blessednxs65
Is it Nicaraguan
That headline on the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal was just too good to pass up and the Journal noted what clear-thinking legislators and policy wonks have said for some time about the current proposals for expanding the federal State Childrens Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), a version of which went down to a 60%-40% defeat in Oregon on Tuesday:
Oregon voters passed judgment Tuesday on a plan that would have made their state children's health insurance program universal. Sound familiar?
It should, because Oregon reproduced the current SCHIP fracas in D.C. on the state level -- and the referendum took a major shellacking, with voters siding three to two against. Oregon's expansion was almost identical to the one backed by Congressional Democrats, so let's conduct a post-mortem, which may also be a portent.
The Journal editorial pointed out that the ringing defeat in Oregon was due most likely [because] voters understood that a tax increase on cigarettes is still a tax increase, and a highly regressive one at that. Only about 20% of Oregonians smoke, and most of those are lower income.
They may also have figured that to the extent tobacco taxes reduce smoking, they will soon not yield enough revenue to pay for ever-growing health costs. The same is true of the SCHIP proposal in Congress.
The editorial concluded that there are far-reaching political ramifications to Oregons vote, if anyone cares, including into next years Presidential race. As for 2008, most of the national press corps has already assumed universal coverage will both carry Hillary Clinton to the White House and march easily into law. The message from the Oregon trail is not so fast, especially if her Republican opponent advances a credible free-market alternative.
Oregon voters passed judgment Tuesday on a plan that would have made their state children's health insurance program universal. Sound familiar?
It should, because Oregon reproduced the current SCHIP fracas in D.C. on the state level -- and the referendum took a major shellacking, with voters siding three to two against. Oregon's expansion was almost identical to the one backed by Congressional Democrats, so let's conduct a post-mortem, which may also be a portent.
The Journal editorial pointed out that the ringing defeat in Oregon was due most likely [because] voters understood that a tax increase on cigarettes is still a tax increase, and a highly regressive one at that. Only about 20% of Oregonians smoke, and most of those are lower income.
They may also have figured that to the extent tobacco taxes reduce smoking, they will soon not yield enough revenue to pay for ever-growing health costs. The same is true of the SCHIP proposal in Congress.
The editorial concluded that there are far-reaching political ramifications to Oregons vote, if anyone cares, including into next years Presidential race. As for 2008, most of the national press corps has already assumed universal coverage will both carry Hillary Clinton to the White House and march easily into law. The message from the Oregon trail is not so fast, especially if her Republican opponent advances a credible free-market alternative.