iblog

The US Senate and House of Representatives have announced a plan to broaden affordable healthcare provision for some of America’s neediest children. The plan aims to provide further medical services to 4 million children who would otherwise need to go without. However, it appears that the US President, George W. Bush, will veto any such legislation. This is in spite of a tragic incident earlier this year, which highlighted the need for affordable health care for America’s poor.

In February, a 12-year-old boy, Deamonte Driver, died after an untreated tooth abscess which spread to his brain. His family lacked medical insurance and was unable to afford private dental treatment. His death had an enormous impact on the local community. According to Gina James, the principal at Deamonte’s school,

“The thing about Deamonte was his smile, he was always smiling. Everyone here was shocked. They couldn’t understand how he could have toothache and then die. We sometimes give the little kids candy as a reward; well, for a while they stopped taking it because they would say ‘if I get a cavity, will I die?”

However, as tragic as Deamonte’s story is, it’s a case that has been repeated time and time again across the United States. Whilst the poorest are offered medical benefits in the form of Medicaid, not all dentists and doctors accept Medicaid patients. It’s a scandal which has appeared to unite American politicians across party lines. A bill to extend medical benefits to cover another 4 million children was passed in the Senate with a majority of 38 votes. However, the bill failed to pass through the House of Representatives with a two-thirds majority, meaning the President can still veto it. And it is likely that George W. Bush will veto the bill when presented with it. Mr. Bush is a firm believer in the private health care system and opposes the proposed legislation on the grounds that it:

“directs scarce funding to higher incomes at the expense of poor families.”

This statement appears somewhat confusing; after all, we’d expect the legislation to help poor families. As one analyst put it:

“In effect, both supporters and opponents of the bill say the other side risks health coverage for children.”

This entry was posted on Saturday, September 29th, 2007 at 2:25 pm and is filed under Current Affairs, Health. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.