a medical bill of $175,000. How is she going to pay that off with her level of income? The drugs she has to take for the next 10 years are going to cost $500 per month.

How is the hospital going to get compensated for the care it gives her? It may get a small portion of that cost back from the state or federal government, but not enough to cover the whole cost.

This same scenario, just with breast cancer is being repeated 2 or 3 times EVERY WEEK, just in our county. How long can this go on before the entire system collapses? How does that affect health care for everyone, including the insured? Women are already refusing treatment choosing to die instead of going through the humiliation of bankruptcy and a lifetime of debt.

Dems are the ones who have been entrusted to fix this problem. Its massive enough that it requires we spend a lot more time analyzing the problem and avoiding quick fixes. Its up to us.

[loyalsister]

90. I was referring to the "spirit" of charity

Health care policy that focuses on "the most vulnerable" and saving children, etc. is about taking care of the few "in need\pitied" as opposed to providing opportunity for everyone who happens to require medical treatment.
"Charity" is the pity mentality as opposed to encouraging independence and equality. Health care coverage is an economic equalizer.

[OzarkDem]

62. No adult should die unnecessarily, either

because of a lack of health insurance, but it happens more and more every day. What about children who become homeless when their parents get sick?

The problem won't be solved until we begin developing comprehensive solutions that help everyone, not just children.

[Mass]

64. Nobody disagrees - This is a FIRST step and it is welcome.

You are the one who thinks it is the FINAL step.

This is a totally futile discussion and a total loss of time.

Sure, it would be nice if Kerry had a bill with global approach on these issues. He has not. Does that justify blasting this plan? I just dont understand.

[OzarkDem]

71. Its not even a first step

Congress just got through cutting $40 BILLION out of the Medicaid budget for 2006. That's a huge step backwards and this program is far too small to have any significant impact of the devastating impact those cuts will have on health care for all, or the crisis it will create within our health care system overall.

There's room and public support for bigger, more comprehensive solutions and they need to be supported by all Dems.

[ProSense]

67. There are 17 Democrats co-sponsoring Kennedy's plan

Kerry is one of them. Others should join.

[Mass]

68. What plan are you talking about?

The bill I am talking about has no co-sponsors at this point.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.2229:

[ProSense]

72. It the same bill he introduced last year and

seventeen Democrats signed on as sponsors. He just reintroduced it this January.

[Mass]

74. Thanks. Here is the bill and Kerry is a co-sponsor.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d109:1:./temp/~bdGKCC:@@@P|/bss/d109query.html|

S.16
Title: A bill to reduce to the cost of quality health care coverage and improve the availability of health care coverage for all Americans.
Sponsor: Sen Kennedy, Edward M. (introduced 1/24/2005) Cosponsors (17)
Latest Major Action: 1/24/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. COSPONSORS(17), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)


Sen Akaka, Daniel K. - 1/24/2005
Sen Boxer, Barbara - 1/31/2005
Sen Corzine, Jon S. - 1/24/2005
Sen Dayton, Mark - 1/25/2005
Sen Dodd, Christopher J. - 1/24/2005
Sen Dorgan, Byron L. - 2/3/2005
Sen Durbin, Richard - 1/24/2005
Sen Inouye, Daniel K. - 1/24/2005
Sen Kerry, John F. - 1/24/2005
Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. - 1/24/2005
Sen Levin, Carl - 1/24/2005
Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. - 1/24/2005
Sen Pryor, Mark L. - 1/24/2005
Sen Reid, Harry - 1/24/2005
Sen Rockefeller, John D., IV - 1/24/2005
Sen Schumer, Charles E. - 1/24/2005
Sen Stabenow, Debbie - 1/24/2005

[OzarkDem]

84. Good for Kerry

Let's hope he spends his time working on getting this bill passed instead.

[OzarkDem]

76. Please read Krugman's analysis

of the health care problems facing the US for a better overall perspective.

A better, more comprehensive plan to avert health care crisis is doable and we Dems are long overdue in taking the lead in this area.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2548630

[WildEyedLiberal]

79. I see there's more bullshit from people who want kids to die

Threads like this are useful. They help determine who are the real liberals and who are the selfish, petty, callous assholes who only care about pure dogma instead of helping real, living, flesh-and-blood people.

This is a big tent party, but there's no room for people who don't care about the welfare of others. All who oppose health care for kids: go fuck yourselves, you selfish, callous, pieces of shit.

[OzarkDem]

85. No one is saying that

We're just saying that a more comprehensive bill should be promoted that protects more than just children.

Some day when you're old enough and end up getting sick, you'll feel the same way.

[Mass]

89. Who disagrees with you? I dont understand.

[OzarkDem]

91. A few people in this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2545200&mesg_id=2549516


Health care policy is complex, difficult to understand, but I encourage my fellow Dems in the DU forums to learn more about it. I'm not trying to bash anyone, but we need to become educated about how to advocate for good health care policy.

The Krugman article is a good place to start learning about the challenges facing the health care system today.