TribLIVE

| Opinion/The Review


The fallacy of SCHIP: It’s not ‘insurance’

About The Tribune-Review
The Tribune-Review can be reached via e-mail or at 412-321-6460.
Contact Us | Video | RSS | Mobile


By Tribune-Review

Published: Monday, February 4, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Updated: Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Like previous expansions of Pennsylvania's State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), Gov. Tom Corbett's 2013-14 budget plan to add $8.5 million to extend coverage to more kids is a well-intentioned paving of the road to taxpayer hell.

Available to uninsured children and teens ineligible for Medicaid, SCHIP has covered more than 1 million young people since its 1993 inception and covers more than 188,000 today. Gov. Corbett wants to enroll another 9,300 with his latest proposal.

But as Commonwealth Foundation scholar Nathan Benefield concludes, Corbett is “striking at the branches, not the root of the problem.”

The governor's proposed expansion would not rein in costs, boost efficiency or make coverage more affordable. As SCHIP covers more children, more private insurers will be crowded out of the market, more employers will pare back benefits, more “free” services will be used and more taxpayer dollars will be spent.

The state's 2006 “Cover All Kids” SCHIP expansion prompted Mr. Benefield to then write: “Despite its name, (S)CHIP is not an insurance program — medical bills are not paid by insurance premiums, but by taxpayers. (S)CHIP is a welfare program, and ... costs will grow exponentially as dependants are added.”

Corbett might see further SCHIP expansion as popular and politically beneficial. Yet it's anything but beneficial for soaring health-care costs and the taxpayers who foot SCHIP's bills.

Most-Read Editorials

  1. Disserving Pennsylvania: Last call
  2. The Thursday wrap
  3. Greensburg Laurels & Lances
  4. The Veterans Affairs/Legionella mess: It grows & grows ...
  5. Iran’s president-elect is an odd ‘moderate’
  6. Sunday pops
  7. Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
  8. Greensburg Tuesday takes
  9. The Box
  10. ‘Reforming’ immigration: The ‘guest’ bomb
  11. A stagnant ‘pool’
You must be signed in to add comments

To comment, click the Sign in or sign up at the very top of this page.

There are currently no comments for this story.
Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.