First – This may be the right thing to do, but before we jump in feet first, lets define who is an eligible child. All we need to do is to start providing FREE health services to see the illegal immigrant population surge more than it has. (oh excuse me, that is not politically correct is it.)
Second – How long will it take before people realize that the more the governments “give us”, the more that the government “owns us”.
This is the first step towards nationalized healthcare. What will the middle income families that already have health insurance do once they qualify? They will drop their coverage and get the free stuff from the government.
FL CSR – I agree with you in principle but I think 2 clarifications are needed.
One – this is the NEXT step towards nationalized heathcare. We alredy have Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP and probably other programs.
Two – this program is not free. It will be cheaper for those who sign up but they’ll be paying more in taxes to sustain it. And for those who don’t (or can’t) sign up, we’ll be footing the rest of the bill.
I think the article is a bit one-sided (kind of strange for the AP, I realize).
1) The states are saying they don’t like the feds telling them the income levels – it sounds to me like it’s the fed’s money; if it’s their money, they get to make the rules.
2) When and how did health insurance become a RIGHT?
If I (in the global sense) can get it free, you bet I’m going to get it. Whoever said that the more we take from the government, the more the government controls us.
I think we all forget the most important issue here – these are OUR (as a country) children, and the country’s future. It’s embarrassing to even bein this position and can’t provide decent medical care to the young who really need it.
I think we all forget the most important issue here – these are OUR (as a country) children, and the country’s future. It’s embarrassing to even bein this position and can’t provide decent medical care to the young who really need it.
Don’t bleed on me. If you can’t work – I’ll happily help you. If you won’t – don’t ask for my money. If you are unskilled – learn some. If you made bad decisions – you learn from your mistakes. Can’t afford kids – don’t have kids.
Either way – you owe yourself – I don’t owe you.
Don’t tell me there’s not opportunity when folks from other countries come here with NOTHING and build great lives for themselves and their families. Know why – they are WILLING TO WORK.
It is all about choices and too many people don’t have health insurance because they are not willing to give up the Ipods,
$150.00 sneakers, etc, etc. It has been a struggle for us over the year but we have carried insurance.
Government is not the answer. When has it ever been? If the politicians took all of the campaign money they are wasting telling lies about one another, they could provide health care for the uninsured.
If you believe in the “children are our future” liberal emotional illogical arguement, then please answer the following.
Please explain to me how further bankrupting this country and becoming more socialist is good for the future of the country.
The national debt is currently around $9 trillion. Add to this the amount the Federal Government have “promised” to pay out in Social Security (ie Senior Welfare) and other unconstitutional programs, and you get a debt of around $50 trillion. Please explain to me how this is good for the future of the country.
But it is not FREE. It comes out of the pockets of every taxpayer. I have no problems providing subsidized care for children on a sliding scale basis, but when health care is free, costs skyrocket. I also think a children’s program should be limited to kids – not adults. No surprise that some of the states listed (NY, NJ) are among the states with the highest cost of living.
These are not OUR children in the sense you use the word. The country did not birth any children, the govenment did not birth any children. I am responsible for the care of the children that my wife and I have brought into the world. YOU are responsible for those that you have.
I do agree with your 1 point – our children (yours and mine, not the country’s) are the future. The more we give them for nothing, the less they’ll be willing to do for themselves and the dimmer the future.
As CJB said, when did health insurance become a right? How about some personal responsibility!
Another Health care issue to be funded by a cigarette tax. Why always the cigarettes? Is this the only thing that causes health problems? How about taxing Big Macs? Monster Double Thick Burgers? High Fructose Corn Syrup? Or, God forbid beer?
Stop having 30% of the population funding all the health care mandates.
Many people who qualify, due to income, choose to pay for their own health care rather than let the government choose who they can see and when. So I doubt that many people will drop their current health care through their jobs if the program is expanded.
It will just allow thoes working poor, that barely make ends meet every month, a way to keep their children healthy.
To provide you more information, one of the features in the just vetoed legislation that Bush and many of us do not like is that the program would be expanded to include an income level that would shift to taxpayer funded coverage many children already covered under private insurance or have private insurance available, but would rather buy a new car or HDTV than purchase health insurance. Most don’t mind providing coverage for the truly needy children of US citizens.
