[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 1]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 860-861]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           IN SUPPORT OF S-CHIP COVERAGE FOR UNBORN CHILDREN

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. BOB SCHAFFER

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, February 7, 2002

  Mr. SCHAFFER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the Bush 
Administration and Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy 
Thompson for the recently proposed rule to expand the State Children's 
Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP) to cover health care for low-income 
pregnant women and their unborn children. The Department's action is 
consistent with the intent of the S-CHIP program, which is to ensure 
low-income children who do not qualify for Medicaid receive health care 
coverage.
  Research demonstrates the direct correlation between the health of 
children and the quality of prenatal care during their mother's 
pregnancy. Therefore, it is vital to the health of young children for 
us to care for them before they are born in order to give them a 
healthy start in life.
  Many states have already obtained waivers from the Department of 
Health and Human Services to include pregnant mothers in S-CHIP health 
coverage. My own state of Colorado is currently debating this issue in 
the General Assembly, and it appears a bill to expand coverage may pass 
and be signed into law shortly. I applaud Governor Bill Owens' 
leadership on this legislation.
  Under curent S-CHIP regulations, Colorado would have to seek a waiver 
from HHS to cover prenatal health care. The newly proposed S-CHIP rule 
would eliminate any delays Colorado and other states might encounter in 
their efforts to obtain a waiver by simply granting all states the 
ability to cover prenatal care under S-CHIP. I urge Secretary Thompson 
to act quickly to enact the new rule.
  In Colorado, approximately 3,400 pregnant mothers and their unborn 
children would qualify for S-CHIP under the new proposed rule. These 
uninsured mothers are within the 134-185 percent range of the federal 
poverty level, thus making them ineligible for Medicaid. Without health 
insurance, it is highly likely these women would never receive adequate 
prenatal care, thus placing their baby at risk for potential health 
problems and complications at birth.
  Including both the mothers and their babies, the new S-CHIP rule 
would essentially be providing health care for 6,800 individuals in 
Colorado alone. Once the babies are born, they are immediately eligible 
for continued health coverage under S-CHIP. It only makes sense to 
extend appropriate health care to the baby while still in the womb. 
There should be no differentiation between the child prior to birth and 
just after birth as some liberal pro-abortion groups are notorious for 
doing.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to briefly address some of the incredulous 
arguments being made against the new S-CHIP rule by just those people 
who classify a ``fetus'' as somehow less of a person from a newborn 
baby. I find it hypocritical for anyone to oppose extending health 
coverage to the unborn child on the grounds it should only be extended 
to pregnant women. It is absolutely ridiculous to separate the life of 
the unborn baby from the life of the mother in regard to expanding 
health care coverage. The baby is wholly dependent on the mother. Thus, 
taking into consideration the S-CHIP focus on health care for children, 
it is completely within the scope of the S-CHIP program to extend 
coverage to the unborn child, and by doing so, the mother, as well.
  Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing me this time to discuss the newly 
proposed S-CHIP rule and the great effects it will have on women and 
babies across this country. Many states, including Colorado, are 
already seeking to extend S-CHIP coverage to unborn babies, so I urge 
Secretary Thompson to enact this broad and bipartisan rule quickly. 
There is no good reason to oppose it.

[[Page 861]]



                          ____________________