Last week's Question of the Week asked readers if they favor a plan backed by Sen. Max Baucus to expand the Children's Health Insurance Program. A small majority agreed with Baucus.

Among 486 responses to this unscientific poll, 260 liked the CHIP expansion and 226 did not.

Some readers' comments:

n Yes, yes and yes again! First, prices rise in medical care, so we must care for the next generation. These children will care for us "seniors." The children are our citizens: Let's be patriotic and mindful of this.

n I don't have any children, so why should I have to pay so somebody else's children have insurance!

n Since President Reagan, there has been a trend toward reducing government sponsored programs that support our citizens' welfare, a trend toward outsourcing these programs into the private, for-profit, sector. This trend has rapidly accelerated with the "Bush Republican" administration. This trend must be stopped and reversed! I believe we must have universal health insurance provided by the government with the operational objective of doing what's right for the welfare and protection of the American people rather than maximizing corporate profit. As a patriotic American, I believe that our survival as a nation rests with our government's ability to protect and enhance our people's health and education.

n I do not favor the expansion of the program, which for the most part is a "feel-good" program that makes some people feel good about themselves and helps Sen. Baucus with his re-election campaign. Undoubtedly there are children and families who need this type program and should probably receive some type of assistance, but when adults are also insured in a "children's health insurance program" the entire program begins to lose value and integrity. Then add the qualifier that folks with an income of 150-300 percent of the poverty level are eligible, it starts to make one wonder if they really need the assistance or if they have something else on which they would rather spend their money.