Be careful what you wish for. They will tax everything they can get away with – cigarettes are just an easy target. But as the smoking population goes down, they will need to tax something else to raise the kind of money they’ll need to pay for the ever expanding benefits.
You may have too much faith in those that already have insurance. Free is a big draw. I heard about a poll where 44% wanted free health insurance. The problem is it’s not really free – someone will pay and the more that sign up, the more someones will have to pay.
And who are the working poor? Should a family of 4 with $80,000 income qualify?
The commentors thus far are much better informed overall than the vast majority of the public…maybe it’s because we know something about insurance. The bottom-line is that this bill has nothing to do with “doing more for our children” and everthing to create an election year headline “Bush Vetos Children’s Health Insurance Bill.” The fact that it greatly expands coverage to kids that are already covered by private insurance will be lost on most people.
I have some place in my heart for the working poor, but I would like to know what the definition is for working poor. I also want to understand just how long we are going to provide this free health care.
I however have no sympathy for long term unemployed, espeically those that can create new and imaginative ways to convince government that they have to be suppoprted by MY tax dollars.
I also have no sympathy for illegal imigrants who invade our country and expect the same benefits that our legal citizens receive.
So much for my ranting… I am just a single voice and until the silent majority in this county stand up and let themselves be heard… we all might as well bend over.
Unfortunately for every person/child that truly needs the goverments help theres another person right behind them more than willing to take advantage. So what do we do? Deny help to everyone, even those that really need it? I don’t like the idea that my tax dollars go to support people who continually abuse the system anymore than the next person but I also don’t think that means no one should recieve help. Is there a solution? I don’t know, anyone have any ideas on how to keep the cheaters out of the system and figure out who those with real needs are?
I have an idea, keep things the way they are, leave the limit at 5 billion dollars a year instead of 3 billion, and those who need it the most will hopefully get the care that they need. I fully agree with Dag Nabbit’s comment that this is just another slam against republicans for the left to use in the next election.
If the states want to provide the insurance, why don’t they come up with the funds on their own?
Answer: Because thay are gutless little men (woman) and they wouldn’t have the excuse… it’s Bush’s fault aka “Shrub” or whatever “clever” little name you can come up with. After all why should New York, Illinois etal pay when they can force their own costs on to others.
but even with the lower limit do you really think all those getting the aid were the ones that really needed it? I’m sure there were plenty of people not getting it that could really use it and even more who were getting it who should be able to pay for it themselves. Giving it to less people isn’t the answer unless by “less” you cut out those who are scamming the system
By no means do I want us tax payers paying for “free” insurance with an unlimited time frame. Many families fall on hard times and need government services for a short while. For thoes families the help should be there and be, realatively, easy to get.
Yes, time limits should be placed on ALL government services. Including welfare.
Yes, evey time certain people hear the word free they figure out a way to get it and keep it.
No program is without fraud. I am not naive enough to think that. I just believe that the services should be available when needed.
If it didn’t cost so much to get an X-Ray, Blood Test and a prescription we’d be in a better position to afford health insurance. A one night stay in a hospitial is like a month’s salary with insurance. Quit blaming the government and the insurance industry and start blaming it on the the health insurance gougers.
Anyone happen to know the reference number for this bill? I’ve read article upon article about this and all of your comments, but have not seen anywhere a reference number that I can use to read the bill and make up my own mind!
The above question is for all you who have responded previously.
So, government,and you who agree with “The Windshield Cowboy” arogant Bush cannot afford to help people whose income is borderline to afford healthcare, which yes it should be a right, but yet you can afford the money to go kill camels in Iraq and Afganistan and else where in the world where USA has no business interfering with.
Maybe what we ought to be doing right now is demanding that instead of a generalized “Let’s Insure The Children” statement, that a detailed proposal be provided, including expected costs, where the funds to cover these costs will come from, who will be eligible, for how long will they be eligible and… what other pork will be added to this bill when it goes up the ladder.
If they do that, I’d bet that every tax payer who even vaguely understands will get sick!
A few years ago, a friend that was a single mom with one child tried to get assistance, she did have a job at min wages and was going to college part time. The social worker basically told her, if she quit her job, they would be able to help her. How screwed up is that! The system basically tells them not to work and they will get assistance. Fortunately, she struggled thru it and has a very good job now and does not need assistance.
