Our kids deserve the best we can give them. And teachers work hard to help all of their students learn. But what happens when a youngster has attacks of asthma or persistent toothaches, which go untreated because the child’s parents can’t afford to pay for the necessary care? That student’s learning is likely to suffer no matter how devoted and skillful a teacher is or how hard the child works. And if the condition is chronic, the child’s future health may be compromised as well.

Problems like this are not unusual. Asthma, for example, is responsible for 14 million lost school days each year, and yet it can be treated successfully when a child gets regular medical care. For many poor children, however, visits to the doctor for medical problems, to say nothing of preventive care, are a rarity. In 1997, the federal government established the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), which is administered by the states and paid for jointly by the states and the federal government. It provides a basic package of benefits for children of the working poor, families that don’t earn enough to buy private healthcare coverage and so are left without any.

In combination with the Medicaid program, CHIP has made a big difference for poor kids. Nearly 4 million children of poor working families are enrolled in CHIP programs, and these youngsters receive preventive and medical care, including standard immunizations and the medications they need to keep conditions like asthma or juvenile diabetes under control. But the program has never reached all of the eligible children—currently there are 6.8 million who qualify but are not insured.

It is obvious that we should cover the millions more who are still without healthcare. The country can afford it and it’s the right thing to do. But that’s not what’s happening. Instead, many states, confronted with big budget deficits, are cutting CHIP funding. And because the program requires that states match federal money, CHIP forfeits a federal dollar for every dollar a state cuts. As a result, we’re not building on this highly successful and affordable program. In fact, many children are losing their coverage, with no prospect of getting it back, and many more are likely to do so in the future.

For example, in recent months, Texas has adopted cuts that will lead one-third of the children now enrolled under CHIP to lose their health benefits. Six states (Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Montana and Utah) have frozen or capped enrollment. That means the children who are eligible but uncovered are out in the cold and will remain there indefinitely. In Florida, there are now 44,000 children in this situation. And if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s proposal to cap enrollment in California goes through, 100,000 poor children in his state will lose their chance to get healthcare coverage through CHIP. Some states are making eligibility requirements tougher, so children who once qualified no longer will be eligible. Other states have instituted premiums or increased them, which will force many families to take their children out of the program.

Unfortunately, there is no reason to think the budget cuts will stop here. And next year there will be a further crisis when some states exhaust federal funding and are faced with financing CHIP on their own.

State budget analysts explain that, given the terrible economic conditions and the requirement that states maintain balanced budgets, they have to cut somewhere, and it’s true that they are in a tough spot. But compromising a program that helps to keep some of our poorest children healthy is a false economy.

The key to the problem is the federal government. There are a number of things it could do to preserve and even strengthen CHIP. Where would the money come from? Let’s not forget that, with all the talk of fiscal responsibility, the administration has sponsored enormous tax cuts that mainly benefit the very rich—and is now seeking to make them permanent. If the administration were to act responsibly and cancel even just some of these tax cuts—the ones that go to those who need them least, or not at all—CHIP could be rescued, children’s health would improve, and so would their schoolwork.

Continuing and strengthening the CHIP program should be a no-brainer. It doesn’t make any sense to talk about leaving no child behind unless we make sure that poor children also get the healthcare they are being denied, and CHIP is the way to accomplish this.

American Federation of Teachers, AFL•CIO - 555 New Jersey Avenue, NW - Washington, DC 20001