David Herszenhorn's front-page "Political Memo" for Wednesday's New York Times was devoted to the fight over Graeme Frost, the boy pushed forward by the Democrats to deliver the response to Bush's weekly radio address on the State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP).
The inimitable Mark Steyn is one of several conservative writers unhappy with Democrats "desperate enough to send a boy to do a man's job."
Herszenhorn accused Republicans and "conservative bloggers" of attacking the boy and his family. While not as bad as the local coverage in the Baltimore Sun as outlined earlier by Ken Shepherd, there is a hostile tone:
"There have been moments when the fight between Congressional Democrats and President Bush over the State Children's Health Insurance Program seemed to devolve into a shouting match about who loves children more.
"So when Democrats enlisted 12-year-old Graeme Frost, who along with a younger sister relied on the program for treatment of severe brain injuries suffered in a car crash, to give the response to Mr. Bush's weekly radio address on Sept. 29, Republican opponents quickly accused them of exploiting the boy to score political points.
"Then, they wasted little time in going after him to score their own.
"In recent days, Graeme and his family have been attacked by conservative bloggers and other critics of the Democrats' plan to expand the insurance program, known as S-chip. They scrutinized the family's income and assets -- even alleged the counters in their kitchen to be granite -- and declared that the Frosts did not seem needy enough for government benefits.
"But what on the surface appears to be yet another partisan feud, all the nastier because a child is at the center of it, actually cuts to the most substantive debate around S-chip. Democrats say it is crucially needed to help the working poor – Medicaid already helps the impoverished -- but many Republicans say it now helps too many people with the means to help themselves.
"The feud also illustrates what can happen when politicians showcase real people to make a point, a popular but often perilous technique. And in this case, the discourse has been anything but polite."
….
"Republicans on Capitol Hill, who were gearing up to use Graeme as evidence that Democrats have overexpanded the health program to include families wealthy enough to afford private insurance, have backed off, glad to let bloggers take the heat for attacking a family with injured children.
"An aide to Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, expressed relief that his office had not issued a press release criticizing the Frosts."
To his credit, Herszenhorn got an undiluted opinion from one of the main Internet drivers of the issue.
"But Michelle Malkin, one of the bloggers who have strongly criticized the Frosts, insisted Republicans should hold their ground and not pull punches.
"'The bottom line here is that this family has considerable assets,' Ms. Malkin wrote in an e-mail message. 'Maryland's S-chip program does not means-test. The refusal to do assets tests on federal health insurance programs is why federal entitlements are exploding and government keeps expanding. If Republicans don't have the guts to hold the line, they deserve to lose their seats.'
"As for accusations that bloggers were unfairly attacking a 12-year-old, Ms. Malkin wrote on her blog, 'If you don't want questions, don't foist these children onto the public stage.'"
Malkin had more in her New York Post column Wednesday:
"What is verifiable: The Frosts own a home in Baltimore purchased for $55,000 16 years ago -- and now worth an estimated $300,000. That's a lot of equity. In addition, the children's father, Halsey Frost, owns commercial real estate and his own small business, but chose not to buy health insurance for himself and his wife, whom he hired as an employee. She now apparently works freelance at a medical-publishing firm, which also reportedly doesn't offer insurance."
—Clay Waters is the director of Times Watch, an MRC project tracking the New York Times.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Look if you stick your
October 10, 2007 - 14:57 ET by USA4freedomLook if you stick your nose in politics, you can’t expect to get a free pass.
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
This is exactly what Ann
October 10, 2007 - 15:08 ET by KevroyThis is exactly what Ann Coulter mentioned in her last book. Liberals try to put a spokesperson at the forefront that is 'unassailable'.
Anybody who dares to question what this snot nosed kid is saying, is labeled as attacking the child. That's why they have people like Max McClellan show up at rallies in his wheelchair, it's why people say Cindy Sheehan has 'absolute moral authority'.
Nothing but a shell game by the looney Left.
Michael J Fox, The Jersey
October 10, 2007 - 17:19 ET by Chris NormanMichael J Fox, The Jersey Girls, Sarah Brady...
