Comments on: Paul Krugman on Bush’s SCHIP veto.

By: Helen Rainier

Helen Rainier — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:17:15 +0000

Apparently noone told Dubya that this particular bill passed with wide bi-partisan support — so to term it in words of “the democrats” sent him a bill he would vote is dishonest.

By: VerbalKint

VerbalKint — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 19:08:17 +0000

#19 It is three times, not twice, the poverty level.

#21 New York asked for an exception that would have allowed it to reach $83K, but was denied. The legislation vetoed by Bush was limited to $60K.

By: katy

katy — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 16:43:28 +0000

…Lincolnâ€™s use of â€œcoolâ€ seems more along how we would use â€œcoldâ€, as in â€œcold-heartedâ€ [...]

of course! now i feel kind of silly… that’s so simple, so obvious…
a not seeing the forest for the trees kinda thing…

[...] this time heâ€™ll fail in â€œcooling the heelsâ€ of the GOPers who actually SUPPORT the current bill.
Comment by JosephW â€” October 7, 2007 @ 3:03 am

never say never…
but i am ever hopeful that “good” will prevail…
.

By: missmolly

missmolly — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 15:07:04 +0000

Whatâ€™s the big deal, about taxing smokers and giving the tax revenue to children? I find it hard to understand the reasons given too.

Comment by Derrick â€” October 7, 2007 @ 1:32 am

There is nothing inherently wrong with this, except that the well is running dry on cigarette taxes. Cigarettes have already been taxed up the wazoo, and while it’s a popular tax with the public (why should we pay for anything when we can get the “evil tobacco users” to foot the bill?), there’s only so much tax you can place on a product before negatives start outweighing positives.

43 states have increased their cigarette taxes more than 70 times since 2002 (source: http://tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0097.pdf). Several states already have taxes on cigarettes of $2.00 a pack or higher (and that doesn’t count local or federal taxes). Federal taxes on cigarettes will rise to $1.00 a pack (61 cents added to the existing 39 cents) with the SCHIP bill.

When the tax on a product exceeds the untaxed price of the product (as it now does in many places), a black market begins to emerge, creating a layer of crime nobody wants or needs. Further taxation only increases this.

Cigarette taxes are a disproportionate tax on the poor. Over 30% of adults below the poverty line are smokers, as compared with about 22% of adults above it (source: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5320a2.htm — scroll down to the table at the bottom). This means that the poor are funding this program more than the rest of us are. This is not fair.

The children who are being helped by SCHIP are not the smokers being taxes, for the most part. Therefore, this isn’t an exise tax, it’s a “sin” or a punishment tax. Smokers have been punished enough with taxes. If we are into punishing behaviors that contribute to shorter life spans, we need to start taxing alcohol and bacon cheeseburgers by similar amounts.

Yes, it is said that higher cigarette prices will cut down on young people taking up this filthy habit, and I agree that anything to cut down on teen smoking is basically a good thing. But we have already squeezed about as much blood from this turnip as we’re going to get.

By: JosephW

JosephW — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 07:03:58 +0000

As best as I can ascertain, Lincoln’s use of “cool” seems more along how we would use “cold”, as in “cold-hearted”, especially given the preceding sentences.
What Lincoln’s speech seemed to be about was a retort to the challenge that Southerners had made that if a Republican were elected as President, then the South would secede. Lincoln was making an effort to ease Southerners’ minds that a Republican President would not necessarily be any worse for the country (vis-a-vis the slavery issue) than had already been in force, and had, in fact, been established by the Founding Fathers. His “cool” statement simply suggested that secession seemed to be an unnecessarily harsh reaction and that voters should not be intimidated from voting for the Republicans simply because the South was making a threat.
To the best of my understanding of the S-CHIP deal, it’s Bush who’s acting as an intimidator in making the veto threat, only (with a bit of luck) this time he’ll fail in “cooling the heels” of the GOPers who actually SUPPORT the current bill.

By: Derrick

Derrick — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 05:32:40 +0000

What’s the big deal, about taxing smokers and giving the tax revenue to children? I find it hard to understand the reasons given too.

By: missmolly

missmolly — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 05:22:09 +0000

Isn’t this the same bizarre reasoning that men who beat up their wives and girlfriends use? “Why are you MAKING me hit you?”

By: TomR

TomR — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 02:45:06 +0000

—-
Krugman writes, â€œSo, President Bush says that Democrats are endangering childrenâ€™s health, by sending him an S-chip bill he wonâ€™t sign.
—-

Nothing new here. Another example of petulant boy George not taking responsibility for his own behavior.

Now go sit in the corner George.

- Tom

By: woodguy

woodguy — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 02:14:05 +0000

One of the Shrub’s arguments against the SCHIP plan, even the one now in effect, is that it is in some cases used to insure low income adults. Will for God,s sake someone in the media ask him, “And why is that a bad thing”?

By: Nevar

Nevar — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 00:11:35 +0000

Heh
Lincoln’s cool…
Heh

By: RUCerious

RUCerious — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 23:10:31 +0000

4 hundred and how many more days of sdrawkcaB hsuB do we have to go?

By: Xisithrus

Xisithrus — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 22:52:23 +0000

I see George is pulling a DARVO by reversing the roles. The congress is now the offender and poor George is the victim that wants to help the children but cant because the congress made him do it.

Could we please stop the insanity? People aren’t falling for this crap anymore.

By: katy

katy — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:45:44 +0000

that’s funny…

any language experts out there?
did “cool” mean the same for lincoln as it does now?
but then, what else?
.

By: EvilPoet

EvilPoet — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:40:11 +0000

Whoops! Didn’t see the other posts my apologies.

By: EvilPoet

EvilPoet — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:37:28 +0000

katy – Yup – he said that.

By: katy

katy — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:25:36 +0000

thanks, And Yet… see #5 :-)
.

By: And Yet...

And Yet... — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:18:36 +0000

abraham lincoln said, â€œthat is coolâ€ ???!

Yeah, he said that, & a lot more that is relevant to current circumstances:

http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/cooper.htm

By: The Republic of Stupidity

The Republic of Stupidity — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:07:30 +0000

not the numbers of $83,000 being tossed around.

If Repubs could only stick to the facts !

Comment by texaslady â€” October 6, 2007 @ 4:53 pm

If I’m not mistaken, there are supposed to be exceptions for high-cost-of-living states, like NY, and yes, the GOOPers keep trying to twist that and misrepresent it as inclusive for all.

By: Badger

Badger — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:04:27 +0000

If Bush is so against “Socialized Medicine”, why doesn’t he veto funding for Medicare???

Political Suicide??? Ohh.

By: texaslady

texaslady — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 20:53:15 +0000

#8 is right SCHIP applies to those up to twice poverty income which is $20,000 so only families earning up to $40,000 qualify not the numbers of $83,000 being tossed around.

If Repubs could only stick to the facts !