#1). Bristol is a single parent. She is a descendant AND MEMBER (due to her father's lineage) of an AK Eskimo tribe. She has an infant son. She is pursuing the father for child support. She has no income of her own, and lives with her parents for support. Technically, yes - her SON, Tripp is eligible for FREE MEDICAL SERVICES through the A-IHS (Alaska Indian Health Services). She must disclose this when petitioning the AK courts for an Order of Parental Support from her son's father, Levi Johnston.
Technically, yes she can use it. But it does seem immoral that she can, living in that house, with her wealthy parents and such. How does her mamma complain about shrinking government and lowering taxes, chiding people for looking to government to help with their problems even as her own daughter drinks from the Indian Health Services welfare trough???
And yet she IS entitled to receive it, just like any other single-parent American would if they were in the same circumstances. Is this a great country, or what?
#2). And Sarah and Todd Palin? Yes, they are entitled to state funds for special education and medical needs of their son Trig, DUE TO his Down's Syndrome. It's federal law. And he can also receive services from the AIHS as Tripp does, for the same reason - he's part AK Indian. And yet, her income and "resources" alone should block this. Another example of automatically qualifying for state aid, based on a disability, yet being able to afford all the services he'll ever need.
What make's me MAD is you've got the disabled and seniors around our country having to spend down their resources in order to "qualify" for federal funds and services. Some seniors are eating cat food and many must skip or skimp on their medications, living their "golden" years sick and miserable - and Bristol Palin is collecting... "Indian Welfare" on behalf of her son, and Sarah & Todd can receive services from the state and / or the A-IHS for Trig because of his Down's.
Remember, we the people elect the idiots to office that make these laws. Years ago an associate of mine that married a woman that had 6 kids and he was earning about three times what I was earning qualified for many welfare benefits, food stamps, medical, cash, etc. I complained to him that this was not right. Guess what, he agreed, but stated that the law provided him the benefits. It was all legal and he would take it. If we didn't like it we should get the law changed. I agree. He was not at fault, but we are. We the voters are absolute idiots.
The "Indian Health Services welfare trough" that you're so quick to point out, is based on the 1921 Snyder Act. It's part of the various treaty agreements, entered into by the United States and the original inhabitants of this country. It gave the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the necessary funding to provide basic health care to the native American populations in Alaska and on reservations.
Are you suggesting the United States no longer honor the treaty agreements, that it made with the original inhabitants of this country.