The Democrats have nothing
October 10, 2007 - 15:18 ET by mostlymoderateThe Democrats have nothing if they can't use sad-looking Polar Bears (global warming) or sick little-children (SCHIP).
Mmmmmmm....
October 10, 2007 - 21:29 ET by Scout FinchCan't touch that!
The libs have no arguement
October 10, 2007 - 15:29 ET by rbosqueThe libs have no arguement so they (again) appeal to the emotions of fools rather than discuss this topic with a little bit of intellect. This is typical DNC playbook.
Parents
October 10, 2007 - 15:34 ET by Jerry MackI can not figure out why parents put their children in these positions! What did they hope to gain? It is pure stupidity on their part to think that every word of his address was not going to be scrutinised. How could they not know that their lives were going to become an open book. They must live in a vacuum.
Wait a minute there...
October 10, 2007 - 15:52 ET by c5thenThe Democrats and their MSM operatives choose a 12 year old boy to be their "face of SCHIP" and then get all upset when their fictionalized story is scrutinized and the strawman collapses because they tried to hide the pertinent facts?! They get upset because the facts and logical questions had to be introduced by bloggers because the professional "journalists" refuse to do their job and just want to write propaganda for the left?!
The Democrats seem to be hiding behing children just like the terrorists and Al Qeada in Iraq hide behing civilians.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Fred08.com
there's always a plan B,
October 10, 2007 - 17:22 ET by TruthMongerthere's always a plan B, and C, and D...
Z is when they admit they were wrong
A service of the new NB respect police
Sure they do
October 10, 2007 - 20:44 ET by general companyThe Democrats seem to be hiding behing children just like the terrorists and Al Qeada in Iraq hide behing civilians
Where do you think they learn it from
Herszenhorn must read this
October 10, 2007 - 16:19 ET by american-americanHerszenhorn must read this board, or pay someone to do so, as he described clearly what was said here about their granite countertops.. Or could it be that people on other boards are in agreement that their home was entirely too "posh" to be considered the "working poor" of America.
Those of us who think we should work and take care of our own are such meanies for pointing out that those people clearly are not in need of govt. assistance.
Fact - the Frost family
October 10, 2007 - 16:53 ET by rwesleyFact - the Frost family received benefits under SCHIP.
Why would the Democrats trot out a child who has already qualified for SCHIP and have him say "I hope others LIKE ME will have this coverage"? Others "LIKE YOU" already receive benefits as evidenced by your story. The Dems obviously want to make it seem as if the program will be eliminated and millions left without coverage if the vote doesn't go their way. What better way than to put a kid out there to shill for them and perpetuate a lie about what they are doing?
rwestly,
October 10, 2007 - 20:55 ET by ding7777Without the reauthorization, children will be left without coverage.
But...
October 10, 2007 - 21:24 ET by dervishBush was willing to re-authorize, and Congress and the Democrats knew it. It's the expansion that he has issues with.
children won't be left
October 10, 2007 - 21:34 ET by TruthMongerchildren won't be left without health care...
why is it the governments job to provide health care?
A service of the new NB respect police
devish,
October 10, 2007 - 21:56 ET by ding7777Point taken.
FWIW, I don't agree with the way this reauthorization would be funded. Targeting only smokers to pay for this program is idiotic - especially since many of the below-poverty parents are smokers.
Its time for some type of universal coverage so that all of these gap programs can be eliminated.
I agree.
October 10, 2007 - 22:07 ET by dervishIf they proposed paying for it with a ten-dollar tax on California wines, it would be substantially less popular amongst their constituents.
I'd be first in line to admit that the current system is -- um -- inadequate, but I'm not for throwing it out until I see some details on a replacement. It's long past time for a sensible debate on the issue, but I don't think Congress is smart enough to solve the problem.
dervish you are a genius
October 10, 2007 - 22:10 ET bybut make it a 25% tax on all imported alcohol
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
I can live with that.I dont
October 10, 2007 - 22:16 ET by well99I can live with that.I dont think a family of four making 60-80 k should get free insurance.That is what the bill veto was supposedly going to do.
real men
October 10, 2007 - 22:19 ET bydrink Miller, Bud, Coors and micro-brews
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Gave it up
October 11, 2007 - 10:28 ET by well99High blood pressure.If Kulmbacker came to the states...well the hell with the blood pressure.
