We've killed a lot of pixels here on SCHIP, even though it's primarily a federal program. One reason: States consider it when making their plans. Another is that it illustrates some of the problems of continually turning health care decisions over to politicians.

On the side of SCHIP expansion are several factors. One, surely, is the difficulty (and in some cases, reluctance) of talking about the program (and indeed, the expansion of any government program) in moral terms.

Rev. Robert Sirico is up to the challenge, however. In an op-ed published this week in the Detroit News, the Michigan-based president of the Acton Institute, takes on some of his co-religionists. He didn't write the headline, of course, but in this case the headline writer got it correct: Faithful can oppose children's health plan expansion in good conscience. (In fact, I'd say that not only can they, but they should.)

Here's the intro to Sirico's essay:

The Catholic Health Association has blasted President Bush for vetoing a program called SCHIP, the State Children's Health Insurance Program. How can anyone be against the health of children?

Well, public policy is more complicated than that. When the state gets involved in public health, there are unintended consequences. In fact, there is enough wrong with this program to make it possible to oppose SCHIP in good conscience.

In short, enticing more people into a government program, especially those who already paying for insurance in the private sector, inflicts harm on human dignity.