For weeks, I've been seeing an ad for Hillary's election as President that implies that Hillary was responsible for SCHIP (and only that ad). However, Senators Ted Kennedy and Orrin Hatch sponsored SCHIP, which was based on a law of Kennedy's home state of Massachusetts. The then First Lady had no official role or behind the scenes drafting role whatever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Children%27s_Health_Insurance_Program; http://www.tedkennedy.org/service/item/health_care; and http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/giving-hillary-credit-for-schip/

Hillary had claimed credit for SCHIP repeatedly during the 2008 primary as well. At that time, speaking to AP, perhaps in response to a reporter's question about her claims, Kennedy seemingly gave credence to Hillary's claim, saying: "The children’s health program wouldn’t be in existence today if we didn’t have Hillary pushing for it from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue." id. "The other end of Pennsylvania Avenue" refers, of course, to the White House and/or the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, both then under the direct authority of President Bill Clinton.

Adam Clymer, who wrote a biography of Ted Kennedy in 2009, also seemed be be responding to a question when Clymer said, "On balance, I would say of course Kennedy and Hatch deserve most of the credit, but Hillary helped by making sure the Administration stuck with the $24 billion in [the Senate-House] conference. She didn’t write the legislation but she played a significant role in getting it passed." http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/giving-hillary-credit-for-schip/ (italics mine)

Do I doubt Kennedy's word? Maybe. According to all reports, Kennedy was one of the most gracious politicians in living memory and fiercely loyal to his fellow Democratic politicians (except, perhaps, President Carter?). I doubt Kennedy would ever have given the lie to claims a Democratic Presidential primary candidate was making, even though Kennedy eventually endorsed her opponent. As it was, when asked later, Kennedy said only, "Facts are stubborn things. I think we ought to stay with the facts." http://archive.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/14/clinton_role_i...

For his part, Hatch said Kennedy deserved all the credit for convincing the President and other legislators were supposedly furious that Hillary was arrogating credit for SCHIP. id. Of course, only Bill can confirm or deny Hillary's claims definitively; and I always find him very difficult to believe, especially when he speaks about himself and/or Hillary. But, forget about all above. (How dare I propose that after all the reading you've done!)

Hillary was First Lady until January 2000, whereupon she became the junior United States Senator from New York, which she remained through 9-11 and until January 2009, whereupon she became Secretary of State of the United States, which she remained until January 2013, when she became Hard Choices promoter, Presidential-candidate-in-waiting and, of course, America's abuela. Thirteen years of holding important public offices of her own, yet her ad asks me to vote for her for President in 2016 because of some vague alleged First Lady level involvement in the Kennedy/Hatch 1997 SCHIP legislation? And she also ran on that in 2008?

Of course, during the 2008 primary, Clinton was for an individual mandate; and, during the 2016 primary, she attacked Sanders for proposing Medicare for all. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/pat-garofalo/articles/2016-01-13/hil... http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/02/12/fact-argue-experts-sanders-m... and http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/11/us/politics/hillary-clinton-health-car... (Thanks, Senator Sanders!)

As far as what Kennedy, who for years called health care "the cause of my life," thought about how Hillary and Bill Clinton had, um, handled "their" health care legislation: https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/09/29/newly-released-inte...

Also instructive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan_of_1993, especially the sections entitled, respectively, "Criticism," "Litigation," "Defeat," and "Controversy in retrospect and perspective." (Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first attempt to portray ourselves as an extra-Constitutional marital co-Presidency!) So, in all, I am not convinced of the wisdom of Hillary's running on anyone's health care accomplishments.

Am I the only one who thinks bombarding the public with this ad is a bit bizarre from any number of perspectives? And does anyone care to guess what fun Trump and his surrogates may have with her SCHIP claims, if they wish?