House Republicans Pass $868 Mil in Cuts to WIC (women, infants, children)

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I hate when people force me to do research. Personally, I wasn't inclined to believe your statement since cutting WIC doesn't sound like something Democrats would do.

So, I went to the below site.

WIC Funding & Program Data

The total funding figure for 2009 is $6,966,046,080.

The total funding figure for 2010 is $7,045,426,014.

Now, admittedly there are no figures for 2011. However, it doesn't seem likely that Democrats would reverse long-standing support for one of the most cost-effective programs the gov't provides, especially since it provides nutrition for infants and small children.

If you can provide a link to support your contention, I think we would all like to see it.

It was funded for a total of 6.7 billion in 2011
And I'm not gonna do your research for you. Bottom line is yes, the dems also cut the bill.

No link = epic failure

Don't be so fuckin lazy its there if you look. You just DON'T WANT TO SEE IT.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

We need to get our budget in order, but during the early stages of recovery from an economic downturn is not the right time to do it.

Correct.

The issue noted in the OP notwithstanding, the GOP’s propensity to advocate cuts in so-called ‘social programs’ is indicative of dogma based decision-making, not fact based.

And this rush to cut programs during the early stages of recovery seems more focused on taking advantage of political cover rather than addressing the deficit.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Why didn't they cut both? Nothing should be off limits; everything should be cut. Period.

 

[Sarah G]

Well, they have to find more money for tax cuts for the rich somewhere! Why not take it from those who can least defend themselves? Good move GOP!

are you going to bitch when a Democrat does the same thing?......if so i want to see you bad mouthing Jerry Brown......

Disabled Fight Jerry Brown’s Budget | HHS Network CA

Gov. Jerry Brown's budget cuts devastate the disabled, poor, sick and elderly : Indybay

Jerry Brown Budget Cuts | California budget: Gov. Jerry Brown approves cuts to services for poor, sick and elderly - Los Angeles Times

Harry, is Jerry Brown raising taxes as well? I think we need a combination of tax cuts and raising taxes to get the economy moving again.

 

[Mustang]

But they leave farm subsidies unchanged.

I gotta say that while cuts need to be made to the budget, when Republicans cut food assistance to women, infants, and children while insisting on maintaining the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, it only serves to reinforce the image of Republicans' as being cold and heartless.

Seems pretty foolish to me. It makes what they tried to do to Medicare look positively altruistic in comparison.

Maybe we ought to first stop lying saying that the Bush tax cuts benefited only the wealthy. Maybe some of those women need to stop having babies just to get more money from the nanny state. Good for the republicans.

And DO what Florida has done and stipulate Drug testing and a few other things before the taxpayer comes off the wallet for the hand-up...and make it NOT a perpetual hand out.

Responsibility is the key here. Government is being irresponsible with money that doesn't belong to them in the first place.

LOL!

Yeah, let FL spend MILLIONS of dollars on drug testing on poor people who have not been convicted of anything to do what? Show fiscal responsibility? I don't think so. And what about private contractors and business owners who receive millions of dollars in gov't spending? They don't get drug tested? How is that fair or even constitional to selectively single out one group (which hasn't actually been accused or convicted of anything) while not requiring another group to submit to the same requirements?

And let's not forget that Gov Rick Scott's former medical businesses (one of them named Solantic) actually performs drug testing. What that means is that Scott's companies (one or more are now run by his wife, Ann) could actually financially benefit from mandatory drug testing. And in case you think that's just a coincidence, keep in mind that Scott's company, Columbia/HCL admitted to 14 felonies related to their Medicare billing procedures and agreed to pay the federal gov't $600 million, and Scott was forced to resign as CEO in 1997. What that means is that Scott and/or his company has a history of fraud.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Well, they have to find more money for tax cuts for the rich somewhere! Why not take it from those who can least defend themselves? Good move GOP!

Well said. They won't touch corporate welfare but for those who need assistance in these hard times, they hurt them further.

That so called corporate welfare....I'd like to see any of you produce a single shred of evidence that corps get "welfare"...Oh and tax breaks or incentives offered by government to produce a needed product or to assist in job creation are not "welfare".
Any assistance offered by government to the private sector helps to expand the economy because business can then create jobs.
Welfare entitlements produce an underclass and bureaucracy.
BTW, those sacred cow programs you people on the left refer to as compassion are being but by a mere 1%...And it's not even a cut. It's a reduction in the annual increase in funding.
It's about time Capitol Hill showed some fiscal responsibility.
Obama keeps blabbering on and on about shared sacrifice. Well God dammit, the entitlement gang has to take their bite out of the shit sandwich just like the rest of us.
If you don't like it, I suggest you write a check.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Well, they have to find more money for tax cuts for the rich somewhere! Why not take it from those who can least defend themselves? Good move GOP!

are you going to bitch when a Democrat does the same thing?......if so i want to see you bad mouthing Jerry Brown......

