Jack Kingston: Grown kids shouldn’t rely on parents for health care

The Republican congressman from Savannah will be an awkward topic of conversation around many a dinner table tonight. From NBC’s “First Read:”

U.S. Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Savannah. AJC file

U.S. Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Savannah. AJC file

Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) came out strongly against a provision of health-care overhaul that is actually quite popular across the country.

Talking on the House floor today about the provision that allows children to stay on their parent’s health-care plan until they’re 26 years old, Kingston said (paraphrasing here, but pretty close):

“I have four kids under the age of 26. I have raised them to be responsible. The average age of soldiers in Vietnam was 19. World War II probably the same. I have raised my kids to be responsible, to get health care at 21. Kids don’t need to be running home to mommy and daddy until they’re 26 for healthcare.”

- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.

83 comments Add your comment

Al from Dadeville

February 18th, 2011
1:06 pm

I agree. My kids are surely off my ex-wife’s insurance by now. Roll Tide.

Reality

February 18th, 2011
1:12 pm

He is an idiot and totally unaware of the real world experiences of the middle class….. these are the working people that DON’T have the connections in DC to get their kids a cushy high paying government job!

dd

February 18th, 2011
1:14 pm

Absolutely agree. Amazing how coddled young adults are, dang, go out, make your mark, and provide for yourself!

tyrone from east point

February 18th, 2011
1:21 pm

Attention Reality,

If you raised your kids to still be dependent upon you for health care at 24-26 years old…you are a total failure as a parent. Consequently, you are the idiot.

Mama Be Good

February 18th, 2011
1:21 pm

It’s official. Jack Kingston lives in a bubble. Where all kids are healthy. Where kids are not medically fragile. Or have disabilities. Where all kids are able to live independently. Where kids can get a job before 21.

Aquagirl

February 18th, 2011
1:21 pm

Wait, I thought we wanted a more educated populace? If someone stays on mommy and daddy’s insurance while getting a PhD in Physics they might displace a foreigner on a HB1 visa. We can’t have that now, can we?

Jon

February 18th, 2011
1:22 pm

Somebody interrupt his inane rumblings about “Big Government” to tell Kingston to let parents make that choice.

Jessie Jackson

February 18th, 2011
1:23 pm

We should always be dependent upon the government for all of our health care needs, housing needs, child care, dental care, food stamps, etc……

khc

February 18th, 2011
1:25 pm

wonder if his children got jobs because of who he is

Jessie Jackson

February 18th, 2011
1:26 pm

Attention Mama Be Good,

Preach on mama…let’s make everyone totally and completely rely on the government for all of our wants and needs.

Truly Amazing

February 18th, 2011
1:27 pm

I’m very neutral on his comments. Sure, there are some irresponsible young adults out there and this could encourage them to continue to be that way. However, for the most part, I believe it is not so easy for young people to get decent jobs that have good health care coverage. Most new jobs now don’t have good coverage if any at all and the coverage is costly. Before he says anything else he should try to get a holistic point of view.

No Dog in this Hunt

February 18th, 2011
1:34 pm

The fact is this provision is costing people a ton of money. Look at the estimates for just the state’s employees. A compromise might be that they can continue to 26 as long as they are full time students. This at least gives us some belief that they will become functional parties in our society. Forcing a kid to drop out of school so they can get a job to pay for insurance is costly to our society.

James

February 18th, 2011
1:36 pm

Attention khc

I wonder if your kids are unemployed because of you.

Logic 05

February 18th, 2011
1:38 pm

Unless they are full time students, why should the kids stay on their parents health care plan?

Dave

February 18th, 2011
1:38 pm

I agree with the Rep 100%……..after 21 you are not a child or dependent unless in college of disabled and should provide for themselves. If the government makes it 26 why not make if 45……
or 50…..there is no difference.

Dave

February 18th, 2011
1:40 pm

1:38 post…….should read “or” disabled

Southside Shawty

February 18th, 2011
1:42 pm

Why should it matter as long as the premiums are paid each month. In this job environment, I know a recent college graduate with a gpa of 3.5 who works as a cashier at Wal-Mart. Kingston, while fairly moderate in the current republican climate, doesn’t have a clue as to what’s going on in the real world today.

I like No Dog’s compromise though.

Terrillterry

February 18th, 2011
1:44 pm

A lot of young people won’t need health insurance but people with disabilities and drug issues will.
I think you cannot judge that everyone fits the cookie cutter mold. Some have been dealt a bad hand.

td

February 18th, 2011
1:46 pm

I think I read some where that this provision will cost the taxpayers of Georgia and additional $18 million per year or per month for Medicaid coverage of the children that their parents currently or will have medicaid.

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Jim Galloway, ~Shawn~. ~Shawn~ said: RT @politicalinsidr: Jack Kingston: Grown kids shouldn’t rely on parents for health care http://bit.ly/ehyMs5 [...]

deegee

February 18th, 2011
1:49 pm

td, would you please go back and get your facts straight. After that, please try to compose your thoughts in a way that will make some sense to us.

ghp_fan

February 18th, 2011
1:53 pm

It seems this is really not a cost issue. Seems if they were saying you could leave your elderly parents on your health insurance that would be pretty costly for the insurance companies. I would think the group of people up to age 26 or so would tend to be the healthiest bunch in the country.

