We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
The Democrats just donít get it. They didnít get it when questions arose about the Frosts. They donít get it now. And it is likely they will never get it because they refuse to ask the right questions.
Itís not about income. Itís about choices. Itís about the kind of government we should have. Itís about freedom versus dependence, liberty versus slavery, self-reliance versus serfdom.
And itís about fairness. In the Frost's case, the consequences of one familyís choices being foisted upon their fellow Americans who may be less well off but are nevertheless asked to pony up to support them.
No one should begrudge the Wilkersonís their participation in S-CHIP. They are barely above the poverty level and have little in the way of assets. But the Wilkersons and those like them are not the problem and the Democrats know it. Borderline cases like the Wilkersonís who regularly fall through the cracks of coverage in other government programs are not part of the central criticism against the expansion of S-CHIP. It is subsidizing coverage for those up to 400% above the poverty level that is the basis of conservative opposition to the Democratís bill.
In someways, this whole debate reminds of the Old English Poor Law. In return for a place in the County Poor House (where you would work at whatever they decided and for their benefit) your needs were taken care of in a way they decided. That we are headed for a new version seems probable.