Dems may use food stamp money to pay for Michelle Obama's nutrition initiative

[Freddie Stubbs]

By Russell Berman - 08/14/10 06:00 AM ET

Democrats who reluctantly slashed a food stamp program to fund a state aid bill may have to do so again to pay for a top priority of first lady Michelle Obama.

The House will soon consider an $8 billion child nutrition bill that’s at the center of the first lady’s “Let’s Move” initiative. Before leaving for the summer recess, the Senate passed a smaller version of the legislation that is paid for by trimming the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps.

The proposed cuts would come on top of a 13.6 percent food stamp reduction in the $26 billion Medicaid and education state funding bill that President Obama signed this week.

Food stamps have made multiple appearances on the fiscal chopping block because Democrats have few other places to turn to offset the cost of legislation.

more: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/114271-dems-consider-more-food-stamp-cuts-to-fund-child-nutrition-bill

[MadHound]

1. God forbid we end the war and have a peace dividend.

Can't have that happen.

[FirstLight]

2. great...more budgeting for the rest of us

you know, OJ is up to $4 a carton?
christ...how are we supposed to LIVE, no jobs, no money and they just keep cutting away.

Are we the expendable serfs after all?

[RandomThoughts]

4. For the upper class to be taken down.

It may require billions in the lower/middle class to reach a very bad point.

But since anything not acceptable is the same, if that condition was created it would make sense. Something has to occur, and as more milder things do not have acceptable results, then logically things of greater impact have to occur.

The only question is how soon and how fast, since each event has a possibility of creating acceptable conditions.

Logically, it makes sense that to remove systematic problems entrenched with concepts that are unacceptable, the populace has to reach both the point where they will do something, and the size to overcome any technological or control methods that exist.

Since the sophistication of crowd control is so high, it seems that the disaster, economic, natural whatever would have to reach a very high level for things to become acceptable.

Sad, but logically seems to be what people want.

And have not seen any other changes towards acceptable situations in needed situations, so it makes sense for those things to occur.

Note my mention of the upper class is an assumption based on a stereotype of ability versus action ratios. It could be other people, don't know. Although the only people that would do the things to create that would be those very people, by their nihilism.

So increased serfdom is the people creating that, creating the conditions for their removal.


Interestingly through hubris they will believe they are in control till the snap.

[davidinalameda]

11. buy a bag of oranges and squeeze them yourself

that takes care of that issue

[SPedigrees]

13. Have you priced oranges lately? They may grow on trees

but they aint free (or cheap.)

[Mimosa]

14. A bag of oranges costs twice as much as a half gallon of OJ and provides less juice

Some people don't know what they're talking about but post anyway.

[Beacool]

17. Yep, in my area the oranges are right now between $0.75 to $1 each.

While orange juice you can get 2 for $5 or $6 depending on the sale.

:-(

[davidinalameda]

30. cheaper than a carton of juice

[babylonsister]

3. May? Is this some clown's supposition? I bet it is. nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. The Senate has already passed legislation to do this

[babylonsister]

10. No they haven't. It was passed once, not twice afaik-yet.

Besides, everyone's on vacation!!! Here's a thread with a link to an article in it about food stamps.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x410438#410550

[sandnsea]

5. The 13.5 is a stimulus increase

It was never intended to be a permanent increase and won't end until 2014, if we are out of this recession.

If they are transferring Dept of Ag money to some other nutrition program, like another version of WIC, it might be a good thing.

Can people ever stop kneejerking.

[dflprincess]

6. Has any one explained to these 3D Chess experts that malnutrition

leads to higher medical costs?

I suppose medical programs will be the next programs they find expendable. God knows war or Obama's "No Child Left Behind in the Race to the Bottom" program can't be cut.

This is just a great way for Democrats to behave. Can't wait to see what they do to Social Security - not surprising they're delaying that until after this year's election.

[inna]

19. my thoughts exactly.

the whole thing is unreal.

