Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Spring Fund Drive: Keep CounterPunch Afloat
CounterPunch is a lifeboat of sanity in today’s turbulent political seas. Please make a tax-deductible donation and help us continue to fight Trump and his enablers on both sides of the aisle. Every dollar counts!
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Squaring the Circle on Children and Health Care

Talk about ideology. Earlier this month president Bush, who initiated an education program entitled No Child Left Behind, vetoed a bill that would expand the SCHIP program to provide health insurance to an additional 3.8 million uninsured kids. Where is a critic to begin?

Whatever rhetoric the Bush regime uses will not change the fact that millions of children will remain without health insurance. This is tragic in its own right, and in the richest country in the history of the world it should provoke widespread outrage. It is even more contemptible in the context of Bush’s apparent concern with the life chances of children, which follows from the “equality of opportunity” credo and is encapsulated in his No Child Left Behind education initiative.

In the conservative world view to which Bush appeals, where individual outcomes in the labor market are an exclusive result of human capital and motivation–rather than, say, class structure and unequal access to important resources–the only government intervention necessary to guarantee equal opportunity is to ensure relatively equal educational opportunities. The main thing is to invest in children’s education. And here, even conservatives agree, there is some role for public education (school voucher advocacy not withstanding).

But the highly oversimplified conservative world view ignores the possibility that unequal access in many areas, including health care, may undercut efforts focused solely on education. Indeed, as sociologist Gøsta Esping-Andersen, an expert on social policy and the welfare state, has noted, a large body of comparative research on socio-economic mobility indicates that reforming and improving education systems has a relatively minor effect on improving equality of opportunity (as measured by mobility).

For example, cross-national studies from the OECD Program for International Student Assessment indicate that social origins and family conditions have a much stronger effect on socio-economic mobility than education systems. As Esping-Andersen explains in the Summer 2007 issue of the popular sociology magazine Contexts, “the seeds of inequality are sown prior to school age on a host of crucial attributes such as health, cognitive and noncognitive abilities, motivation to learn, and, more generally, school preparedness.”

The issue of children’s health is intimately interconnected with the issues of education and equality of opportunity. Children who fall behind early in health have already begun on unequal footing. But scrutiny of the Bush veto hardly stops here. I would like to briefly shine two different lights on the proposed SCHIP expansion, one concrete and another more abstract.

First, then, what are the relative costs? Expanding SCHIP to cover the additional 3.8 million children was expected to cost $35 billion over five years. This is a large number, but it needs to be put into perspective. It is just 6% of the total amount spent on the so-called war on terror since 9/11 ($610 billion). Comparing the projected annual cost of the SCHIP expansion ($7 billion) with public spending in 2006, it is just 0.3% of the total Federal budget ($2,568 billion); 2% of the defense budget ($419.3 billion); 13% of the education budget ($56 billion); and 56% of the budget for the failed war on drugs ($12.5 billion). According to the Congressional Pig Book, 9,963 projects were identified in 2006 appropriations as earmarks, or pork-barrel spending of local or special interest. These projects cost $29 billion in 2006, over four times the yearly cost of expanding SCHIP.

Second, what about the bogeyman of socialized health care? Ideology is a powerful thing: conceptual frames have a powerful effect on how people think about the world. The Bush regime, like the conservative movement more generally, has masterfully used Orwellian language to frame policy debates. Think of the Healthy Forests program that expanded logging in protected wilderness areas, or the Clear Skies program allowing increased industrial air pollution.

Behind the Orwellian doublespeak remains a rigid ideology that is a tool of class warfare. Only by viewing the situation in these terms can we understand how the No Child Left Behind president vetoed SCHIP. If the program were extended to give an additional four million children health coverage, it would not be a railroad switch sending our economy off to socialism. Now, I would argue that getting on such a track would be the best thing for the health of the American society and the world. But in any case, modern economies are complex combinations of private enterprise, institutional regulation, and government intervention. Old tropes about “free market versus socialism” (read: Soviet Union or China) only retain currency for their ideological value.