Right now I am that Single mom working 40 hours a week, in a management job, receiving no child support, and still making ends meet. Not all that could use help abuse it..thank you RAL I couldn’t agree more
All the more reason for you to be against paying for those who do take advantage of the government. You work hard and it shows. Unfortunately there are too many phoneys out there.
Not everyone that needs assistance is a dead beat. Even at the new min wages(which is a joke, in my opinion), it is difficult for many, many working people to afford health insurance. I am self employed and until I was able to get medicare, and I also have a supplement insurance, I paid over $500.00 a month for health insurance. This was a struggle. I think we need to help our own people for a change.
You are right, there are many that are dead beats, but why make the good suffer for the bad! There certainly should be a system to weed these out and help those who really need it. Children are innocent and we should take care of them if their parents can’t.
You are right, kids are innocent and i have no problem with the program that is in place, nor do I have a problem with an increase in funding. But this bill was vetoed because there are too many left winged ulterior motives and its becoming more about the kids and their families, instead of the just kids who dont have options.
One of the previously posted comments asked for a solution, rather than to continue the venting, so I’ll try to start something, in hopes that others can build it further along.
We all, indeed, pay for these systems. What is desperately missing is oversight by the true provider — the actual taxpayer, for the line item expense. That CAN be repaired, massively changing these issues.
Step 1) Create welfare clearance boards at the LOCAL level. Their job is to discover who in the local community needs assistance, and what kind of assistance. They must use a standardized national template that describes the need, reason, and duration.
Step 2) Create 100% tax credits for citizens to use at such clearance boards. The taxpayer may choose, at THEIR OWN DISCRETION, whether they earmark that money for health care, food stamps, education, or any other category of assistence available. Allow that taxpayer to have up to 20% of their tax due used in this manner (if I owe $10,000 in taxes, then I could spend $2,000 directly to this specific place and purpose, and then only send 8,000 with my tax return).
Step 3) Each contributing taxpayer to a local board will optionally check the box to be willing to serve on the audit committee. Annually, an audit committee will review the local board, to ensure that they have accurately provided their information on beneficiaries of those local grants. If a single mom is using her grant to go back to school, then she’d better be a single mom, and she’d better have gone back to school! The opinions of need would not be audited — just the accuracy of the participants and the information provided.
What many taxpayers hate is that their taxes are used in ways that horrify them. Other taxpayers could care less (if they were passionate about it, we wouldn’t be in this mess). Allow such a 100% credit program, and then see how many individual taxpayers would make the effort to direct where their tax money was actually spent. Even if only 10% of taxpayers participated in such a program, you’d have 10% of citizens very happy with where their tax money was spent.
The big deal is — you’d have the people spending the money watching the accounting of the money! Money gets spent very differently by an individual than it does by a committee… or an appointed representative… and by a politician or bureaucrat is the worst! Put the power in the people. Government is to do for us only what we CANNOT do for ourselves. Creating the organizational structure and vehicle by government is fine. But then having the citizens deciding how much is spent where… that’s REALLY managing your financial resources!
Some will say that the above is what charities do. Used to, perhaps… but not any more. There is not a 100% tax credit for charity contributions, and too many “not exactly a charity” entities out there. Some are huge machines, where executives bleed off donations in fund raising events, big incomes, etc. What was done during our parent’s generation by charities and churches is NOT what is done by them now… done too much personal research there.
I’m simply wanting to pay the same amount of taxes, but get to decide myself where I allocate part of that money. You don’t get to tell me what I should allocate it for… which allows me to “vote by dollar” which of the items get funded by my money. You do the same… and there will be a nice spread of where the money goes.
Hopefully, each local community will know where the money will be spent best. And the more citizens that adopt the option, the more we’ll be spending our money on our wants.
Hopefully, rather than tear down the idea above, others can suggest improvements where I’ve not considered pitfalls.
Not to tear down your system, but my initial response is – you’ll have to raise taxes (local, state or federal) to fund the program.
Second, what an opportunity for kick back and graft.
I’m glad someone’s trying, but truly there are no simple answers cause there’s always an exception to the rule; or this or that. I just know that throwing more money at a problem never makes it go away.
By each according to his ability to each according to his needs. This is taken from the communist/socialist writings, and it’s what the government is trying to do by way of programs.
