Priorities

                                      [click pic to biggie size; data from here]

Yes, to ensure (in theory, because in actuality this is a state-run program) no one gets covered that shouldn't and the funding levels will have no regard to cost of living (that is people who live in areas like NY where the salaries are higher but the cost of living is as well - the income cut-offs remain the same); they'll vote it down. Get the troops out of Iraq? No. Ensure the troops have as much time at home as on tour in Iraq - no. Keep voting for these fiscal conservatives [what an oxymoron that is] and they'll keep digging us into a hole any time they're left to govern.

Update: It appears that Mr. Simpson voted in favor of the bill today.

If I were a cynic, I might suggest that he did so knowing that The House did not have a veto-proof majority so his vote was moot. Mike can have his cake and eat it too. He can tell his constituents (of which I thankfully am not one ... oh wait -never mind) that he understands, it's a travesty that the program didn't get renewed but, after all, he voted for it. So he is, of course, blameless.

That's what I might suggest were I a cynic but, then again, you have to admit that vote was a 180-degree turn from his earlier position:

...The Democrat bill is an underhanded, devious step towards Hillary-care: a government-run, government-mandated health insurance plan for everyone, regardless of income, age or citizenship.

...This bill is bad for Idaho and bad for children.

I believe I've previously discussed other aspects of Rep. Simpson's presentation of the bill.

Cynic? Who, me?