[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 167 (Wednesday, October 31, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13595-S13597]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                 SCHIP

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I realize today is Halloween, so millions 
of children all over the globe will be showing up at our homes, saying 
``trick or treat.'' Unfortunately, Congress has been up to more tricks 
than treats lately. I say that with a sense of irony but also a sense 
of great disappointment.
  Almost 3 weeks ago, on October 11, I sent a letter to Senator Reid, 
the Senate majority leader, and the Speaker of the House, Congresswoman 
Pelosi, urging them to work across the aisle with Republicans and 
Democrats to come up with a sensible compromise on the reauthorization 
of the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
  Today, as we know, is October 31, Halloween, and we have still not 
been able to come up with a compromise that is reasonable and fiscally 
responsible which the President will sign. The families and the 
children in my State of Texas who are, unfortunately, put on edge and 
suffering some sense of anxiety wondering whether this important 
program will continue to serve the needs of low-income children are 
being unfortunately taken advantage of and disadvantaged.
  Why in the world would Congress play this kind of game and make those 
who are the most vulnerable among us the most anxious about their 
future and whether they will be able to get the health care which 
everyone in Congress believes low-income children ought to receive?
  Instead of negotiating and trying to come up with a sensible 
compromise,

[[Page S13596]]

we find the leadership in the House of Representatives rushing through 
a bill with little bipartisan input. Rather than trying to hammer out a 
meaningful compromise, we find a bill that actually costs just as much 
but serves fewer children and which otherwise makes minor tweaks to the 
legislation.
  This bill clearly misses the mark and fails to reauthorize the State 
Children's Health Insurance Program according to the original intent of 
the program, which is putting low-income children first, low-income 
children whose families earn too much money to qualify for Medicaid--
that is up to 100 percent of the poverty level--but who make up to 200 
percent of the poverty level. Unfortunately, due to the inaction of the 
U.S. Congress, we have 700,000 low-income Texas children who qualify 
for Medicaid, who qualify for SCHIP, but who are currently not signed 
up and receiving those benefits. Instead, Congress is taking its eye 
off the ball and exploding this sensible program that deserves to be 
authorized by raising the eligibility cap to 300 percent of the poverty 
level but doing nothing--I reiterate--nothing to ensure that low-income 
children, including 700,000 low-income children in Texas, have coverage 
first before we grow the program to higher income levels and cover 
adults as well.
  In fact, this legislation repeals the requirement that 95 percent of 
low-income children below 200 percent of the poverty level be covered 
first before extending coverage to children from higher income 
families. I do not believe this provision has the interests of the 
children this legislation was designed to serve put first. Instead, I 
think it puts partisan political interests ahead of the interests of 
low-income children.
  All of this has come, of course, in response to the President's veto 
of the original SCHIP reauthorization, a proposal that failed to 
encourage participation among the poorest of our children, and instead 
expanded coverage to children of higher income families as well as 
adults. Rather than being an obstacle, the President's veto should be 
looked at as an opportunity to reengage on a bipartisan basis to come 
up with a solution. It is no wonder that Congress's approval ratings 
are around the 11-percent range. When the people across America look to 
Washington to find solutions to their problems, what do they find? They 
find partisan posturing and precious few results.
  This is an opportunity to deliver a result and to keep a promise that 
we, on a bipartisan basis, have made to the poorest children in our 
country. What should we have asked ourselves as to what we should do? 
While we leave our children and their families blowing in the wind, 
will we turn their lives into campaign promises or will we, instead, 
keep our word that we came here to serve the needs of the American 
people, and particularly the most vulnerable among us, by continuing 
this important program and making sure that poor kids get health care 
first, before we look at growing this program to cover other more well-
to-do children or perhaps even adults as are covered currently in four 
States.

