Good reasons for president's veto

The push is on to socialize health care in America as recently evidenced by Ms. Froma Harrop's Oct. 7 column slamming President Bush for vetoing the latest "S-Chip" proposal by Congress. Of course such an agenda is easier to promote if one leaves out the main reasons for Bush's veto.

Democrats want to include as children those up to 25 years of age. The income level for participating in "S-Chip" is three times the poverty level, adjusted for local costs of living, which in New York would be $84,000 per year. Several states, Illinois among them, allow adult parents of children in "S-Chip" to also get health insurance paid by "S-Chip." This accounts for up to 25 percent of "S-Chip" spending in these states. Finally, liberal Democrats have redefined "children" so as to exclude prenatal care and have included abortion coverage in "S-Chip."

The above issues not withstanding, Ms. Harrop insists "S-Chip" legislation was vetoed because there wasn't a big enough kickback to the private health insurance industry for a service that ideally is a private health matter.

How about affirming those who prioritize the needs of their families and eliminate Social Security taxes and all income taxes on wages used to do the socially responsible task of buying one's own health insurance for their family, as is the case for millions of self-employed and those working for small businesses. I am sure this proposal also would be decried by Ms. Harrop and liberal Democrats as an obvious kickback to big horseshoeing (my trade), big lawn maintenance and the beauticians' lobby.

Mike McKay

Wauconda