Disabled Fight Jerry Brown’s Budget | HHS Network CA

Gov. Jerry Brown's budget cuts devastate the disabled, poor, sick and elderly : Indybay

Jerry Brown Budget Cuts | California budget: Gov. Jerry Brown approves cuts to services for poor, sick and elderly - Los Angeles Times

Harry, is Jerry Brown raising taxes as well? I think we need a combination of tax cuts and raising taxes to get the economy moving again.

???

Do you mean spending cuts and tax increases?

 

[The T]

are you going to bitch when a Democrat does the same thing?......if so i want to see you bad mouthing Jerry Brown......

Disabled Fight Jerry Brown’s Budget | HHS Network CA

Gov. Jerry Brown's budget cuts devastate the disabled, poor, sick and elderly : Indybay

Jerry Brown Budget Cuts | California budget: Gov. Jerry Brown approves cuts to services for poor, sick and elderly - Los Angeles Times

Harry, is Jerry Brown raising taxes as well? I think we need a combination of tax cuts and raising taxes to get the economy moving again.

???

Do you mean spending cuts and tax increases?

*Good Catch*

 

[The T]

Maybe we ought to first stop lying saying that the Bush tax cuts benefited only the wealthy. Maybe some of those women need to stop having babies just to get more money from the nanny state. Good for the republicans.

And DO what Florida has done and stipulate Drug testing and a few other things before the taxpayer comes off the wallet for the hand-up...and make it NOT a perpetual hand out.

Responsibility is the key here. Government is being irresponsible with money that doesn't belong to them in the first place.

LOL!

Yeah, let FL spend MILLIONS of dollars on drug testing on poor people who have not been convicted of anything to do what? Show fiscal responsibility? I don't think so. And what about private contractors and business owners who receive millions of dollars in gov't spending? They don't get drug tested? How is that fair or even constitional to selectively single out one group (which hasn't actually been accused or convicted of anything) while not requiring another group to submit to the same requirements?

And let's not forget that Gov Rick Scott's former medical businesses (one of them named Solantic) actually performs drug testing. What that means is that Scott's companies (one or more are now run by his wife, Ann) could actually financially benefit from mandatory drug testing. And in case you think that's just a coincidence, keep in mind that Scott's company, Columbia/HCL admitted to 14 felonies related to their Medicare billing procedures and agreed to pay the federal gov't $600 million, and Scott was forced to resign as CEO in 1997. What that means is that Scott and/or his company has a history of fraud.

Jails are replete with fraud... I will remind you that brevity is the soul of wit. You have yet to experience it.

*NEXT*

 

[thereisnospoon]

But they leave farm subsidies unchanged.

I gotta say that while cuts need to be made to the budget, when Republicans cut food assistance to women, infants, and children while insisting on maintaining the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, it only serves to reinforce the image of Republicans' as being cold and heartless.

Seems pretty foolish to me. It makes what they tried to do to Medicare look positively altruistic in comparison.

Maybe we ought to first stop lying saying that the Bush tax cuts benefited only the wealthy. Maybe some of those women need to stop having babies just to get more money from the nanny state. Good for the republicans.

Nobody gets rich on WIC. Regardless, once a child is born, what makes more sense to you?

1. Providing the child with enough quality nutrition to hopefully thrive later in life? (AKA penny wise)

2. Putting their development in jeopardy and possibly making them a burdon on society for much longer than the years between birth and starting school? (AKA pound foolish)

How about the wonderful and often ignored concept of taking care ofd the children one brings into the world.
You lefties believe that anyone who makes babies is automatically entitled to the largess of the taxpayers whether they need it or not.
I am a supporter of social programs where people in real need, unable to care or produce for themselves are covered.
However it just doesn't work that way. The rules are ignored. Anyone who walks through the door is processed and away they go. No questions asked.
Another example of entitlement madness. Reduced or free school lunches.
I suppose it would not interest you that it is a violation of federal law for school administrative personnel to investigate any application for eligibility.
As a matter of fact it is in the school district's best interest to have as many students on the program as possible. Why? Because each student who gets the benefit is automatically counted as a "student living in poverty"...The more students in poverty, the more federal dollars a school district can receive. That's madness. Absolute madness.
I find it highly offensive how the left's idea of compassion always begins with other people's money

 

[The T]

Maybe we ought to first stop lying saying that the Bush tax cuts benefited only the wealthy. Maybe some of those women need to stop having babies just to get more money from the nanny state. Good for the republicans.

Nobody gets rich on WIC. Regardless, once a child is born, what makes more sense to you?

