I’d been only sort of following the SCHIP battle between Congress and the White House, and I thought others might be like me, so I took some time to sort through the news and speeches to try to nail a few key facts and debate points.

What is SCHIP? The State Children’s Health Insurance Program was enacted in 1997 as a way to provide health coverage for uninsured children whose families do not qualify for Medicare. The SCHIP programs are jointly financed by federal and state governments, but administered by the states, within broad federal guidelines. Currently, uninsured children in families with incomes at twice the federal poverty level or less - $36,200 a year for a family of four - are eligible for SCHIP coverage. 6.6 million children are currently covered under SCHIP, which is up for refunding.

What is the new SCHIP bill? The House and Senate have passed a compromise bill that would increase funding for SCHIP by $35 billion over the next five years (which would bring the total funding to $60 billion), with the goal of reaching roughly an additional 4 million uninsured children (around 9 million US children are currently uninsured). Uninsured families earning up to 300% of the federal poverty level - $61,842 for a family of four - would be eligible to apply for coverage for their children. States could apply for waivers to cover families earning more than this amount in certain cases; such waivers would be subject to the approval of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The new bill phases out waivers that have allowed states to offer SCHIP coverage to some adults, but does allow for coverage for pregnant women. Dental and mental health benefits are included in the new proposal.

The expansion would be funded through an increase in the federal tobacco tax.

Criticisms and Counter-arguments

Point: The President recently told reporters: “I believe this is a step toward federalization of health care…Their proposal is beyond the scope of the program, and that’s why I’m going to veto the bill.”

Counterpoint: Senator Orin Hatch (R-Nebraska) argued that the compromise bill would cover 3.7 million of the 6 million uninsured US children from families with incomes of 200% of the federal poverty level or less, which “really goes to the heart of what we are trying to achieve” with the program as enacted in 1997.

Point: This bill would give families of four earning over $80,000 access to SCHIP funds.

Counterpoint: This is a talking point I’ve read in several places. Senator Hatch’s rebuttal: “Let me be clear. Our legislation does not permit a state to cover these families unless the Secretary of Health and Human Services approves the state’s application to cover individuals at that income level.” New York’s application for a waiver to cover uninsured children from families earning 400% above the poverty level has so far been denied.

Point: The program would entice families to move from private health insurance onto government programs.

Counterpoint: Senator Hatch argues that the SCHIP bill includes funding incentives and specific guidelines to help states focus their enrollment efforts on low-income, uninsured families. However, the Congressional Budget Office does project that while 3.7 million of new enrollees will have been previously uninsured, about 2 million children will likely be moved by their parents from private coverage to SCHIP.

Point: It’s unfair to increase the tax burden on smokers.

Counterpoint: Cigarette taxes offer a disincentive for smoking, and have been shown to cut teen cigarette use.

Point: The program is expensive.

Counterpoint: Uninsured kids tend to receive medical treatment in emergency rooms, which winds up costing taxpayers more that the SCHIP program would. Also, as a comparison, over the next five years we’ll spend $2.6 trillion dollars for Medicare.

My take, for what it’s worth: It was nice to read Senator Hatch’s address, dry, boring, and completely removed from the screeching rhetoric that has colored much of the SCHIP debate. I tend to trust his assessment. This may not be a perfect bill - there may be some misuse of the program that will have to be addressed, and as a former smoker, I do feel for those who are going to get hit with yet another tax - but it looks to me like the two parties have hammered out a good compromise bill that should address one serious piece of our current health care crisis.

However, that figure of 2 million children being moved by their parents from private to public insurance does concern me. Back to Senator Hatch: “I will not sugar coat it. It is a problem. It is a concern. And, we should take every step we can to keep it from occurring.” I’d like to hear some specifics there.

For a different perspective, George Will has a Newsweek column up about the politics of the debate and how it frames the future of health care, which is interesting, but includes the inaccurate talking point that families earning $83,000 would automatically be eligible to apply for SCHIP.

Feel free to weigh in, as always.

Posted by MommaSteph.

US News and World Report had a recent article about the “new mommy track”, looking at trends in flextime and other options that make it easier for moms (and dads) to find a work/life balance:

On the company front, 31 percent of organizations allow employees to work from home or off site on a regular basis, and 73 percent allow extended career breaks for family responsibilities, according to a survey by the Families and Work Institute. Best Buy allows some of its corporate employees to set their own hours and work entirely from home. Last year, PricewaterhouseCoopers, a public accounting firm, launched Full Circle, a program for parents that enables them to temporarily stop working for the company but stay in touch through networking and training events. Keeping connected makes it easier for moms to return to work when they’re ready. “The thing we know for sure is that women need choices. Our careers are not as linear as men’s,” says Jennifer Allyn, managing director in the office of diversity.

