Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Budget Deal Slashes Nutrition Assistance For Poor Women and Children, Boosts Defense Spending By $5

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:13 PM
Original message
Budget Deal Slashes Nutrition Assistance For Poor Women and Children, Boosts Defense Spending By $5
http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/12/budget-deal-cuts /

Late Friday night, President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) struck a deal that averted a government shutdown, but (unless it is rejected by Congress) will lead to about $38 billion in spending cuts over the remainder of the fiscal year. These proposed cuts, alongside rising gas prices and draconian budget cuts at the state and local level, have already led some economists to knock up to a point off of their estimate for U.S. economic growth.

For instance, Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial, said she had cut her forecast for 2011 to 3.3 percent, from 4.2 percent. Anything below 3 percent and youre just running on a treadmill. Youre not getting anywhere, she said. Here are just some of the cuts included in the deal, which should be voted on by the end of the week:

Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC): $504 million

State and local law enforcement: $415 million

Much more at the link --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. Evil, evil, evil! Cutting WIC is cruel and unusual punishment for women and children!
And here is Michelle, trumpeting her "kids need to lose weight", while her husband stops the ONE nutrition program for women and their children!

EVIL!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
19. It was unspent funds from fiscal year 2010.
http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/04/facts-on-budget-comp... /

1. Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC): $504 million -

This would be absolutely awful, if it were accurate. But it turns out the cut is simply a government clawback of unspent money left over from fiscal year 2010. Not a penny is being cut from actual WIC recipients.

Plus, the CBO has recently reported that the cuts in the deal for this year are actually only $352 million. As per another Think progress article: http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/13/cbo-budget-deal-cut... /

Nothing has been cut from WIC. What was 'cut' were unspent funds from last year. The president's budget request for this year includes more money for WIC and similar programs.


-snip-

# The President proposes $7.6 billion in new budget authority for the WIC program an increase of approximately $350 million above the 2010 level (excluding the added funding in the economic recovery act, or ARRA). The proposed funding, along with significant funding carried over from last year, is expected to serve more than one half million additional participants per month in FY 2011 compared to FY 2010, for a total 10.1 million women, infants, and children per average month.
# An increase of $125 million is proposed for the contingency reserve, bringing the total available reserve to $250 million to provide resources to help bridge the gap should participation or food costs be higher than anticipated in FY 2011.
# The Presidents request also includes $104 million to increase the monthly fruit and vegetable benefit allotments for children from $6 to the full $8 recommended by the Institute of Medicine (IOM). This $2 per month increase for children combined with the $2 per month increase for womans benefits enacted in 2009 (for FY 2010) brings all the WIC food packages up to the level recommended by the IOM.

-snip-

More at link: http://frac.org/leg-act-center/budget-and-appropriation... /
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. We've heard that story before. It always ends with people losing benefits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cairycat Donating Member (454 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #1
22. I've read that WIC saves $3-$4 for every $ spent
How the HELL can they justify cutting that? Cutting funding from giving kids a decent start in life to have $5 billion more for the machinery of destruction? Especially the Rethugs and blue dogs who yawp about "abortion is evil" but don't hesitate to literally steal food from the mouths of babes. Evil, indeed.

Children's brains and bodies cannot develop properly when they do not receive enough of the right foods. Even if WIC didn't save money, it would be costly down the road to let children be malnourished, in this, supposedly the greatest country on earth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #1
23. This obscene depravity provides the world a glimpse/microcosm of actual pub values/humanity
:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scuba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. If defense spending was only boosted $5 I would dance naked in the streets. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. it's 5 BILLION -- the title was too long n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scuba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Rats!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. What a bunch of ASSHOLES!!!! To hell with FOOD for women, children and infants and
increase DEFENSE spending???&^%$#@ Does anyone see what's wrong with this picture? My G-d. Where have our values gone? Where's the empathy for those less fortunate? Now I'm pissed....again. When will this shit ever end?

K & R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. Just remember... its all the fault of the RW and the corporate media.
The hands of the Dems in power are squeaky clean.

Please remember that. It will make the sight of hungry women and children much easier to ignore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. I'll keep repeating that to myself.
:( This country is in such a BAD place. It's embarrassing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. While you keep repeating it, I'll hold the barf bag for ya.
I don't know whether to be ashamed, livid, fearful or just crawl under a rock and hunker in denial.

I feel like those baby eagles during the wind storm..."Run for cover!"

:cry: :nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. They cannot ignore the issues of homelessness/hunger/poverty forever.
Edited on Thu Apr-14-11 02:51 PM by in_cog_ni_to
They HAVE TO FACE IT SOME DAY. The issues aren't going to just magically disappear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Oh, but they will. Meanwhile, poor people are imploding, and taking it out on themselves.
Killing themselves, killing each other, etc.

But, one day, the anger level will EXPLODE, and be turned outward, and that won't be pretty.

"Progressives" can forestall that EXPLOSION now, but time is running out, and they show no inclination to take action.

:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. This cut makes only a negative impact; it does virtually NOTHING to reduce the deficit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. They don't actually care about the budget. It's just a smokescreen and code word they use as
an excuse to rob the poor!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
7. recommend
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
8. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iwillnevergiveup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
9. Let 'em eat cake???
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
10. No benefits are being cut:
1. Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC): $504 million -

This would be absolutely awful, if it were accurate. But it turns out the cut is simply a government clawback of unspent money left over from fiscal year 2010. Not a penny is being cut from actual WIC recipients.

link


CBS: Budget deal details: Cuts that aren't quite cuts

<...>

Among the cuts:

$700 million from clean and safe drinking water programs;
$390 million from heating subsidies;
$276 million from pandemic flu prevention programs; and
$1.5 billion from the president's new $8 billion initiative to spur high-speed rail development.

Many of the cuts appear to have been cuts in name only, because they came from programs that had unspent funds.

For example, $1.7 billion left over from the 2010 census; $3.5 billion in unused children's health insurance funds; $2.2 billion in subsidies for health insurance co-ops (that's something the president's new health care law is going to fund anyway); and $2.5 billion from highway programs that can't be spent because of restrictions set by other legislation.

About $10 billion of the cuts comes from targeting appropriations accounts previously used by lawmakers for so-called earmarks - pet projects like highways, water projects, community development grants and new equipment for police and fire departments. Republicans had already engineered a ban on earmarks when taking back the House this year.

<...>


CBO: Budget Deal Cuts Less Than 1 Percent Of The $38.5 Billion Claimed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hawkowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
14. But the SPEECH!!!
Obama's speech, that is what we need to focus on! Screw women and children; let them buy their own goddamn ponies!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
18. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maryf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
21. kr nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 23rd 2014, 04:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC