Some Momentous Quiet News
Something about this NY Times article has been bugging me for hours, and it finally dawned on me what it was. Here's the pertinent information:
The Bush administration violated federal law last year when it restricted states’ ability to provide health insurance to children of middle-income families, and its new policy is therefore unenforceable, lawyers from the Government Accountability Office said Friday. ...
In a formal legal opinion Friday, the accountability office said the new policy “amounts to a marked departure” from a longstanding, settled interpretation of federal law. It is therefore a rule and, under a 1996 law, must be submitted to Congress for review before it can take effect, the opinion said.
But Jeff Nelligan, a spokesman for the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said, “G.A.O.’s opinion does not change our conclusion that the Aug. 17 letter is still in effect.”
Here's what the letter had to say:
The letter told states what steps they needed to take to be sure the children’s health program would not displace or “crowd out” private coverage under group health plans. The White House cited the policy as a justification for rejecting a proposal by New York State to cover 70,000 additional youngsters. ...
Under the Aug. 17 directive, states cannot expand the Children’s Health Insurance Program to cover youngsters with family incomes over 250 percent of the federal poverty level ($53,000 for a family of four) unless they can prove that they already cover 95 percent of eligible children below twice the poverty level ($42,400).
Moreover, in such states, children who lose or drop private coverage must be uninsured for 12 months before they can enroll in the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and co-payments in the public program must be similar to those in private plans.
It turns out that BushCo can't do that: it's freakin' illegal.
And how did the GAO get around to making that conclusion? Simple: two senators asked for an opinion:
The legal opinion was requested by Senators John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia, and Olympia J. Snowe, Republican of Maine. In view of it, they urged the administration to rescind the Aug. 17 directive.
Now, neither senator is hardly a charter member of DFH, and that's what's so intriguing about all of this. After 7+ years of signing statements and grandiose theories of the Unitary Executive, two somebodies in Congress finally had second thoughts about a particular issue. They asked for an opinion, and voila!, they got an answer.
It was as simple as that, yet nobody else had the intelligence, the temerity, or the ovaries to even question the administration's right to do whatever it damned well pleased. Nobody in the 109th Congress, and only two in the 110th.
I'm thinking we're needing more than a new administration at this point.
The Bush administration violated federal law last year when it restricted states’ ability to provide health insurance to children of middle-income families, and its new policy is therefore unenforceable, lawyers from the Government Accountability Office said Friday. ...
In a formal legal opinion Friday, the accountability office said the new policy “amounts to a marked departure” from a longstanding, settled interpretation of federal law. It is therefore a rule and, under a 1996 law, must be submitted to Congress for review before it can take effect, the opinion said.
But Jeff Nelligan, a spokesman for the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said, “G.A.O.’s opinion does not change our conclusion that the Aug. 17 letter is still in effect.”
Here's what the letter had to say:
The letter told states what steps they needed to take to be sure the children’s health program would not displace or “crowd out” private coverage under group health plans. The White House cited the policy as a justification for rejecting a proposal by New York State to cover 70,000 additional youngsters. ...
Under the Aug. 17 directive, states cannot expand the Children’s Health Insurance Program to cover youngsters with family incomes over 250 percent of the federal poverty level ($53,000 for a family of four) unless they can prove that they already cover 95 percent of eligible children below twice the poverty level ($42,400).
Moreover, in such states, children who lose or drop private coverage must be uninsured for 12 months before they can enroll in the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and co-payments in the public program must be similar to those in private plans.
It turns out that BushCo can't do that: it's freakin' illegal.
And how did the GAO get around to making that conclusion? Simple: two senators asked for an opinion:
The legal opinion was requested by Senators John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia, and Olympia J. Snowe, Republican of Maine. In view of it, they urged the administration to rescind the Aug. 17 directive.
Now, neither senator is hardly a charter member of DFH, and that's what's so intriguing about all of this. After 7+ years of signing statements and grandiose theories of the Unitary Executive, two somebodies in Congress finally had second thoughts about a particular issue. They asked for an opinion, and voila!, they got an answer.
It was as simple as that, yet nobody else had the intelligence, the temerity, or the ovaries to even question the administration's right to do whatever it damned well pleased. Nobody in the 109th Congress, and only two in the 110th.
I'm thinking we're needing more than a new administration at this point.
Labels: 109th Congress, 110th Congress, The Unitary President, Universal Health Care Access
posted by Diane at 3:59 AM
3 Comments:
hmmm.... maybe someone should ask the GAO if it is ok to torture... or indefinetely detain someone without charges or... well the list could go on and on... but it does make one (me) wonder if this is the only way our senators and congressional reps can get answers...
and do they need these answers from the GAO to paint the picture....
and what good are the answers if they all sit back and say..."yeah i thought that was illegal..."
sigh...
For some time it has looked to me as though the GAO is the one office that this administration has not been able to completely remake with loyal party hacks.
They don't appear to fudge numbers, even now.
But as the comment above reminds us, the Bush admin simply says, "So?" And the legislative body writes a letter, or something, and impeachment is still off the table.
Well, except in this case it might make a difference. The GAO's opinion was that the letter Bush sent to the states is invalid, and that means those states who want to expand health coverage to kids can go forward.
It will probably wind up in court, but the administration has at best a 50-50 shot on the issue.
Post a Comment
<< Home