In his State of the Union Address tonight, President Bush will propose a plan that shifts tax incentives to increase health coverage for the uninsured. The fact that Grover Norquist and Pat Toomey support it should be enough to send up a Texas-sized red flag. But if you want a New York angle on why it's a bad idea, you can find it in the Times' pre-SOTU analysis of the State of Bush. Seems that a major chunk of the money for the plan will come directly at the expense of New York's hospitals.

Several public health officials reacted with alarm to Mr. Bush’s plan to encourage states to take Medicaid money now earmarked for public hospitals and use it for state programs to cover the uninsured. The Bush administration proposes cutting Medicaid payments to public hospitals and other “safety net” providers by $3.9 billion over the next five years. Preliminary estimates suggest that 40 percent of the savings would come at the expense of the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, which operates 11 hospitals, 4 nursing homes and more than 80 community clinics. Kenneth E. Raske, president of the Greater New York Hospital Association, called the proposal “an absolute disaster for New York.” Deborah Bachrach, a deputy commissioner in the New York State Health Department, said it would affect hospitals “that serve some of the lowest-income, most vulnerable patients.”

[Emphasis mine]. New York's hospitals are already deep in crisis. Now they're going to be plundered to pay for some half-assed, incrementalist, Norquist-supported Bush administration plan? Thanks again, George. You never cease to find ways to screw this town over. Update: The Center for American Progress has a great quick analysis of what's wrong with Bush's health proposal.