Democrats' SCHIP Ahoy all over again

A new version of the Democrats’ SCHIP bill, H.R. 3963, was reported out of the House Rules Committee at 11:25 p.m. last night under a closed rule. Which means that the Republicans did not get to view the 293- page bill until late last night, let alone be part of the negotiations. Despite cosmetic changes, the bill did not adequately fix many of flaws which led to the veto of the previous bill.

The bill does not require proof of citizenship to receive SCHIP benefits. Section 211 of the bill states: “in lieu of requiring the individual to present satisfactory documentary evidence of citizenship or nationality,” states can submit “the name and social security number of the individual.” Earlier in the afternoon, a Republican-sponsored amendment – the only one allowed – which would require a positive proof of citizenship by recipients, among other things failed on a mostly party-line vote, 164-242. Most Americans do not want illegal immigrants collecting benefits paid for by American taxpayers. The bill was just just like the last bill and allows for identity fraud. Social Security numbers are not a valid proof of citizenship. This is an issue many House members, on both sides, expressed concerns about but it was not adequately addressed. “We gave the other side the opportunity to correct this major flaw in the legislation, but they chose to stay with their leadership and reject an offer to compromise,” Rep. john Boozman (R-AR) said.

The bill passed 265-142, less than the two-thirds needed to override, despite the absence of several California members due to the wildfires in that state. There will be 13 Southern California Representatives (9 Republican and 4 Democrats) absent from today’s SCHIP vote because they are where taking care of their family, friends, and neighbors during the horrific fires in California.

Republicans expressed concern that the new SCHIP bill does not guarantee needy children are first in line for benefits, just like the old plan, Boozman said, "SCHIP was created for needy children. It would follow that needy children receive SCHIP benefits first. The last bill stripped out a requirement that 95% of SCHIP-eligible children receive benefits before states can let richer families participate. This bill strips it out again. How can you tout a bill as a way to help needy kids when those kids are not guaranteed to be at the head of the line?”

---

Tags: children, John Boozman, SCHIP, State Childrens Health Insurance Program, US House