Botg, why not make it a 95%
October 11, 2007 - 09:32 ET by MikeBBotg, why not make it a 95% tax on liberals? If they want the government involved in charity, which is unconstitutional, then they should damn well finance it. Leave the smokers and the wine drinkers, and the SUV drivers, and us regular tax payers alone.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
mikeB
October 11, 2007 - 19:39 ET by'imported' was the most important part. But i must agree that the libs motto is "Anything worth doing is worth making you pay for"
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Maybe next the dems can use
October 10, 2007 - 17:10 ET by ckc1227Maybe next the dems can use one of those 25 year old adult "children" that are also covered by this program to make their case. It's all for the children, ya know.
It's also important to note that the wife has a college degree, which leads me to believe that she could find a job that pays more, and that also offers health insurance. Not sure about the husband's education, but I'm sure he could get a higher paying job with benefits as well, assuming their income really is $45,000 a year. That's $22,500 per year each, less than $11.00 an hour for a typical 40 hour work week.
But they don't want to make these changes, and giveaway programs like this provide no incentive for them to do so.
The both work part time and
October 10, 2007 - 17:49 ET by Right2thePointThe both work part time and have rental income from the commercial property.
Right now they are trapped by the system without an exit strategy.
I they go find better jobs to raise their income they will exceed the income limitations of the program and have to fund the cost of the childrens treatments.
They can't get the insurance without running into pre existing medical condition issues.
They need the program and they are on it.
But this trap they are in shows one of the faults of the program as it is structured.
Right2thePoint,
October 10, 2007 - 21:11 ET by ding7777The trap is that private health insurers either deny coverage for a pre-existing condition or charge premiums so high that even if the Frosts double their combined income they still could not afford private insurance.
SCHIP is a gap measure and would not be necessary if we had universal heath coverage
you seem to assume the
October 10, 2007 - 21:31 ET by TruthMongeryou seem to assume the universal system will have no caveats - it will probably have just as many as our current system, possibly more...
and you will still have the rich getting their cushy private insurance
this just seems to be a way to get the rich to pay health care for the not rich
and if it doesn't come to fruition it's still a handy election tool for the left to use for votes - like most of their issues i think
A service of the new NB respect police
"
October 11, 2007 - 01:38 ET by ckc1227"
SCHIP is a gap measure and would not be necessary if we had universal heath coverage"
Neither would be necessary if people like you didn't expect people like me to pay your bills for you. Geez, get a job.
Their are a few problems
October 10, 2007 - 21:23 ET by general companyTheir are a few problems with what many have suggested and the way they all work together or the lack there of. But my biggest problem is the simple fact that these parents gambled with their kids health and their $ and lost. They may not be able to get insurance now because of preexisting problems, but nothing stopped them before. If I or my wife were to change jobs we would certainly make sure our kids coverage would continue. It is a no brainer.
Besides all of this, the bill would not do any more for this kid then what it is currently doing. All it will do is introduce a lot more kids and adults to the system. It will also give companies "choices" about how to provide coverage for their employees, or weather to. This bill is no more then an interdictory addition of socialized health care.
First no one to my
October 10, 2007 - 17:44 ET by Right2thePointFirst no one to my knowledge is attacking the child.
What is being questioned is
1) The scripted assertions the child presented at Dem leaderships behest.
2) The actions and choices of the parents that led to the current situation.
Additional reporting from the Baltimore Sun reveals that the family business folded the same year they bought the commercial building which they now rent.
Also it reveals there are two mortgages the family carries.
The earlier reporting of a 1200 a month mortgage does not specify if that is for the house only which they refinanced recently to modify the house for the injured children.
Apparantly both the children involved earlier went to the same private school on now revealed scholarships (but reports disagree on the original tuition cost) but now the daughter due to her situation is in another state/city funded alternate special needs school.
