Socialism for the Rich

By Arnold F. Fege

April 5, 2008 - What is wrong with a Congress and White House that, at the drop of the hat, give away $30 billion in loan guarantees to shore up Bear Stearns chief executive Alan Schwartz ["Buddy, Can You Spare a Billion?" Washington Sketch, April 3] but find it impossible to provide $30 billion over five years to fund the State Children's Health Insurance Program?

Aren't families without health insurance just as much at risk as Wall Street is? Aren't our children worth as much as a Bear Stearns executive who made $141 million over the past five years despite recklessness and inept leadership?

Shouldn't the 45 million children and families who have no health insurance have the same political clout as the multibillionaires who are able to buy influence with their unfathomable riches?

Oh, I forgot. Providing government health insurance is socialism. But providing government bailouts to banks and brokerage houses is not? Excuse me for getting my "isms" confused and my patriotism misplaced, but this is one citizen who cannot be duped anymore by a Congress and a White House that plead poverty when it comes to funding poor kids and families but "public interest" in justifying $30 billion to Bear Stearns. If socialism is good for business, why is it not good for the uninsured?

The writer is director of public engagement and advocacy for the Public Education Network and has lobbied on children's health and education issues.