The senior Senator from Ohio said: ``Healthcare for our kids
shouldn't be controversial . . . it shouldn't be partisan. It should be
easy.''
The junior Senator from Maine called a potential lapse in SCHIP ``an
abdication of our responsibility.''
The junior Senator from Oregon said: ``Struggling families would like
to have some stability, not have their children be a bargaining chip in
some broader vision.''
All of these Democratic Senators represent tens of thousands of
children who depend on SCHIP. I am more than puzzled why they would
threaten to turn their backs on those children--and shut down the
government while they are at it--over the entirely unrelated issue of
illegal immigration. Why would anyone suggest it is a good idea to not
fund SCHIP for 6 years and to not fund the government because they are
upset over illegal immigration, which is an issue we have until March
to address? Last year, the Senate Finance Committee unanimously agreed on a
proposal to extend SCHIP by 5 years. The continuing resolution we
expect to take up will extend it for 6, with no partisan attachments.
Keywords matched
illegal immigration