In the Washington Post today columnist Eugene Robinson has a column entitled "Bush's Veto Lies." He accuses the President of lying about SCHIP in his veto message. Having worked on Capitol Hill, I am uncomfortable when people start throwing around the word "lies" when it comes to public policy. That indicates that you think your opponent does not honestly hold a certain view but, instead, knows you are right but deliberately decides to state a falsehood. It essentially says that you can't disagree with me unless you are being dishonest. And while it is certainly true that some politicians lie, I think most policy disputes are honest disagreements.

That being said, if Mr. Robinson is going to start throwing around the word "lies" to label his opponent, I guess it's fair to use the word "lie" about his assertion that "the program Congress voted to expand provides health insurance for children who fall into a perilous gap: Their families make too much money to qualify for Medicaid but don't make enough to afford health insurance."

If Mr. Robinson thinks President Bush was lying in his veto message, then Mr. Robinson is certainly lying here. There is nothing in this bill that limits SCHIP coverage to families that cannot afford health insurance. Instead, it basically assumes that people in certain income ranges cannot afford health insurance. Even a cursory examination of state uninsured data illustrates that many people with low incomes have private health insurance. And most people with incomes between 200% and 300% of the federal poverty level (the income range for which states are expanding SCHIP) have private insurance.

Of course, I don't think that Eugene Robinson is lying. Instead, I think he's ignorant. He doesn't know much about health care and instead merely wanted to find a pretext to attack President Bush. If he's going to start questioning the honesty of others, however, he should at least make sure he's got his own facts straight.