  The recent debate on SCHIP has focused too much on our political 
gains and not enough on the well-being of our poor children. This bill 
has become another political football in a game that has been raging 
for months, but, unlike any other game that I am familiar with, this 
game has only an imaginary scoreboard, the results are arbitrary, and 
nothing--nothing--it appears, is out of bounds.
  Whenever a health care package for low-income children is delayed 
because some want to engage in partisan games and political posturing, 
you know things have gone too far.
  They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and 
over again and yet expecting different results. Well, by that 
definition, this is insanity. We know the original bill that was vetoed 
by the President was because it strayed far from the original 
objectives. It was not funded on a source of revenue that could be 
expected to pay for this radical expansion of the current program by 
140 percent.
  Well, we know the reasons the President vetoed that legislation. And 
what does the leadership in the House of Representatives decide to do? 
Well, they decide to essentially do the same thing again and dare the 
President, one more time, to veto this legislation.
  It is clear this is not, by definition, good-faith negotiation and 
attempt, on a bipartisan basis, to solve this very real problem. Rather 
than give voice to those who want to find a better and more sensible 
solution to this problem, we will find ourselves this afternoon simply 
voting on another substantially flawed bill, which the President has 
likewise promised to veto.
  Of course, when the bill returns from its short and uneventful trip 
to the White House, we will not fail to see the video cameras paraded 
out for the press conferences to talk once more about how the President 
and those who voted against this bill have heartlessly blocked it.
  It has become a cynical ploy. Everybody gets it. Only people inside 
the beltway in Washington or inside this Chamber who continue to engage 
in partisan posturing do not get it. The American people see through it 
as clearly as you would expect.
  The truth is no one wants to see SCHIP reauthorized more than the 
Members of the Congress, on a bipartisan basis. It is an enormously 
successful program passed with broad bipartisan support in 1997, and it 
should be continued. As a matter of fact, those of us who voted against 
the bill the President vetoed believe we should continue the program, 
and we should add at least $10 billion to the original funding in order 
to cover more and more low-income kids.
  But even more important than that, in my State of Texas, half of the 
uninsured children in Texas who are eligible for Medicaid and SCHIP 
under the current program are not signed up. What is Congress doing to 
make sure those children are reached out to, that their parents are 
assisted in filling out the paperwork so they can qualify for this 
program? Precious little. Precious little.
  Congress continues to add 140 percent to the current authority under 
this program, to take money out of necessary outreach to reach out to 
the low-income kids and to explode this program into one that covers 
people making much more money than double the Federal level of poverty.
  I will do everything in my power to ensure these children get the 
health care they need. The problem is, as I and many of my colleagues 
have pointed out numerous times, this bill does not make these children 
a priority. It does not make these children a priority but, rather, an 
afterthought.
  Instead, it puts other children, many of whom already enjoy the 
benefits of private health insurance, in competition with these low-
income children for CHIP coverage. The result is that children who most 
need it get crowded out in favor of children who already have private 
health insurance.
  This bill simply does not fix the problem. It raises the eligibility 
for CHIP enrollment without a concerted effort to enroll those children 
who are currently eligible first. Additionally, this new bill does 
nothing to close the loopholes on income disregard. Now, that is a 
fancy way of saying disregarding the rules. You say the rules are one 
thing, but you come behind it later on and say: Well, forget some of 
these rules when it comes to qualifying income.
  This bill is another example of that kind of gamesmanship under the 
title of income disregards which allows States the ability to, in 
effect, define a family's income by saying: We will not take into 
account all income. We are going to disregard some so you will qualify 
for this Federal Government taxpayer-paid-for benefit.
  This loophole would allow States to actually exceed 300 percent of 
poverty level by disregarding part of the family's income.
  Neither does this bill address the crowd-out effect which is expected 
to shift 2 million children from private coverage to government-run 
health care. There are a number of other problems with this bill that 
do nothing to eliminate the document fraud and identity theft that 
would allow noncitizens to qualify for the benefits under this 
legislation.
  We can do better. We must do better. But we cannot do better as long 
as we continue to engage in this partisan gamesmanship and political 
posturing. Unfortunately, it is the low-income children, among the most 
vulnerable in our country, who are the ones who are left wondering: Is 
Congress going to act in their best interests?
  Unfortunately, they have seen very little evidence so far that they 
are our

[[Page S13597]]

No. 1 priority, as they should be. Instead, partisan politics appear to 
be the No. 1 priority, and those children appear to be something left 
behind.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey is recognized.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for the rest of 
the Democratic time in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________