Acting as an apologist for the current system, Everett Koop reminded an audience recently of that fact. He said the Bill of Rights does not provide for such a thing and nor was it meant to in his opinion.. More people, however, are thinking that health care should be a right. What about fighting for a constitutional amendment to that effect. That may be the ONLY way to see to it that we get decent health care. marta
>I suspect Marta is right that the salad days of Medicaid
>are nearing an end. We were talking about public support
>and gross spending, and in this regard Medicaid has done
>pretty well. Jim's point about the broader eligibility
>for Medicaid is also well-taken. In this regard, a key
>battleground in the next year or two is the fate of SCHIP--
>State Childrens Health Insurance Programs, one of Clinton's
>two good deeds (the other was expansion of the EITC).
>SCHIP is looking at big funding shortfalls in FY2003
>in about ten states.
>
>I disagreee w/Jim about the salience of the state angle;
>the financing and control of AFDC were much the same, and
>that did little to save it.
>
>The lesson I take from the '90s is that waivers of Federal
>standards in the name of 'state flexibility' -- even for
>progressive reasons -- that weaken the entitlement
>aspect are what can unravel a program. We see waivers
>in Medicaid, just as we saw in AFDC as the '90s got
>under way. The safest course for benefits, if not
>always the most efficient in other respects, is for
>benefits and eligibility to be stipulated in law and
>guaranteed as a matter of right, as if they were
>property.
>
>In the same vein, the road to reconstructing AFDC/TANF,
>I would say, is to fight for work under TANF auspices
>to enjoy the same status as jobs in general, with FLSA
>protection. Minimum wage, EITC, SS benefits, etc.
>
>mbs
-- Marta Russell Los Angeles, CA www.disweb.org