All modern capitalist economies are highly regulated in a number of ways, but in ways that benefit powerful capitalist classes yet are ideologically coded as “private sector,” “free market,” and so on. Consider the American health care system. We spend twice as much, per capita, as the single-payer, government-run programs in other capitalist democracies. Yet the American system is hobbled with layer upon layer of bureaucracy and riddled with inefficiencies. It requires a very effective dominant ideology to instill in the population a preference for a highly inefficient American-style system over a government-run program, which we know from the experience of most other capitalist democracies is less expensive with better health outcomes.

Politicians in twenty-first century America should be working to make sure all of its residents have health coverage, not continually obstructing any progress by using the ideological scare tactic of the socialist bogeyman. We should begin with the nearly four million children who are currently without coverage, but we should not stop until we have a more efficient and effective health care system, whether this is administered by the public or private sector.

MATT VIDAL is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the UCLA Institute for Research on Labor and Employment. He can be reached at mvidal@irle.ucla.edu.

 

More articles by:

Matt Vidal is Senior Lecturer in Work and Organizations at King’s College London, Department of Management. He is editor-in-chief of Work in Progress, a public sociology blog of American Sociological Association, where this article first ran. You can follow Matt on Twitter @ChukkerV.

Weekend Edition
May 25, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Melvin Goodman
A Major Win for Trump’s War Cabinet
Andrew Levine
Could Anything Cause the GOP to Dump Trump?
Pete Tucker
Is the Washington Post Soft on Amazon?
Conn Hallinan
Iran: Sanctions & War
Jeffrey St. Clair
Out of Space: John McCain, Telescopes and the Desecration of Mount Graham
John Laforge
Senate Puts CIA Back on Torture Track
David Rosen
Santa Fe High School Shooting: an Incel Killing?
Gary Leupp
Pompeo’s Iran Speech and the 21 Demands
Jonathan Power
Bang, Bang to Trump
Robert Fisk
You Can’t Commit Genocide Without the Help of Local People
Brian Cloughley
Washington’s Provocations in the South China Sea
Louis Proyect
Requiem for a Mountain Lion
Robert Fantina
The U.S. and Israel: a Match Made in Hell
Kevin Martin
The Libya Model: It’s Not Always All About Trump
Susie Day
Trump, the NYPD and the People We Call “Animals”
Pepe Escobar
How Iran Will Respond to Trump
Sarah Anderson
When CEO’s Earn 5,000 Times as Much as a Company’s Workers
Ralph Nader
Audit the Outlaw Military Budget Draining America’s Necessities
Chris Wright
The Significance of Karl Marx
David Schultz
Indict or Not: the Choice Mueller May Have to Make and Which is Worse for Trump
George Payne
The NFL Moves to Silence Voices of Dissent
Razan Azzarkani
America’s Treatment of Palestinians Has Grown Horrendously Cruel
Katalina Khoury
The Need to Evaluate the Human Constructs Enabling Palestinian Genocide
George Ochenski
Tillerson, the Truth and Ryan Zinke’s Interior Department
Jill Richardson
Our Immigration Debate Needs a Lot More Humanity
Martha Rosenberg
Once Again a Slaughterhouse Raid Turns Up Abuses
Judith Deutsch
Pension Systems and the Deadly Hand of the Market
Shamus Cooke
Oregon’s Poor People’s Campaign and DSA Partner Against State Democrats
Thomas Barker
Only a Mass Struggle From Below Can End the Bloodshed in Palestine
Binoy Kampmark
Australia’s China Syndrome
Missy Comley Beattie
Say “I Love You”
Ron Jacobs
A Photographic Revenge
Saurav Sarkar
War and Moral Injury
Clark T. Scott
The Shell Game and “The Bank Dick”
Seth Sandronsky
The State of Worker Safety in America
Thomas Knapp
Making Gridlock Great Again
Manuel E. Yepe
The US Will Have to Ask for Forgiveness
Laura Finley
Stop Blaming Women and Girls for Men’s Violence Against Them
Rob Okun
Raising Boys to Love and Care, Not to Kill
Christopher Brauchli
What Conflicts of Interest?
Winslow Myers
Real Security
George Wuerthner
Happy Talk About Weeds
Abel Cohen
Give the People What They Want: Shame
David Yearsley
King Arthur in Berlin
Douglas Valentine
Memorial Day
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail