Mike Rogers Cast 19 Votes Against Children's Health Funding
The former representative voted against measures to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program between 2004 and 2009.
Updated on Sept. 29, 2026 in Children’s Health
Live Poll
Should the federal government prioritize expanding public health coverage over protecting the private insurance market?
Between 2004 and 2009, Mike Rogers cast 19 votes against legislative measures intended to extend, expand, or increase funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program. His voting record included opposition to the 2007 Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act and the 2009 legislation to renew the program.
Why it matters
The legislative decisions affected a program designed to provide coverage for low-income children. Rogers argued at the time that such expansions could potentially displace private insurance and questioned the efficacy of the programs in reaching the intended beneficiaries.
A 2007 proposal would have increased Michigan funding by 44 percent, potentially adding 80,900 children to coverage rolls that supported 55,000 children monthly. At the time, the program utilized an income threshold of $41,000 for a family of four.
The players
Mike Rogers
He is a former member of the United States House of Representatives who served Michigan.
The details
Rogers consistently opposed funding mechanisms often tied to tobacco tax increases. Beyond the child health insurance votes, his record also included voting twice against the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act in 2010.
Timeline
2004-2009: Rogers cast 19 votes against health insurance measures.
2004: Rogers voted against a program expansion funding bill.
October 2007: MIChild supported 55,000 children monthly.
2009: Rogers voted against legislation renewing and expanding the program.
2010: Rogers voted against the James Zadroga 9/11 Act.
The Big Picture
These votes reflect the historical debates surrounding the State Children's Health Insurance Program and its expansion during the 2000s. The legislative actions represent a series of votes taken against the long-term funding and renewal of this federal-state partnership program.
The program provided vital coverage for low-income children in Michigan whose families exceeded traditional Medicaid thresholds. Decisions to limit or expand these programs directly determined the accessibility of routine medical care for tens of thousands of residents.
The takeaway
Congressional debates over federal health programs frequently center on the balance between government-funded expansion and the preservation of private market alternatives. These historical votes highlight the ongoing political divide regarding how states and the federal government should allocate health resources for children.
Further reading
Learn more about local policy impacts in Michigan Children’s Health.
Source note: This article includes information reported by InsuranceNewsNet.
Live Poll
Should the federal government prioritize expanding public health coverage over protecting the private insurance market?