Also the reporting is trying to minimize the value of both properties in only using the tax appraisal value and ignoring recent comparable sales that more accurately reflect the fair market value of the properties.
A lot of word parsing and fact dodging going on.
Right2,It doesn't matter
October 10, 2007 - 18:19 ET by Chris NormanRight2,
It doesn't matter what the facts are. The only two things that matter in this case are "Child" and "Conservative Criticism". Using these two elements, the liberal attack dogs can create a "Controversy". Much like when they used the elements of "Rush Limabaugh" and "Phony Soldiers".
Children as political human shields
October 10, 2007 - 18:02 ET by nkviking75Any party that can use children as political human shields has given up the right to claim moral superiority over anyone.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Bigtime
October 10, 2007 - 18:26 ET by well99"Any party that can use children as political human shields has given up the right to claim moral superiority over anyone."
That says it all.
You're seeing liberals through the moral lens of a conservative.
October 10, 2007 - 18:34 ET by RJLiberals really believe they are morally superior. They believe that gives them the right to say or do anything to "fix" America, i.e. the ends justify the means.
I'm sure that, as they prepared to use the children in this scam, they "justified" it that way.
I dont see it as a
October 10, 2007 - 22:25 ET by well99I dont see it as a liberal/conservative or Repub/Dem .I see it as a cheap exploitation on the part of people with the moral values of a pig.You dont use kids for political tools period.
It certainly isn't a new
October 11, 2007 - 02:50 ET by fitzfongIt certainly isn't a new tactic...in fact, it's one of the most dishonest, underhanded disgusting weapons in the left's arsenal. Michael J. Fox, Elizabeth Edwards, Christopher Reeve, the Jersey Girls, Chris Matthews' "Real American Hero" goonion pawn...
Go read this
October 10, 2007 - 20:15 ET by Right2thePointGo read this one
California has some interesting rules for their SCHIP implementation
I just phoned California’s SCHIP program, Healthy Families, and found that my
family could qualify.
This is the scenario I laid out:
· Husband, age 62 (which I’ll be in
2-years), collecting early Social Security; Wife, age 41;
· Two minor
dependent children, ages 2 and 7;
· Currently covered under self-paid
individual health insurance (incidentally, costing about $10,000 a year, HMO,
with $35 doctor visits and 30% co-insurance payments for other services,
formulary Rx’s $20 generic and $35 brand);
· Mutual fund capital gains of
$50,000 and ordinary dividends of $30,000;
· Earned income of $2289 a month
by wife at job without medical benefits. (My wife is not currently working,
being a house-mom.)
Thus, even though having substantial liquid assets, saved through a lifetime
of scrimping in order to fund retirement, I would qualify for California’s
Healthy Families SCHIP program. Assets and unearned income (e.g., Social
Security, capital gains, ordinary dividends) do not count against SCHIP
qualification.
http://www.democracy-project.com/archives/003491.html
}}---> schip
October 10, 2007 - 23:25 ET by Cool ArrowIf I had put 40,000 per year into private schools for my children, the pittance left over would have had me living under a bridge somewhere.
It's very hard for me refrain from going Huffpo in my comments about leaches such as these.
You'll remember the Clinton admin was quick to sic an IRS audit on their political detractors? Problem is Republicans are either too principled or too stupid to take a page from the Dems.
Anyone who makes, or made, an honest living throughout life has got to see this as an "in your eye, suckers" jab.
I don't believe in Kharma, I believe in God. May He judge the Democrat Party in the sight of all. May He be merciful and enlighten those who have been deceived.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
"The trap is that private
October 11, 2007 - 01:16 ET by ckc1227"The trap is that private health insurers either deny coverage for a
pre-existing condition or charge premiums so high that even if the
Frosts double their combined income they still could not afford private
insurance."
Nonsense. Complete and utter nonsense. They say they currently make $45,000 a year. If you double that, it comes to $90,000 a year.
They also say the cheapest private policy they can find will cost them $1,200 a month. So, are you telling me they can't squeeze $14,400 per year for private health insurance for their children out of an extra $45,000? Is that some new kind of liberal math or something?
