Ontario GOP has posted his
interview with Randy Kuhl. It's a good run-down of Kuhl's spin on some important election-day issues.
To his credit, GOP asks a couple of questions about issues that will be important election issues. On S-CHIP, Kuhl's justification for voting against hasn't changed much since last Fall:
Their plan also enables
illegal aliens to fraudulently enroll in Medicaid and SCHIP by
weakening the proof of citizenship. Also, their bill is the most
regressive tax increase in American history and taxes the poor to
benefit the rich. SCHIP was also designed for children, but the
Democratic extension increases the number of adults on SCHIP, which
allows even more resources to be taken away from low-income kids. And
finally and most importantly, SCHIP was designed for low-income, poor
children. The majority forgot that when they designed their extension,
because there are still poor children not covered. We must ensure that
we cover the low-income children first before considering expanding the
program.
I've debunked some of these claims earlier (see
this post on the immigrant issue). The "tax the poor" spin is an argument that poor people will bear the brunt of the tax increase on tobacco that partially funds S-CHIP expansion. The adult issue is a legitimate question, but the states that received waivers for adults were already covering all the kids allowed to be covered by S-CHIP, so the spin that adult funding is shorting kids is wrong. Also, part of the reason that poor children are not covered is that states are allowed to set coverage levels, and some fund S-CHIP at lower levels.
On the trip to Brazil, I think Kuhl over-reaches when he says this:
This trip was enlightening and
desperately needed. And for those people that want to belittle it for
political gain, do not understand that as a country you can not hide
your head in the sand and think that everything will be fine. This is a
global economy and we must learn from one another to benefit from the
successes and failures that we have experienced.
The obvious rejoinder to this is that there's no desperate need for anyone to stay at five-star hotels and fly on first-class military charters to learn about Brazil.
Iraq is not mentioned in the interview, which I think reflects the spin
that the working surge means Iraq no longer matters. I don't think
that wish will hold up to the reality of the election.
Comments
It was my understanding that the adults being covered were 'educationally handicapped' adults not able to be living on their own (either being taken care of by their parents or in group homes.)
Good point. You're right about that, but some are also parents of eligible children. But, that's only in states that were already at the 250% of poverty eligiblity line. Those states received a waiver to cover parents of eligible children.