Kucinich: SCHIP Bill Fails To Provide Health Coverage For Legal Immigrant Children

[Sapphire Blue]

Kucinich: SCHIP Bill Fails To Provide Health Coverage For Legal Immigrant Children

Washington, Sep 25 - Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), issued the following statement after voting against the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) conference report today:

“I cannot support legislation which extends health coverage to some children while openly denying it to other children,” Kucinich said. “This legislation is woefully inadequate: and I will not support it.

“Legal immigrant children deserve the same quality health care as other children receive. It is Congress’ responsibility to address the main difficulties that prevent legal immigrant children from gaining access to health care. Today, we did exactly the opposite.

“HR 676 guarantees full health care coverage for all children. When considering a universal health care proposal, HR 676, the Medicare for All bill, is the only health care plan that addresses three important issues: quality, accessibility, and cost. HR 676 stands alone in an increasingly crowded field of efforts to provide health care coverage to all,” Kucinich said.

Kucinich voted for the original House-passed version of the bill because it contained language to grant health coverage for legal immigrant children. However, in today’s bill, this language was omitted.


http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=75275

[Greeby]

1. So Dennis, you voted for it before you voted against it?

*ahem* Say no more

[hayu_lol]

2. Dennis seems to be a bit confused...

Did he publically object on the floor of the house? If not, why not? Did he submit an alternative plan of his own? If not? Why not?

What exactly is a legal immigrant child? Is this a child born here of illegal aliens? A child here with his parents, both of which are green card holders? A child who immigrated here with his/her parents who have since gained citizenship? How would Dennis define what exactly what a legal immigrant child is?

[LWolf]

5. Did he submit an alternative plan of his own?

:rofl:

Ok, so you didn't read his statement as quoted in this thread, and have never read anything about Dennis Kucinich, and don't follow his work, or that of John Conyers, in Congress, so you have never heard of HR 676.

Those little oversights seem to indicate that it is not Congressman Kucinich who is confused about the issue.


:dunce:

[rjones2818]

3. Hmmm...

Kucinich voted for the original House-passed version of the bill because it contained language to grant health coverage for legal immigrant children. However, in today’s bill, this language was omitted.

It always helps to read to the end of the post. Sometimes there's important information there.

[Yukari Yakumo]

4. Kuch proves just what a total ass-clown he really is.

And this is something I'd like his local personality cult around here to explain.

But this is typical Kuch ass-clownery. If something is not 100% exactly to his liking, he'll vote against it. Can we even afford such a thick-headed dumbass to live in the White House... no, let me rephrase that... Can we even afford four more years of a thick-headed dumbass living in the White House? I think not. Kuch would end up vetoing almost everything that arrived at his desk. Government would end up getting shut down because nothing would get accomplished.

[bluedog]

6. sounds like someone else we know

if he doesn't get it all his way.....he won't vote for it...didn't he do that with the Iraq with drawl plan.the gradual one.he voted no because it was not instant?

[penguin7]

8. The Iraq bills were funding bills

And also they were trying to privatize the oil.

There is not enough info here to make any kind of call on this bill, but I would be very surprised if the decision made here was not very well informed.

[SaveElmer]

7. Typical Kucinich...

Has absolutely no interest in making forward progress unless it conforms 100% to his view of how it should be done...a view that has less than 0% chance of happening...

[Dawgs]

10. Best description of Kucinich I have ever seen.

:applause:

[rinsd]

9. The bill passed right?

If so then let me say good for Kucinich.

His vote did not effect the bill's passing while he got to make his poltiical stand abotu something he strongly believes in.

[Dawgs]

11. Sorry rinsd. I don't agree with you on this one.

Kucinich voted against a healthcare bill for children. Speaking against it is one thing - voting is another.

[rinsd]

14. It was a dangerous move politically.

And I see merit in what Elmer says about Kucinich being an all or nothing kind of guy.

But I respect him not voting for what he perceived as a bad bill because it left out language protecting legal immigrant children.

[SaveElmer]

12. It wasn't just about passing...

It was about passing with a veto proof majority...

Kucinich provided no leadership toward that goal, instead preferring to play politics with his vote...

I will note not one other member of the Progressive caucus voted the way Kucinich did...

Sorry, IMO this is a disgrace and I hope his primary opponents don't let Ohio voters forget it...

[penguin7]

13. Why should a bad bill have a veto proof majority

before it is vetoed?

[SaveElmer]

15. Wasn't a bad bill...it was a very good bill...

As every single member of the Progressive caucus saw...except Kucinich...

[rinsd]

16. He could still change his mind in the event of a veto.

I understand what you are saying in terms of this being another example of Kucinich wanting all or nothing but since the bill passed this was more of a moral stand vs. a line in the sand. I would be more upset if his vote prevented passage than the more symbolic nay he cast.

[applegrove]

17. I wondered why he voted against it. Now I know. (crickets)