Aquagirl

February 18th, 2011
1:59 pm

deegee, when a post starts with “I think I read somewhere….” it’s like a warning label. You are solely responsible for any subsequent brain lock you suffer.

deegee

February 18th, 2011
2:00 pm

Why should anyone care as long as their parents are paying the premiums? How do we know that their adult children aren’t reimbursing them for the cost of the insurance? Why don’t we tell Jack Kingston, Nathan Deal and David Ralston that their grown children shouldn’t rely on their parents for jobs, income, and multi-million dollar loans?

catlady

February 18th, 2011
2:02 pm

Mr. Kingston, How many of your children are getting their insurance by being soldiers right now? How many of them have jobs thanks to “connections” like Nathan Deal’s and David Ralston’s? (you know, they got those lobbyist positions simply by “merit”)

How many of your children have master’s degrees in astrophysics and cannot find an appropriate job, with benefits?

Sam I Am

February 18th, 2011
2:02 pm

And he was wrong about the age in Nam, guess he gets his “Facts” from that old song.

YeahRight

February 18th, 2011
2:03 pm

Sure, let them go without healthcare – see if congress gives a flip – they don’t!
That kid that has the pre-existing condition…. after all, he chose to get the condition, didn’t he/she?
Graduate from college, and the only job you can get is flipping burgers? Too bad on you when you slip on an icy sidewalk trying to get to work – you just gotta pay with all that money you’ve saved! Too bad for you! See if anyone else cares! Just Die …. See if the ‘religious right’ really gives a damn.

khc

February 18th, 2011
2:05 pm

james are your kids as retarded as you

Johns Creek resident

February 18th, 2011
2:08 pm

What if I do not want my kids to be covered by my health insurance policy. Do they still have to be covered? Will I be able to pay less for health insurance if my kids are not covered, or will my insurance payments be subsidizing those who choose to cover their adult kids on their policies?

JP

February 18th, 2011
2:10 pm

I think the rule or provision ought to stay in place. If parents want to pay for their kid’s insurance, who am I to stop them? That said, I never once thought of getting on my parents’ insurance, I always assumed I’d have to deal with it myself. Not saying I am better, that was just my thinking.

Interesting Observation

February 18th, 2011
2:14 pm

All of you will be absolutely amazed at how dependent we all are on the government. The low hanging fruit – food stamps, medicaid, medicare, social security, and government employees are easy to take aim at and vilify. Seldom do we stop and think of the myriad of government contracts and subcontracts and spinoffs that people in the private sector benefit from. Everything from local companies supplying food to school districts, local suppliers who provide desks and chairs to the schools. The local builders who build and manintain schools. Companies that build school buses. Property owners who lease to the government. Paving companies that pave the roads. Concrete companies that rely on road construction and other public works to keep them afloat. Asphalt companies. Just about every sector of our economy is directly or indirectly involved with the government. Dell and HP build and sell computers and other high tech equipment to the government. Software engineers are employed to design software for CIA, FBI and other federal agencies. AT&T and other communications companies have contracts with the government. Auto and truck manufacturers build and sell automobiles and trucks to governments. Let’s say we shrink government by one-third think of the number of people in the private sector whose jobs will be affected. I could go on forever, but you get the picture. Think people, think and stop being led by some of the same hypocrites who benefit via a relative or friend and bash the government just to get your vote.

GaBlue

February 18th, 2011
2:17 pm

Why should he, or anyone else care if my college student is on my policy at work. **I** am still paying for it! Did it suddenly become FREE for everyone else, and I just didn’t get the memo or something? Is he trying to tell me how to run the finances in my family? “Gee, relative X can be covered, but relative Y should not…. ” What a MEDDLER!

Shouldn’t Mr. Kingston be out there hustling donations to dredge the port and create jobs in his district? Get your nose out of our family’s personal business, Congressman!

Curious George

February 18th, 2011
2:19 pm

Hey on my insurance, we get to choose single or family coverage. Family coverage takes care of everyone in the family for the same premium. For a small fee, I will adopt your kids and put them on my insurance.

Go Home Stinkston!

February 18th, 2011
2:29 pm

You and your GOP buddies destroyed the global economy with your economic strategy of de-regulation and the fiscal malpractice of your Wall Street buddies. As a recent college graduate, I can’t get a decent job that pays health benefits. I take home $1,500 per month. I would have to pay $485 per month for a BCBS high deductible healthcare plan. That is almost 1/3 of my income. I am glad Obama had this included in the reform. I’d be glad to pay for my own insurance if you could figure out how to make it cost less? Big healthcare is making record profits. How much money do you take from Big Healthcare? I think that is our answer. Shut your pie hole Congressman.

cs

February 18th, 2011
2:32 pm

He’s my congressman and a good one but I am going to disagree not so much on what he said but the fact that more and more can not afford insurance………even parents much less their offspring. If he wants to do something constructive, do something about the insurance companies and medical profession robbing us blind.