The company did not start the program out of a spirit of generosity: In 2001, it faced a 24 percent turnover rate. Allyn estimates the cost of losing a client services’ employee, which most are, to be around $80,000. So if Full Circle enables one person to return to the firm, she says, the program has paid for itself. Allyn says the turnover rate has already fallen to 15 percent.

The Pew Research Center conducted a survey that found that a growing number of working mothers say that part-time employment is their ideal work situation, which jives with what our own MomSquawk community said in a recent poll on the issue.

What to do if you don’t work for a company that has a built-in parenting-friendly program? Some women are able to negotiate their own flextime schedules. And enough have dropped out and started their own businesses that the media has seen fit to coin a term to describe these women: “mompreneurs”.

Lori Johnson, 34, is one of those moms. After working more than 80 hours a week as a sales account executive in the semiconductor industry, she quit after having her daughter, Avery, just over two years ago. Not willing to return to such a hectic lifestyle, she decided starting her own business out of her home in Concord, Mass., was a “happy medium.” She now designs and sells car seat covers. The idea for Hot Toddies Baby Gear came to her after she became frustrated when people mistook her daughter for a boy because she could find only blue seat covers.

Look for this to be a continuing trend. A 2006 Lifetime Television poll found that 47% of their respondents in the 18 to 29 age group aspire to manage their own companies.

Posted by MommaSteph.

We received this friendly heads up from the good people at March of Dimes about a new free booklet they have available for folks planning to have a baby:

Getting ready for pregnancy isn’t only about your physical health. The March of Dimes wants you to be prepared emotionally and financially, too, when you welcome your wonderful baby into the world! What you and your partner do to get ready before you’re pregnant will help your baby get the best possible start. March of Dimes is offering its “Are You Ready?” booklet free of charge, thanks to a generous grant from First Response. It is packed with healthy tips and answers the many questions surrounding your emotional, physical and financial well-being before becoming pregnant.

You can order your free booklet here. And you get a discount coupon for a First Response pregnancy test to boot!

It can’t hurt to get some input from these folks. Or you could just be like my husband and me. Our preparations went something like this:

Husband: Are you sure we’re ready to have kids?

Me: What do you mean? Everyone does it. How hard can it be?

Sending lots of baby dust to you TTC ladies.

Posted by MommaSteph.

In light of the recent lead in toys news, I checked in with the Sierra Club to get their take on how government agencies are performing in terms of getting a handle on the problem. You may recall that last year the Sierra Club sued the Environmental Protection Agency in federal court as a way of pressuring the agency to take action in protecting kids from lead toy jewelry. The EPA and the Sierra Club reached a settlement. Under the agreement, the EPA agreed to contact 120 companies with a letter addressing the hazards of lead exposure. The EPA also agreed to alert the Consumer Product Safely Commission to the problem of inadequate quality control measures that have allowed hazardous lead jewelry into the country.

In response to my inquiry for an update, I received an email from Tom Neltner, Co-chair of the National Toxics Committee for the Sierra Club. Regarding the settlement, he notes:

We were not excited about the resolution. CPSC had begun rulemaking to only address children’s metal toy jewelry. We thought quality control was a problem that went well beyond that type of product. But legally, we were not certain that we could force EPA to take action. So we deferred to the judgment of the agencies. Given the recent events, we see an even more urgent need for action by either or both of the agencies.

In answer to my question about why the CPSC doesn’t fine companies who repeatedly import and sell toys made with lead:

As I understand it, CPSC can fine for violations of its rules. It has rules on lead in candle wicks and the use of lead-based paint as a product or on furniture or children’s toys. But CPSC is loathe to use that authority. The recent recalls by RC2 and Mattel violated these rules. My impression is that the reluctance has three roots:

1. From staff limitations. Enforcement takes resources they don’t have. They only have 400 people in the entire agency.
2. An agency philosophy of working with companies.
3. A lack of a quorum on the Commission that makes it impossible for the Commission to take official action. The Commission vacancies have left the action crippled in a situation like this.

I can certainly understand the CPSC’s staff issues (they’ve been without a director for over a year now, and the President’s recent nominee, you may recall, withdrew his name when it was revealed that he accepted a large severance package from his longtime employer, a powerful manufacturer’s lobby).  And the philosophy of working with businesses on voluntary standards and enforcements is certainly more attractive than the constant crackdown.