You confused me, i dont think it’s simple enough for many people to understand. I think i know where you’re going with it, but people are not going to get these $2000 tax credits without a government tax increase. My thoughts…impose the fairtax and everyone can choose what to do with the money they earn.
umpiire, many great ideas, I like the tax credit idea. Also the welfare clearance board, but it is to find people who care enough to fill these positions. And would the politicians like the idea of not having control, I don’t think. I worked for the government many years ago, and I saw too many lazy people pretending they were working. I think that would be the first step, to weed out the pretenders!
umpiire – some good thoughts but others miss the mark. For example, “Government is to do for us only what we CANNOT do for ourselves.”
The purpose of govenment is not to do what we can’t do, at least not everything we can’t do. The scope of the federal government was intended to be very limited to those enumerated in the constitution. I haven’t yet found heathcare referenced there.
My last thought on this issue………….
It is strange how most people think that these are unnecessary give away programs, until someone we know, a relative, friend or even ourself, is in need of one of these programs, then our opinions change.
“Free Children’s health care” is already there. My daughter is a single mother working and going to college. Title 19 paid for her son’s birth and all medical expenses he incurs. Of course, her annual income is around $10,000, and she does not have health insurance on herself.
All these folks that receive medicaid and foodstamps file taxes every year. And they received a return, I’ve seen someone who only worked 2 months part-time get back $3,500. FOR WHAT? They didn’t pay that in. Here’s what you do, make them pay their own Medicaid, foodstamps and such. Instead of getting back a refund, deduct what they received in free benefits from the GOV.
First – This may be the right thing to do, but before we jump in feet first, lets define who is an eligible child. All we need to do is to start providing FREE health services to see the illegal immigrant population surge more than it has. (oh excuse me, that is not politically correct is it.)
Second – How long will it take before people realize that the more the governments “give us”, the more that the government “owns us”.
Don’t you just love publicity seeking politicians?
This is the first step towards nationalized healthcare. What will the middle income families that already have health insurance do once they qualify? They will drop their coverage and get the free stuff from the government.
FL CSR – I agree with you in principle but I think 2 clarifications are needed.
One – this is the NEXT step towards nationalized heathcare. We alredy have Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP and probably other programs.
Two – this program is not free. It will be cheaper for those who sign up but they’ll be paying more in taxes to sustain it. And for those who don’t (or can’t) sign up, we’ll be footing the rest of the bill.
I think the article is a bit one-sided (kind of strange for the AP, I realize).
1) The states are saying they don’t like the feds telling them the income levels – it sounds to me like it’s the fed’s money; if it’s their money, they get to make the rules.
2) When and how did health insurance become a RIGHT?
If I (in the global sense) can get it free, you bet I’m going to get it. Whoever said that the more we take from the government, the more the government controls us.
Free Me From Government Domination and Control.
I think we all forget the most important issue here – these are OUR (as a country) children, and the country’s future. It’s embarrassing to even bein this position and can’t provide decent medical care to the young who really need it.
I think we all forget the most important issue here – these are OUR (as a country) children, and the country’s future. It’s embarrassing to even bein this position and can’t provide decent medical care to the young who really need it.
Don’t bleed on me. If you can’t work – I’ll happily help you. If you won’t – don’t ask for my money. If you are unskilled – learn some. If you made bad decisions – you learn from your mistakes. Can’t afford kids – don’t have kids.
Either way – you owe yourself – I don’t owe you.
Don’t tell me there’s not opportunity when folks from other countries come here with NOTHING and build great lives for themselves and their families. Know why – they are WILLING TO WORK.
Key word – RESPONSIBILITY!
It is all about choices and too many people don’t have health insurance because they are not willing to give up the Ipods,
$150.00 sneakers, etc, etc. It has been a struggle for us over the year but we have carried insurance.
Government is not the answer. When has it ever been? If the politicians took all of the campaign money they are wasting telling lies about one another, they could provide health care for the uninsured.
JG,
If you believe in the “children are our future” liberal emotional illogical arguement, then please answer the following.
Please explain to me how further bankrupting this country and becoming more socialist is good for the future of the country.
The national debt is currently around $9 trillion. Add to this the amount the Federal Government have “promised” to pay out in Social Security (ie Senior Welfare) and other unconstitutional programs, and you get a debt of around $50 trillion. Please explain to me how this is good for the future of the country.
