Senator Eliot Shapleigh - El Paso, Texas

We've heard plenty of talk from politicians running for office about taking care of children and families. It's a popular refrain on the campaign trail that no reasonable person could oppose. But when the campaign is over and it's time for action, too many of those self-proclaimed children's champions go missing in action. As a result, children are left in the lurch.

Not this time.

On Wednesday, President-elect Barack Obama urged the U.S. Senate to act with the "same sense of urgency" as the House to pass an expansion of the Children's Health Insurance Program. It looks like that will happen. Fast.

The government-financed CHIP is primarily for children whose parents are not wealthy enough to buy private insurance but earn too much to qualify for Medicaid. Nationwide, about 7 million children have coverage through CHIP. The expansion would increase that to 11 million for an additional cost of $33 billion over four years. It would be financed by a hefty federal tax increase — 61 cents — on cigarettes.

Obama is holding true to his campaign statement that health insurance is a right, rather than privilege, and to his promise to expand coverage for uninsured Americans.

"In this moment of crisis, ensuring that every child in America has access to affordable health care is not just good economic policy but a moral obligation we hold as parents and citizens," Obama said.

The measure still must pass the U.S. Senate, but that seems a formality because it twice before passed both chambers. President George W. Bush blocked the expansion, vetoing it twice in 2007.

An expanded CHIP program certainly would be a plus for Texas, where one in five children lacks health coverage. But nothing can be taken for granted from the state Legislature. Texas lawmakers have been both generous and stingy when it comes to CHIP. Because CHIP requires matching state money, an expansion might be deemed too expensive at a time the state confronts a $9 billion drop in revenue.

That would be shortsighted, inefficient and very costly to local taxpayers. We've said it before but it's worth repeating: CHIP is not for layabouts. These are working parents who are financially strapped. They qualify for CHIP if they earn up to 200 percent of the federal poverty level, or $42,400 for a family of four. The expansion would help families who earn 300 percent of the federal poverty level ($63,600) buy insurance for their children. In Texas, it means adding 160,000 children to CHIP's current rolls of more than 450,000.

Economically struggling families benefit from CHIP, but so do local taxpayers. The federal program partners with states so that in Texas, for instance, the state receives about $2.60 for every $1 it invests in CHIP. CHIP-enrolled children get regular checkups and treatment for minor ailments at doctors' offices instead of in hospital emergency rooms. It's the very kind of initiative that government does well. And it keeps costs down for local governments that otherwise would pick up the whole cost of caring for people without health insurance.

In Texas, the state share would cost $100 million. Lawmakers would be wise to do the math of paying for health costs with and without CHIP. They should consider the costs to local communities and their campaign rhetoric to help Texas families. If they do, they will expand CHIP.