While planning out a family with one minimum wage working parent and two children’s budget, I was awestruck at just how impossible it is to live on minimum wage pay. I spent much time tweaking expenses, and no matter what, the family would have to live with small housing, state health insurance (CHIP and Medicaid), and food from government programs and non-profits. While researching the eligibility requirements of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), I came across a recent news article regarding future plans for the Kansas Children’s Health Insurance Program. With the Kansas State budget appearing to have a deficit the governor is proposing to take money from the federal affordable care act; money originally allocated to the Kansas Children’s Health Insurance Program to balance the state’s budget. The governor’s spokesperson is claiming, “Children will continue to be served as they are now, and expenditures remain the same.” Should states really take that risk in shorting the Children’s Health Insurance Program in which countless children rely for their health care? If I were a parent in Kansas dependent on CHIP for my child’s health care, whether they are sick or healthy, I would be furious by the possibility of my child being unable to receive the same amount of care or being unable to register for CHIP due to the loss of the funds. This brings us to a larger issue of policy being determined by wealthy privileged politicians. Balancing the budget may put the governor in a good light, however, is a balanced budget worth the low-income families possibly losing health coverage for their children? Should we be questioning why privileged politicians get so much pull aiding low-income individuals?

http://ksn.com/2016/01/21/low-income-families-worried-about-funds-taken-from-chip-program/