But it is not FREE. It comes out of the pockets of every taxpayer. I have no problems providing subsidized care for children on a sliding scale basis, but when health care is free, costs skyrocket. I also think a children’s program should be limited to kids – not adults. No surprise that some of the states listed (NY, NJ) are among the states with the highest cost of living.
Oh, and by the way, my kids aren’t your kids. My kids are my kids. Your kids are your kids.
Take care of yours and I’ll take care of mine. Leave the government out of it.
These are not OUR children in the sense you use the word. The country did not birth any children, the govenment did not birth any children. I am responsible for the care of the children that my wife and I have brought into the world. YOU are responsible for those that you have.
I do agree with your 1 point – our children (yours and mine, not the country’s) are the future. The more we give them for nothing, the less they’ll be willing to do for themselves and the dimmer the future.
As CJB said, when did health insurance become a right? How about some personal responsibility!
Amen H.H. you hit the nail right on the head. People stop breeding and we won’t be in this mess. if you can’t feed ’em, don’t breed ’em.
Another Health care issue to be funded by a cigarette tax. Why always the cigarettes? Is this the only thing that causes health problems? How about taxing Big Macs? Monster Double Thick Burgers? High Fructose Corn Syrup? Or, God forbid beer?
Stop having 30% of the population funding all the health care mandates.
Many people who qualify, due to income, choose to pay for their own health care rather than let the government choose who they can see and when. So I doubt that many people will drop their current health care through their jobs if the program is expanded.
It will just allow thoes working poor, that barely make ends meet every month, a way to keep their children healthy.
To provide you more information, one of the features in the just vetoed legislation that Bush and many of us do not like is that the program would be expanded to include an income level that would shift to taxpayer funded coverage many children already covered under private insurance or have private insurance available, but would rather buy a new car or HDTV than purchase health insurance. Most don’t mind providing coverage for the truly needy children of US citizens.
Be careful what you wish for. They will tax everything they can get away with – cigarettes are just an easy target. But as the smoking population goes down, they will need to tax something else to raise the kind of money they’ll need to pay for the ever expanding benefits.
You may have too much faith in those that already have insurance. Free is a big draw. I heard about a poll where 44% wanted free health insurance. The problem is it’s not really free – someone will pay and the more that sign up, the more someones will have to pay.
And who are the working poor? Should a family of 4 with $80,000 income qualify?
The commentors thus far are much better informed overall than the vast majority of the public…maybe it’s because we know something about insurance. The bottom-line is that this bill has nothing to do with “doing more for our children” and everthing to create an election year headline “Bush Vetos Children’s Health Insurance Bill.” The fact that it greatly expands coverage to kids that are already covered by private insurance will be lost on most people.
I have some place in my heart for the working poor, but I would like to know what the definition is for working poor. I also want to understand just how long we are going to provide this free health care.
I however have no sympathy for long term unemployed, espeically those that can create new and imaginative ways to convince government that they have to be suppoprted by MY tax dollars.
I also have no sympathy for illegal imigrants who invade our country and expect the same benefits that our legal citizens receive.
So much for my ranting… I am just a single voice and until the silent majority in this county stand up and let themselves be heard… we all might as well bend over.
Unfortunately for every person/child that truly needs the goverments help theres another person right behind them more than willing to take advantage. So what do we do? Deny help to everyone, even those that really need it? I don’t like the idea that my tax dollars go to support people who continually abuse the system anymore than the next person but I also don’t think that means no one should recieve help. Is there a solution? I don’t know, anyone have any ideas on how to keep the cheaters out of the system and figure out who those with real needs are?
I have an idea, keep things the way they are, leave the limit at 5 billion dollars a year instead of 3 billion, and those who need it the most will hopefully get the care that they need. I fully agree with Dag Nabbit’s comment that this is just another slam against republicans for the left to use in the next election.
sorry, thats 5 billion over 5 years instead of 35 billion
If the states want to provide the insurance, why don’t they come up with the funds on their own?
Answer: Because thay are gutless little men (woman) and they wouldn’t have the excuse… it’s Bush’s fault aka “Shrub” or whatever “clever” little name you can come up with. After all why should New York, Illinois etal pay when they can force their own costs on to others.
but even with the lower limit do you really think all those getting the aid were the ones that really needed it? I’m sure there were plenty of people not getting it that could really use it and even more who were getting it who should be able to pay for it themselves. Giving it to less people isn’t the answer unless by “less” you cut out those who are scamming the system
There will always be someone scamming the system, but increasing the budget by a factor of 7 is not going to help weed out the scammers.