But the lead toys from China problem is too unwieldy for a “gentlemen’s agreement” approach. Just in terms of lead in children’s jewelry, a recent federal inspection found that roughly 20% of the products out there pose a lead hazard. That equals hundreds of thousands of items on store shelves and in vending machines today. And of the 17.9 million pieces of jewelry recalled since 2005, 95% were manufactured in China. (I guess not too surprising, since these days it seems everything on the shelf at Toys R Us was made in China.)

In his email, Mr. Neltner of the Sierra Club noted that he’d “love to see CPSC publicly report on the effectiveness of the recalls. Kids don’t want to lose their valued toy. And only a portion of parents will act.” That’s been my issue as well. First off you need for the parent to hear about the recall, then to recognize that the hazardous item is in her house, then to find it. If all this occurs, she’ll likely throw the item out rather than approach the company for a refund, so the financial hit on the company that put the lead kids’ jewelry or toy onto the store shelves is going to be pretty minuscule.

For example: Twentieth Century Fox distributed over 700,000 bonus charms in a Shirley Temple movie package. The charms were then found to contain dangerous levels of lead. As part of their recall effort, Fox offered a free DVD to consumers who returned the charms. Only 6.7% were sent back. A Fox spokesman noted, “We wanted them all back, we did everything we could do to get them back.”

They key has got to be keeping lead out of children’s jewelry and other kids’ gear in the first place.

The CPSC is now considering issuing a formal ban on children’s jewelry containing lead, instead of merely setting an enforcement standard. 195 pages of letters and comments have been submitted to the agency on the proposal. Of all the input, only one letter opposes the ban. It’s from…the government of China!

In the letter, a deputy director general at China’s General Administration for Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine argues that lead in children’s jewelry is not hazardous if it’s covered by a protective coating, and that the proposed regulations would “increase the cost of producing and inspection of the manufacturers of children’s metal jewelry, and bring unnecessary obstacles to trade.”

My first reaction to reading that was, frankly, boo-fricking-hoo. Of course, I’m no economist, so I’d be open to hearing why we have to turn a blind eye to lead in kids’ jewelry so as not to put an undue burden on the Chinese economy.

But more to the point, can’t we all agree, as consumers, that we’ll gladly spend 50 cents more for a kids’ bracelet if we can be sure that it’s not a lead poisoning hazard? Where’s the controversy?

Posted by MommaSteph.

It’s that time of the year (at least here in Puerto Rico) when you have to get prepared for a new school year. It will begin on August 8 at 7:30 am but preparations started about two weeks ago. Getting ready for school can hurt your pocket, so money needs to be allocated to this important expense. How should you handle this? A Back to School Budget is one of the best ways to manage this process.

There are so many things to choose from that the process has become a complex one. If you need crayons, do you actually need the washable ones or would it be better to get a 24-pack with all the “important” colors? Maybe you need a notebook. Do you need it small or big? Should it have characters or just geometric figures? Hard or soft cover? Lines or no lines?

According to the National Retail Federation, families in the U.S. are expected to shell out $18.4 billion on back-to-school gear this season, up 6.9% from last season. The average family will spend nearly $530 for back-to-school items.

I’m pretty sure I’m ready for school, but I do know that the first week will be stressful. Each teacher will have a list and each one will probably have different things on it. Hopefully my sons will have their supplies, but most of all they will begin a new chapter in their education. Learning cannot be budgeted; let them get rich in knowledge.

Posted by momcrazyforkids.

Cup Recall: CVS Stores and the CPSC announced a recall of Playskool toddler sippy cups because of reports of children chewing through the sippy spouts, with some incidents of choking (though no injuries) reported. Consumers should stop using the cups and visit a CVS for a refund.

Nice News: Anchorwoman Campbell Brown announced today that she’s leaving her long-time job at NBC for a spot at CNN. Noted Ms. Brown, “I’m making some decisions right now that I think make a lot of sense for me and my family.” Make that, expanding family. Ms. Brown also announced that she and her husband are expecting their first child.

Children’s Health Insurance Program Update: President Bush is threatening to veto the compromise bill hammered out in Congress to expand funding for State Children’s Health Insurance Program, a federal/state government partnership that offers health insurance to children from families who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but who struggle to afford private insurance. The President’s spokesperson notes that he objects to how some states have used the program’s flexible guidelines to cover adults, and that the program constitutes “a gradual government takeover of healthcare”. The President favors a $5 billion increase in funding (the compromise bill adds $35 billion). Republicans in Congress predict that if the President vetoes the bill, the chance of a veto override are high, as the legislation has broad bipartisan support.