1. Providing the child with enough quality nutrition to hopefully thrive later in life? (AKA penny wise)

2. Putting their development in jeopardy and possibly making them a burdon on society for much longer than the years between birth and starting school? (AKA pound foolish)

How about the wonderful and often ignored concept of taking care ofd the children one brings into the world.
You lefties believe that anyone who makes babies is automatically entitled to the largess of the taxpayers whether they need it or not.
I am a supporter of social programs where people in real need, unable to care or produce for themselves are covered.
However it just doesn't work that way. The rules are ignored. Anyone who walks through the door is processed and away they go. No questions asked.
Another example of entitlement madness. Reduced or free school lunches.
I suppose it would not interest you that it is a violation of federal law for school administrative personnel to investigate any application for eligibility.
As a matter of fact it is in the school district's best interest to have as many students on the program as possible. Why? Because each student who gets the benefit is automatically counted as a "student living in poverty"...The more students in poverty, the more federal dollars a school district can receive. That's madness. Absolute madness.
I find it highly offensive how the left's idea of compassion always begins with other people's money

And don't have them until you can afford them, and don't expect taxpayers to pay for the "WHOOPSIES"...

We're sick of it.

 

[Douger]

The problem is not budgeting. The problem is oxygen thievery.
Eliminate the worldwide military, euthanize all members of that club. That gene pool needs elimination.The desire to kill and control is a truly evil genetic fault.
Move to politicians( this includes their two legged guard dogs). Start at the very top and work your way all the way down to the scout-"master" and mayor.That is gene pool two, that is closely related to gene pool one, just far more intelligent, if you can call it that."Creative" is a better term. The military is the meatheads. Group two are the professional liars and thieves.
At that point you own the bankers(and their kings and THE queen). Tell them how it will be from now on...... or....... repeat steps one and two.

Have fun. I have a Psychopis Krameriana in bud that is ready to open.I'm going to go witness it..........a six to eight hour event. I find that to be truly important.
Ever sit for a few hours and watch a Morpho menelaus come from its chrysalis and dry it's wings ?

 

[The T]

Douger? YOU don't live here. You're Persona Non-Grata...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUkBOuFJgr4]YouTube - ‪GINO VANNELLI - Persona Non Grata‬‏[/ame]

 

[NYcarbineer]

No need to worry.

Conservative donations to private charity will make up for 100% of this. If you believe conservatives...

 

[Polk]

But Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) argued that the $686 million cut is warranted given a 300,000 drop in the number of participants in that program over the last year.

You're all over the map on those one. First you seem to buy that the cuts are somehow solely to administrative spending, then you pull out the strange claim that WIC isn't discretionary spending, then you reject the CBPP's assertion that the cuts reduce spending on women, infants, and children, now you accept that argument but justify it by claiming drops in enrollment--a ten percent funding cut justified by an alleged 3 percent enrollment decrease. That dog won't hunt, Monsignor.

Quiet you, you're just ignoring his facts.

 

[Polk]

No need to worry.

Conservative donations to private charity will make up for 100% of this. If you believe conservatives...

Indeed. Little known fact: poverty didn't exist before the D3m0nrat$ created it by passing the nightmarish Nazi-inspired Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

 

[Mustang]

Nobody gets rich on WIC. Regardless, once a child is born, what makes more sense to you?

1. Providing the child with enough quality nutrition to hopefully thrive later in life? (AKA penny wise)

2. Putting their development in jeopardy and possibly making them a burdon on society for much longer than the years between birth and starting school? (AKA pound foolish)

How about the wonderful and often ignored concept of taking care ofd the children one brings into the world.
You lefties believe that anyone who makes babies is automatically entitled to the largess of the taxpayers whether they need it or not.
I am a supporter of social programs where people in real need, unable to care or produce for themselves are covered.
However it just doesn't work that way. The rules are ignored. Anyone who walks through the door is processed and away they go. No questions asked.
Another example of entitlement madness. Reduced or free school lunches.
I suppose it would not interest you that it is a violation of federal law for school administrative personnel to investigate any application for eligibility.
As a matter of fact it is in the school district's best interest to have as many students on the program as possible. Why? Because each student who gets the benefit is automatically counted as a "student living in poverty"...The more students in poverty, the more federal dollars a school district can receive. That's madness. Absolute madness.
I find it highly offensive how the left's idea of compassion always begins with other people's money

And don't have them until you can afford them, and don't expect taxpayers to pay for the "WHOOPSIES"...

We're sick of it.

Fine, you're angry at irresponsible parents. Is that any kind of a legitimate reason not to provide their innocent infants and small children with food when they're just starting to develop?

All you manage to do is make a mockery of the RW claim about how innocent life should be protected because, make no mistake, a 2 yo toddler is JUST as innocent as any unborn child that prolifers say they want to protect.

 

[Mustang]

It was funded for a total of 6.7 billion in 2011
And I'm not gonna do your research for you. Bottom line is yes, the dems also cut the bill.

No link = epic failure

Don't be so fuckin lazy its there if you look. You just DON'T WANT TO SEE IT.

Couldn't find it, huh?

 

[Jack Fate]

They should have cut more. The waste and fraud is more than what they cut.

 

[Sallow]

Earth to Moonbats: We've run out of Other People's Money.

Well like Jan Brewer has proved, people dying as a result of cuts in funding is no great shakes to the Conservative.