By no means do I want us tax payers paying for “free” insurance with an unlimited time frame. Many families fall on hard times and need government services for a short while. For thoes families the help should be there and be, realatively, easy to get.
Yes, time limits should be placed on ALL government services. Including welfare.
Yes, evey time certain people hear the word free they figure out a way to get it and keep it.
No program is without fraud. I am not naive enough to think that. I just believe that the services should be available when needed.
If it didn’t cost so much to get an X-Ray, Blood Test and a prescription we’d be in a better position to afford health insurance. A one night stay in a hospitial is like a month’s salary with insurance. Quit blaming the government and the insurance industry and start blaming it on the the health insurance gougers.
Anyone happen to know the reference number for this bill? I’ve read article upon article about this and all of your comments, but have not seen anywhere a reference number that I can use to read the bill and make up my own mind!
What is worst?
The above question is for all you who have responded previously.
So, government,and you who agree with “The Windshield Cowboy” arogant Bush cannot afford to help people whose income is borderline to afford healthcare, which yes it should be a right, but yet you can afford the money to go kill camels in Iraq and Afganistan and else where in the world where USA has no business interfering with.
. . .who will sue a doctor at the drop of a syringe.
Answer – The family has to pass a drug test as one step in qualification.
If you’re spending my money, I don’t want it spent on illegal drugs.
You’re joking right?
Do you think healthcare should be a non-profit industry? If so, would we get the best and brightest?
It cost so much more due partially to, dare I say it, lawsuits and the fear of being sued.
Same reason house calls aren’t made any longer and why you can’t video tape births (although I have no idea why you’d want to).
Free market is nearly ALWAYS better than a regulated one. Don’t start with price controls, that’s just another path to the same destination.
Maybe what we ought to be doing right now is demanding that instead of a generalized “Let’s Insure The Children” statement, that a detailed proposal be provided, including expected costs, where the funds to cover these costs will come from, who will be eligible, for how long will they be eligible and… what other pork will be added to this bill when it goes up the ladder.
If they do that, I’d bet that every tax payer who even vaguely understands will get sick!
A few years ago, a friend that was a single mom with one child tried to get assistance, she did have a job at min wages and was going to college part time. The social worker basically told her, if she quit her job, they would be able to help her. How screwed up is that! The system basically tells them not to work and they will get assistance. Fortunately, she struggled thru it and has a very good job now and does not need assistance.
Right now I am that Single mom working 40 hours a week, in a management job, receiving no child support, and still making ends meet. Not all that could use help abuse it..thank you RAL I couldn’t agree more
All the more reason for you to be against paying for those who do take advantage of the government. You work hard and it shows. Unfortunately there are too many phoneys out there.
Not everyone that needs assistance is a dead beat. Even at the new min wages(which is a joke, in my opinion), it is difficult for many, many working people to afford health insurance. I am self employed and until I was able to get medicare, and I also have a supplement insurance, I paid over $500.00 a month for health insurance. This was a struggle. I think we need to help our own people for a change.
You are right, there are many that are dead beats, but why make the good suffer for the bad! There certainly should be a system to weed these out and help those who really need it. Children are innocent and we should take care of them if their parents can’t.
You are right, kids are innocent and i have no problem with the program that is in place, nor do I have a problem with an increase in funding. But this bill was vetoed because there are too many left winged ulterior motives and its becoming more about the kids and their families, instead of the just kids who dont have options.
Don’t forget the VA system along with the other plans you mentioned.
One of the previously posted comments asked for a solution, rather than to continue the venting, so I’ll try to start something, in hopes that others can build it further along.
We all, indeed, pay for these systems. What is desperately missing is oversight by the true provider — the actual taxpayer, for the line item expense. That CAN be repaired, massively changing these issues.
Step 1) Create welfare clearance boards at the LOCAL level. Their job is to discover who in the local community needs assistance, and what kind of assistance. They must use a standardized national template that describes the need, reason, and duration.