[smalll]

8. "Let's Move"? Telling Americans that they're sedentary fatties --

(and pushing them to eat arugula -- and yes, arugula was prominently planted in the White House garden) --

Somehow, I think that won't poll too well. As they say these days, the "optics" aren't good. :shrug:

(On edit: most Americans ARE sedentary fatties. But you're not exactly supposed to tell them that when your husband is a President who will face a touch-and-go re-election campaign.)

[liberalmuse]

9. How about we just end Bush's fucking wars instead?

You know, by not passing the billions of dollars of funding every single time it comes around. Honestly, I'm sick of all the assholes in DC. Fucking CLUELESS pieces of shit.

[Michigan-Arizona]

12. Exactly! Well stated liberalmuse

[Mimosa]

16. Bush's wars?

He's GONE...


but not in spirit?

[Beacool]

15. Well, that's one way to make people lose weight.

Cut their food stamps and they won't be able to buy food. Solved two problems in one stroke. Very cost effective if you think about it.

Although, I don't know if they'll have enough energy to move.......

:crazy:

[inna]

18. You have got to be kidding me. Can anyone defend or at least rationalize this crap??

Un-fucking-believable. :nuke:

[ipaint]

20. We run the largest corporate welfare system in the world

and the only place democrats can find money is by cutting programs for the poorest citizens.

Baloney. Just an indication of how right the party has moved.

[JoePhilly]

21. You are being LIED to!!

And it starts in the first line.

"Democrats who reluctantly slashed a food stamp program to fund a state aid bill may have to do so again to pay for a top priority of first lady Michelle Obama."

Democrats DID NOT "slash a food stamps program" to fund the state aid bill.

What they did is shorten the time in which a TEMPORARY INCREASE of food stamps expires. See, in the stimulus, the DEMOCRATS included a TEMPORARY INCREASE to food stamps. That TEMPORARY INCREASE was set PHASE OUT after 2014. So as part of the state aid package, they moved the PHASE OUT to 2014 to cover a VERY SMALL part of the overall state aid bill.

Which means that between now and 2014, food stamp funding will be ABOVE the pre-stimulus period. It is HIGHER than it was when the stiumuls passed. And if the Dems do nothing else, after 2014, food stamp funding returns to what it was right before the stimuls passed.

No cutting, no slashing of any kind. Moreover, the Dems have said that between now and 2014, they will be looking to extend the INCREASE to the food stamps program BEYOND the original date in the stimulus.

Again, no cutting, no slashing.

Articles like this one intentionally distorts the facts, because the goal is to get Democrats to STAY HOME.

Nothing more.

(typo)

[inna]

23. Way to deny the obvious and defend the undefensible. Yes, these are cuts.

It's beyond absurd to try to argue that they are not.

[SunsetDreams]

24. Food Stamps Are Not Being Cut

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x412695

[Lance_Boyle]

31. These are cuts in the same way that killing the * tax cuts is a tax hike.

In other words, in the "liars may say it is but it really ain't" way.

[Zenlitened]

27. So how many years of funding, which had already been promised, have been...

...um, what's the word, if not "cut" or "slashed"?

"Re-imagined"?

"Made to no longer be"?

:shrug:

[TheKentuckian]

28. Is the amount of funding increased, stable, or less? Less

Is the program underfunded at this time? Yes

Is their any actual indication that accounting for this that the program will need 20 billion less in a few years?

We need to be fighting for more funding rather than defending cuts.

[whistler162]

22. Reporter failure --- EPIC!!

Fails to report that the "cut" is a non-renewal of the stimulus increase and doesn't happen until 2014 until the end of the article. But, spreads the sensational lie at the beginning.

Wonder what else he fails at reporting.

[tallahasseedem]

25. Yet there are many...

here at DU that buy this hook, line and sinker. Anything to bash Obama.

[JoePhilly]

26. Bingo ... I explained the truth up above ... and the only response

was a denial of the truth.

[Lilyeye]

29. Yup! It's really sad what has happened to this site.