SCHIP

It has been said, "If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain." There has been the suggestion for some time that liberals operate off their feelings while conservatives operate from reason. This, of course, isn't entirely supportable, and I've heard too many conservatives arguing from their feelings rather than reason to actually buy into the idea. On the other hand, it seems too easy to find reasons to believe it at times.

Take the SCHIP argument. Providing care for uninsured children feels right. You might even argue that it is right. Children should be taken care of. It feels right and it is right. When House Democrats brought children, a nun, and a rabbi to press conferences, it wasn't to promote the most cogent argument. When they had a 12-year-old boy read the Democratic radio address on Saturday, it wasn't because of his superior reasoning skills. It was intended to tug unabashedly at everyone's heart strings. And I feel it. It feels right.

Then they tell me that Congress wants to pay for this "right thing to do" with a 61-cent-per-pack cigarette tax. All of the sudden my brain kicks in ... and I don't know what to do with it. Supplying health insurance for uninsured children feels right, but the question of how to pay for it didn't come into the question.

So, we're going to do this thing that feels right by violating my reason. How does that work? I mean, let's keep our brains engaged and examine this idea. We're in favor of taking care of children. We're going to pay for it by taxing cigarettes. Where does that take us? We have one of two possible directions (in terms of absolutes). First, the added tax could decrease the number of smokers. This would mean a decrease in the funding for children's health care. This would mean that be producing an effect most of us would agree would be a good thing -- decreased smoking -- we would be eliminating the intended effect -- taking care of the kids. Okay, let's go the other way, then. Don't allow an increase in cost decrease the number of buyers. Indeed, if we are truly in favor of children's health care, we ought to start a fund-raising campaign. Reintroduce cigarette ads into all the markets. Remove those pesky fines we've placed on cigarette makers and encourage more smoking. Nullify all those anti-smoking laws that we've put into place and encourage smokers to buy, buy, buy. We ought to teach our teens the necessity of caring for children and get them to do their part by smoking. Hey, you don't actually have to smoke; just buy the cigarettes. Whatever we do, we need to up the purchase of cigarettes ... for the children.

You see? I'm stuck here. I feel that the right thing to do is take care of the children, but then the method you offer me is just plain illogical. What am I supposed to do with that? Why do we set these things into forms that just cannot hold water. Why not make it feel right and reasonable?

I don't know. I don't get it.