Sheesh, no wonder this country gets more mucked up every day.
}}---> ckc
October 11, 2007 - 01:30 ET by Cool ArrowWhere's the outcry from the teachers union complaining that this impoverished family doesn't make use of another highly qualified government institution. . . Public Education?
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
"Where's the outcry from
October 11, 2007 - 01:53 ET by ckc1227"Where's the outcry from the teachers union complaining that this
impoverished family doesn't make use of another highly qualified
government institution. . . Public Education?"
Priorities. They already have a lock on the education system, so universal health insurance is the goal now.
I am really really tired of lazy assed libs (like dingbat) constantly reaching into my wallet to fund their bohemian, irresponsible lifestyle. You want to be a broke-ass whiner, be a broke-ass whiner. But leave me out of it.
CKC....for 1200 a month
October 11, 2007 - 08:01 ET by JayTeeFor 1200 a month, you can pay a lot of medical bills yourself, without waiting to fullfill the deductable on a policy.
That's a choice some people make with pre-existing conditions....not all people....but some, like me. I can pay it to the Insurance Companies, or I can pay it to the medical establishment and have extra money left over.
Bottom line, I'm self insured, it's a choice Hillary doesn't want me to make.
Why would someone pay 1,200 a month for a year, on the offhand chance they might have to pay 1,800 once a year ? Put the profit in your pocket, not the insurance Companies, and not in the Government coffers.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
JayTee has a point. If you
October 11, 2007 - 09:44 ET by MikeBJayTee has a point. If you are reasonably healthy and employed, take about one or two hundred dollars a month and put it in a mutual fund. Even a moderately performing mutual fund realizes 10% per annum ROI. Let that money grow and accumulate over the years. Also, take out a health/hospitalization insurance policy for catastrophic illnesses. As you grow older, and your income increases, increase the amount you pay into your mutual fund. You won't have any worries as you age, and you won't need to depend on the government to extort money for you from the taxpayers.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
attack by bloggers ? where ? how many dead/injured ?
October 11, 2007 - 07:53 ET by JayTeeIf the Kid holds an elected office, then I could see this as an attack on his voters, and endangerment of the kid losing his Job.
But if the Kid was already a SCHIP benefactor, and was presented as a victim, then the bloggers are merely passing on information, some of it (house/business) as part of the public record. How can you attack someone with Public info ?
The Baltimore Sun is fast disappearing......it exited from my workplace 2 months ago, it bulges with unsold papers on the sidewalk vending machines, stacks of unsold papers at Starbucks/Panera Bread, where the "Examiner" from Washington is the preferred replacement.
It was dumb, and the "handlers" got caught.....give information to the Kid from the bloggers on how things work, so he doesn't get victimized again in his old age.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
}}---> Easy JayTee
October 11, 2007 - 07:58 ET by Cool ArrowIt can't be a pretty thing to realize mommy and daddy are consummate leaches.
The question now is whether he'll grow up to be just another ward of the state as his parents were, or an upstanding proud American.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
Hey, when he's a Teenager...he will think far worse of them
October 11, 2007 - 09:54 ET by JayTeeAs he turns into a Teenager, mom and Dad will be the "worst", and he will sign on to a Blog, and attack his parents....in words...
Blogs are Therapy........Where else can you sign on thinking "No WMD's" and find like thinking squirrels ?
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
I Ain't Buying Insurance For People Who Make More Than ME
October 11, 2007 - 18:04 ET by JoelCTLet me just say this:
When I was making $12 an hour ($25,000/year), I bought health insurance for my children. When I had worked my way to $65K+ a year, I bought health insurance for my children. When the company went under, and I started over at $11 per hour ($23K/year), I bought health insurance for my children. Now that I am making <none yer business> I STILL provide health insurance for my family.
The father of this child is a lazy cur who needs a sound thrashing, NOT a hand out!
I REFUSE TO BUY HEALTH INSURANCE FOR PEOPLE MAKING MORE MONEY THAN ME!!! DO YOU HEAR ME HILLARY!!!!!