As a result of President George W. Bush's Oct. 2 veto of a children's health insurance bill, North Carolina will have less funding to help uninsured children.
The bill proposed a $35-billion increase in funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program over the next five years, bringing the total funding to $60 billion and exceeding Bush's proposal by $30 billion. Congress will vote this week to override the veto.
Although the veto's influence on North Carolina has not been calculated, the veto of the legislation will negatively affect children in the state, said Brian Letourneau, director of the Durham County Health Department.
The Bush administration justified the veto with two reasons, said Christopher Conover, assistant research professor at Duke's Center for Health Policy.
"One of the administration's concern was the program already was not reaching the lowest income children for which it was intended, and now the states were starting to expand coverage into groups that the administration felt was unnecessary," he said.
Conover added that he believes the bill aimed to provide health coverage for children from middle-low income class families, and the government probably did not want to spend tax dollars on children that already had access to health coverage.
"I don't know the exact impact on North Carolina in terms of numbers of children affected, but it definitely will reduce the number of children the program can cover not only in North Carolina but across the country," Conover said.
North Carolina Health Choice for Children-the state's child health insurance program-provides free or reduced price comprehensive health care for children of families who do not qualify for Medicaid but cannot afford health insurance premiums.
Letourneau said the veto reduces the funding for Health Choice for Children and will create waitlists to get into the program, which will delay caregiving to children.
"It has been a very successful program, and it has increased the access of primary care and the access of children to a medical home and to have a continuity of medical care and to have the ability to have preventive health care delivered to them," he added.
Letourneau said Congress should try to revive the bill because more funding means more coverage for children.
"It doesn't make any sense to cut funding and the veto itself doesn't make any sense," he said. "The legislation was a win-win and vetoing the legislation does not make any sense to any health care provider in the state."
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.