Working Dad has a piece up on a recent Pew poll that shows that only 1/5 of working moms say that full-time employment is their ideal. Of those with young children, 16% find full-time work ideal, down from 31% a decade ago.

We had a couple of polls on the boards last spring on this topic, one for working moms, one for at-home moms, and the results jive with the Pew poll, with 16% of working moms voicing a preference for full time work, while over half would like to work part time, and 23% would prefer to stay at home full time.

Of the at-home moms, slightly more would prefer to work part time over being completely at-home.

Some other interesting findings from the Pew poll:

• 72% of dads say full-time work is their ideal.
• Only 26% of dads rated their parenting performance a 9 or 10 out of 10, 11 percentage points lower than all moms polled.
• Only 10% of working moms gave themselves the highest marks as parents, compared with 28% of at-home moms.

For polling info on societal attitudes towards working moms, check out the rest of the Working Dad piece.

Posted by MommaSteph.

Push for More Newborn Screening: The American College of Medical Genetics recommends that every US state adopt screening standards for newborns that test for a ‘core panel’ of genetic and congenital conditions. They estimate that each year 500,000 babies are not screened for conditions that could be treated with early detection. The organization’s president states, “When newborn screening detects an abnormality, early diagnosis and treatment can make the difference between a healthy life and one that is shortened or requires long-term care. These tests can make a huge difference to a child and family.”

Insurance for Poor Kids Expanded: Lawmakers in the Senate have struck a deal and agreed to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program to offer health coverage to an additional 3.3 million children. The coverage is for children of families who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but too little to afford insurance on their own.

Here’s what greeted me when I opened the box containing my son’s just-arrived bargain tricycle:

“Operation Iostrucion of Adjustoble Baby Walker.”

Baby walker? Why was it being called a baby walker? It’s a bike. The papers opened with a caution: “Before using this product, read the instruction which tells you the right operation and installation so that your child will not be hurt and the strollers will not be damaged.”

Strollers? It’s a bike. What gives? But God knows, I didn’t want my child to be hurt, so I carefully removed the components of the bike/stroller/baby walker and began the assembly process, paying strict attention to the directions, which read as follows:

1. Put the head of strollers on the handlebar, aim at the eyelet and put gasket on it, locknut was locked.
2. The handlebar linked the asostyle of front-wheel drive, after encased in front-fender, and locknut was locked.
3. Inserted bolt after the eyelet of head, the eyelet of handlebar and carriage online, and locknut was locked.
4. Put the front eyelet of the back seat on the front eyelet of the front carriage, and lucknut was locked, the screw in the seat, through the back eyelet of the carriage and the back eyelet of the back seat, and locknut was locked.
5. Put the both side of the baseboard on the eyelet of the back-seat carriage, and locknut was locked.
6. Aim the basket of strollers at the head of strollers, and was locked by the hexangular screw.
7. The axes linked the try put gasket and shutoff on it and fixation and the adornment of tyre was installed.
8. Set the carriage of back seat on the back shelves both side was locked by locknut.

This strollers is a help for child who is make joy to drive, please often check it!

Um…yeah, I’ll be sure to do that. Or better yet, I’ll make joy for myself, of a bitter kind, and just drag the components to the curb now. Locknut was locked.

Posted by MommaSteph.

Money is something that most of us use daily. Whether you are only buying bread and milk or financing a brand new car, money is associated to our day to day activities. Most elementary-school kids think that money comes from an ATM machine, while teenagers feel mature and independent when handling money situations.

Whatever your case talking about money with your kid can help create awareness of how income versus expenses work out. They can use this knowledge to understand the importance of earning an income and the basic concepts on handling finances.

Of course there are different concepts based on the kids’ age. This is why Family Education provides different alternatives on how to approach the subject. Whether you are not from a wealthy family or have won the lottery, chances are that your kids will need to work on a budget or at least be prepared to work with an allowance. In the past, talking about money was not important; mom or dad worked and they provided food and shelter. Now we need to talk about kids about money because they will need to make accurate financial decisions on most things. Most kids know how to spent money but have no idea how to save it.

My sons have been saving for the last six months so they can buy a PSP. This techno machine is highly sensitive so I’m making sure they know they have to be careful. Since they are paying for it they feel more in control and they have their piggy bank ready for the weekend when I’ll take them to the store. They’ve saving penny by penny so they are looking forward to see the final result. I could just have bought it for them but I feel they needed to understand that money doesn’t grow on trees.

I guess you can teach them a lot of theory about money but nothing beats the practice.

Posted by momcrazyforkids.