Just three months after Congress gave children's healthcare a 10-year lifeline, Trump reneges

[workinclasszero]

Just three months after Congress gave children's healthcare a 10-year lifeline, Trump reneges
By MICHAEL HILTZIK MAY 08, 2018 | 2:55 PM

Those of us with long memories — defined in this turbocharged world as memories that date back more than 90 days — will recall that one of the biggest cliffhangers of that bygone season involved the funding of the Children's Health Insurance Program, or CHIP.

CHIP, which costs the federal government a paltry $14.5 billion a year but covers 9 million children and pregnant mothers, finally got funded by Congress in January, more than three months after the lawmakers allowed it to expire.

Now President Trump, eagle-eyed as ever for places to save federal funds (except when the money is spent on the 1%), is proposing to strip some $7 billion from funding for CHIP and other children's programs. That's nearly half the $15 billion he wants Congress to "rescind" from funds already appropriated for non-defense programs.

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-trump-chip-20180508-story.html

[Freethinker65]

1. Kids could not get enough $$$ from fundraisers to contribute to the slush fund?

[workinclasszero]

3. Yeah

Can't get any attention from our Pay to Play elected officials for sure.

Trump: Sorry kids, F off and die already OK?

[dalton99a]

2. Trump is the personification of evil.

[workinclasszero]

4. Agree

The lawless beast in the white house is a horror.

[ailsagirl]

7. Doesn't this compromise his wife's BeBest campaign... just a little?

[workinclasszero]

8. Yeah just a tad

[Ilsa]

9. Hey! A kid doesn't have to be free of disease to Be Best!

In fact, they can Be Best at being diseased! Or disabled! Or, whatever.

[bdamomma]

10. is it be best???

or be beast?

[gratuitous]

5. I have seen it argued

I have seen it argued that these claw-backs are funds that were time-limited or were contingency funds for states to use in case of high enrollment. Because fewer people than expected enrolled in CHIP, these funds weren't used, goes the argument. I don't know how correct that is (sounds rather fishy, and the arguer didn't provide any links or evidence), but if there is some truth to it, I would argue that it shows that the ACA is working quite well in covering people in spite of the herculean efforts by Republicans to sabotage it.

[forgotmylogin]

6. BUT THE PRESIDENT NEEDS THREE MORE MISSILES.

WHY CAN'T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND HE NEEDS TO SHAKE HIS DICK AT IRAN?

[appalachiablue]

11. Kick for this very impt. issue!