Weird lead-in from the WSJ:
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration appears to be softening a policy that states have complained hindered their efforts to expand health-care coverage for poor children under a popular state-federal insurance program.
In a letter sent to states Wednesday, the administration says it will give states more flexibility to prove that they have enrolled 95% of poor children from eligible families — a condition, laid out in an August directive, for using federal funds to expand coverage under the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.
Isn’t the whole idea that states are trying to expand eligibility to children who are NOT-so-poor, i.e. middle class children? Wasn’t the Bush administration’s rule that states must cover 95% of poor children before attempting to cover middle class children? The above WSJ snippet seems either accidentally circular or purposefully misleading. And you’d think a counter-argument might be "poor is subjective." But considering the kinds of eligibility expansions they are considering here in N.C. (Kids’ Care), my family will probably qualify if we have another baby! Funny, I don’t consider myself poor.