Step 2) Create 100% tax credits for citizens to use at such clearance boards. The taxpayer may choose, at THEIR OWN DISCRETION, whether they earmark that money for health care, food stamps, education, or any other category of assistence available. Allow that taxpayer to have up to 20% of their tax due used in this manner (if I owe $10,000 in taxes, then I could spend $2,000 directly to this specific place and purpose, and then only send 8,000 with my tax return).
Step 3) Each contributing taxpayer to a local board will optionally check the box to be willing to serve on the audit committee. Annually, an audit committee will review the local board, to ensure that they have accurately provided their information on beneficiaries of those local grants. If a single mom is using her grant to go back to school, then she’d better be a single mom, and she’d better have gone back to school! The opinions of need would not be audited — just the accuracy of the participants and the information provided.
What many taxpayers hate is that their taxes are used in ways that horrify them. Other taxpayers could care less (if they were passionate about it, we wouldn’t be in this mess). Allow such a 100% credit program, and then see how many individual taxpayers would make the effort to direct where their tax money was actually spent. Even if only 10% of taxpayers participated in such a program, you’d have 10% of citizens very happy with where their tax money was spent.
The big deal is — you’d have the people spending the money watching the accounting of the money! Money gets spent very differently by an individual than it does by a committee… or an appointed representative… and by a politician or bureaucrat is the worst! Put the power in the people. Government is to do for us only what we CANNOT do for ourselves. Creating the organizational structure and vehicle by government is fine. But then having the citizens deciding how much is spent where… that’s REALLY managing your financial resources!
Some will say that the above is what charities do. Used to, perhaps… but not any more. There is not a 100% tax credit for charity contributions, and too many “not exactly a charity” entities out there. Some are huge machines, where executives bleed off donations in fund raising events, big incomes, etc. What was done during our parent’s generation by charities and churches is NOT what is done by them now… done too much personal research there.
I’m simply wanting to pay the same amount of taxes, but get to decide myself where I allocate part of that money. You don’t get to tell me what I should allocate it for… which allows me to “vote by dollar” which of the items get funded by my money. You do the same… and there will be a nice spread of where the money goes.
Hopefully, each local community will know where the money will be spent best. And the more citizens that adopt the option, the more we’ll be spending our money on our wants.
Hopefully, rather than tear down the idea above, others can suggest improvements where I’ve not considered pitfalls.
Umpire,
Not to tear down your system, but my initial response is – you’ll have to raise taxes (local, state or federal) to fund the program.
Second, what an opportunity for kick back and graft.
I’m glad someone’s trying, but truly there are no simple answers cause there’s always an exception to the rule; or this or that. I just know that throwing more money at a problem never makes it go away.
By each according to his ability to each according to his needs. This is taken from the communist/socialist writings, and it’s what the government is trying to do by way of programs.
Sorry.
You confused me, i dont think it’s simple enough for many people to understand. I think i know where you’re going with it, but people are not going to get these $2000 tax credits without a government tax increase. My thoughts…impose the fairtax and everyone can choose what to do with the money they earn.
umpiire, many great ideas, I like the tax credit idea. Also the welfare clearance board, but it is to find people who care enough to fill these positions. And would the politicians like the idea of not having control, I don’t think. I worked for the government many years ago, and I saw too many lazy people pretending they were working. I think that would be the first step, to weed out the pretenders!
umpiire – some good thoughts but others miss the mark. For example, “Government is to do for us only what we CANNOT do for ourselves.”
The purpose of govenment is not to do what we can’t do, at least not everything we can’t do. The scope of the federal government was intended to be very limited to those enumerated in the constitution. I haven’t yet found heathcare referenced there.
My last thought on this issue………….
It is strange how most people think that these are unnecessary give away programs, until someone we know, a relative, friend or even ourself, is in need of one of these programs, then our opinions change.
“Free Children’s health care” is already there. My daughter is a single mother working and going to college. Title 19 paid for her son’s birth and all medical expenses he incurs. Of course, her annual income is around $10,000, and she does not have health insurance on herself.
All these folks that receive medicaid and foodstamps file taxes every year. And they received a return, I’ve seen someone who only worked 2 months part-time get back $3,500. FOR WHAT? They didn’t pay that in. Here’s what you do, make them pay their own Medicaid, foodstamps and such. Instead of getting back a refund, deduct what they received in free benefits from the GOV.