Health of Children in Red States Suffers

Children living in red states -- those in which a majority of the citizens voted Republican in the 2004 presidential election -- may be worse off in terms of health than those living in states that voted Democrat, according to a new book.

The book, "Homeland Insecurity … American Children at Risk," suggests kids in red states are more likely to lack health insurance, live in poverty and die early.

Michael Petit, president of the Every Child Matters Education Fund and author of the book, said politics is largely to blame for the discrepancy. And he adds that political decisions made at the state level have the most impact.

"Where it plays out for individual children and families is in the states -- nowhere more than in so-called red states where children are at significantly greater risk than children in blue states," said Petit in a press conference Wednesday.

Petit used U.S. census data and other government sources to compare states that voted Republican in the 2004 presidential election to those that voted Democratic. To rank the states, he used a set of 11 child-related statistics, several of which were measures of health, such as insurance coverage and prenatal care.

According to his findings, nine of the 10 top states with the best outcomes for children today were blue states. The top 10 states, in order, were Wisconsin, New Jersey, Washington, Minnesota, Nebraska, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, Iowa (the sole red state in the group) and New Hampshire.

All 10 of the bottom-rated states were red states -- Wyoming, Georgia, Arkansas, Alabama, South Carolina, Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Louisiana and Mississippi.

According to Petit's research, a child in the bottom 10 states is twice as likely to die by the age of 14 than a child in the top 10 states.

Children in the bottom 10 states were also 1.8 times more likely to be uninsured than their top 10 counterparts, and expectant mothers were more than twice as likely to receive inadequate prenatal care.

The data show that "children fare much better today if they happen to live in some states instead of others," said Dr. Joel Alpert, past president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, during Wednesday's press conference.

"Children who live in blue states do better. Children who live in red states do worse. It's there in the data," he said. "The data are convincing, and they are alarming."

Health policy experts said the findings establish a likely link between a state's politics and its efforts to safeguard children's health.

"The primary programs we have to insure kids -- namely Medicaid -- are basically federally funded state programs," said Timothy Jost, professor of health care law at the Washington and Lee University School of Law.

Jost said that individual states have a lot of sway when it comes to the health coverage that children receive.

"States that tend to be politically and economically conservative have less inclusive medical assistance programs," he said.

"So, it would make a great deal of sense that states that are Republican have conservative social and economic policies that lead to a decreased health status for poor children."

More Than Just Voting Trends

Jost said other factors that affect children's health, such as poverty, nutrition and housing status, could also play a role in the discrepancy.

And, according to Petit, a state's racial demographic can also play a role in child health.

Page
  • 1
  • |
  • 2
Join the Discussion
You are using an outdated version of Internet Explorer. Please click here to upgrade your browser in order to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
You Might Also Like...