No Dog in this Hunt

February 18th, 2011
2:37 pm

The age provision is adding $18 million to the state budget in 2011 and $35 million in 2013. See http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2011/02/16/nathan-deal-warns-against-a-hasty-defunding-of-health-care-reform/.

When requirements to provide care are added to insurance policies, rates go up. If they didn’t, and people wanted the benefit, the insurance companies would have already added the benefit. Then comes the employee/employer split. Most organizations attempt to split the cost on consistent percentages. That means the rate goes up (or down) for both parties.

What is also damaging is the uncertainty. My three kids all have individual policies, which I would drop if I knew they were going to be able to stay on my policy. These policies have become more expensive with the new mandates in coverage, and they don’t pay off much because of deductibles, etc. and because they are secondary coverage. The only reason I maintain them is because I am uncertain of the ability to provide my children coverage in the future, and with pre-existing conditions, these policies took 12 months to actually provide coverage. If Obama care is repealed, my kids are covered. If not, I have wasted $500/month while my kids are in school and covered by my plan.

momof2

February 18th, 2011
2:39 pm

Make companies offer more full time jobs with benefits instead of giving them just under “full time” with no benefits. My kids work, but don’t have insurance due to the companies. They don’t make enough money to live independently and pay out of pocket for health insurance. Not everyone can be a doctor/lawyer/banker.

Three Tours in Iraq - Civilian Now

February 18th, 2011
2:39 pm

I am 24 years old and a Veteran of the Iraq War. Dear Mr. Kingston, Thank you for destroying this country’s financial security while I was abroad looking for your WMDs. I can’t find work right now and am on my parent’s healthcare plan, thanks to President Obama. I guess I am one of the irresponsible people you are talking about. How much sand time did any of your kids put in? FU

Reality Check

February 18th, 2011
2:47 pm

Is he aware that children under 26 and full-time students could stay on their parents’ health plan? The only new part to this provision is removing “full-time student”.

findog

February 18th, 2011
3:03 pm

Congressman say the darnest things:
If he knew the answer he wouldn’t be using the average age argument of WWII soldiers for his comparison, it was 26
Odd that happens to be the new drop off age…

Retired Soldier

February 18th, 2011
3:13 pm

@ Three Tours in Iraq: Thank you, thank you for stepping up and serving. You are right on with your comments. These lilly white republicans have no intention of ever letting their kids serve in the military.

TBone

February 18th, 2011
3:23 pm

I received quite a bump in my share of health insurance contribution due to this little provision. Most 26 year olds are in good health and choose not to carry insurance like I did. Being forced to insure 26 year old children is a travesty and should be rescinded.

Truth

February 18th, 2011
3:28 pm

All I know is when I graduated from college at age 22, I did not expect my parents to take care of any of my insurance. I purchased my own health, renters and auto insurance. I even rented till I was 28 years old so I could save enough of my own money to purchase my first house.

I am the Father of four also and I hope I am raising my children to be responsible for their actions when they get older such as taking care of your protections (insurance) in life when you become an adult.

Joe

February 18th, 2011
3:29 pm

It’s not that young, healthy people can’t buy health insurance. It’s that they’re young and healthy, so they don’t think they need it.

First, if a young uninsured adult, for example, is seriously injured in a car accident, then we taxpayers could end up footing the bill.

In addition, insurance works because those without claims are paying for those who make the claims But young adults, usually the healthiest, aren’t purchasing insurance, that drives up the cost of insurance for everybody else.

So, by allowing parents to keep their young, adult children on their family policies, insurers collect more money with which to pay out claims, the risk is spread among more people, and this holds down premiums for all of us. It also reduces the risk of taxpayers having to pay their medical bills if they do have some sort of catastrophic illness or injury.

Truth

February 18th, 2011
3:29 pm

If you are not an adult till you are 26 then don’t let them vote, serve in the military, drink or go to an R rated movie till they are 26.

DW

February 18th, 2011
3:30 pm

Same old republican mantra.. “lets sh!t on regular folks so rich corporations can rake in more record profits”

Truth

February 18th, 2011
3:31 pm

DW:
You insult regular folks like myself with your language and your lack of responsibility. Grow up and take care of yourself like we all have to do.

Ethel

February 18th, 2011
3:34 pm

well i believe that not all children are independent or living on their own by the age of 24-26 years old and if they are they are just starting in the career field and insurance is very expensive so if a parent has the choice to add their child for that amount of time there is no additional expense to the parent that already carries a family plan, to add the child that is over 21. verses that child taking out there own insurance costing them a fortune. every parent wants to help their child no matter how old they are so there less burden on the child.

Fred

February 18th, 2011
3:36 pm

Thank you Mr. Kingston; now get the law passed allowing interstate competition in the insurance business; and get tort reform done, so that competition will get those costs dropping for everybody!

mamaj

February 18th, 2011
3:56 pm

@ Joe; your comments make so much sense.