Chatham Dems

This open letter to Jack Kingston comes from Willis Forrester of St. Simons Island.

In recent weeks you have repeatedly expressed your justifications for voting against making more children eligible for coverage under the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). By leaving out critical details, you have misled the people of District 1and have presented false information about who would benefit from an expansion of this program.
Among your flawed justifications, you have stated that SCHIP “became a boon for politicians who aggressively enrolled everyone they could, regardless of age and income.”

This is false. The SCHIP was established in 1997 by Congress “to expand coverage beyond those who were poor to uninsured low-income children.” It is a state-administered program and subject to eligibility criteria set by the state program. The Federal regulations that cover this program are carried out by the Department of Health and Human Services. Just where are those people in District 1 who have been enrolled, regardless of age and income?

In Georgia, the eligibility limit for SCHIP is currently set at 235% of the official Federal poverty level which means that a family of 4 would have to have an income of less than $48,529 to even be eligible for the program. The median household annual income for a family of 4 in District 1 is approximately $30,000 - hardly enough to maintain even the basic needs of a family, including expensive health insurance premiums. There are approximately 50,000 children under the age of 18 in District 1 who currently live in poverty - why not be an advocate for these children instead of using misleading and false information in order to justify your voting against help for them and those in the middle income levels who simply cannot afford health insurance?

You stated that “families with a household income up to $83,000 will qualify.”
This is false. Nothing in the vetoed SCHIP bill would have mandated coverage for people at this income level, anywhere. New York state, where living costs are exceedingly high, requested the Bush Administration to allow it to set that state’s income cut-off at $82,600 for a family of 4, but this request was denied. The District of Columbia and 15 states currently have eligibility income ceilings exceeding that set for Georgians which, as stated above, is $48,528. Why do you deny an expansion of this program which would help more of your constituents in District 1 because of eligibility levels that are already more restrictive than in 15 other states?

You have stated that the vetoed bill would set “the stage for government sponsored universal health care.”
This is false. The Congressional Budget Office Director, Peter R. Orszag, has said that he “hasn’t seen another policy proposal that would reach as great a level of the uninsured with as low of an effect on those who had private health insurance.” Please offer some facts which support your contention that this program leads to “universal health care” and why that, in itself, would be a bad thing.

Finally, you object to the greater cost of the program.
Instead of raising taxes on smokers, then perhaps the money could come from the billions which have been sent to Iraq for that colossal misadventure and for which there is no end in sight. How is it that you so willingly vote for the $2-3 billions per week that go for the war in Iraq but cannot stand up for your constituents in District 1 for an increase in a program that would benefit people here at home?

Mr. Kingston, I really don’t expect you to change your attitude or performance in representing all of the people of this District, but please do not be misleading about why you vote the way you do. The people, all the people, of this District deserve to know that your representation is lacking, that your advocacy for your constituents is subject to the whims of the Bush Administration, and that the upcoming election will offer a chance for change.

Tags: No Comments