posted August 11, 2010 01:34 PM         

But, I'm not a leftist so I'm just going to say this vote is a payback for public union employees who spent hundreds of millions in the last 2 elections to elect demoscats...because that's what they did do.

Democrats, Advocacy Groups Blast Cuts to Food Stamps to Fund $26B Aid Bill
Published August 11, 2010

Some Democrats are upset and advocacy groups are outraged over the raiding of the food-stamp cupboard to fund a state-aid bailout that some call a gift to teachers and government union workers.

House members convened Tuesday and passed the multibillion-dollar bailout bill for cash-strapped states that provides $10 billion to school districts to rehire laid-off teachers or ensure that more teachers won't be let go before the new school year begins, keeping more than 160,000 teachers on the job, the Obama administration says.

But the bill also requires that $12 billion be stripped from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps, to help fund the new bill, prompting some Democrats to cringe at the notion of cutting back on one necessity to pay for another. The federal assistance program currently helps 41 million Americans......

posted August 11, 2010 04:07 PM         

I also think that the teachers that are let go are usually the ones that are not performing up to standard or refuse to continue their professional development. My brother is a teacher and has his Masters plus has continued his education in order to keep up with the changes. He is not in fear of losing his job.

You are also right in that when there are less students there will be less teachers. People get laid off, why don't we see a bailout for private companies that have to lay off people due to the lowered demand in their products?

I see this as just buying more votes from the unions.

posted August 11, 2010 05:27 PM         

House Democrats Want No More Food Stamp Cuts in Child Nutrition Bill
By: David Dayen Wednesday August 11, 2010 6:15 am
FDL Fire Dog Lake

quote:

---

House progressives, angered by the continued chipping away of the federal food stamp program as a pay-for in various bills, are taking a stand with the child nutrition bill, which the Senate passed before leaving for their August recess. That bill paid for increases to the federal school lunch program with food stamp cuts, essentially cutting a child’s dinner to pay for their lunch.

The House also has a version of the child nutrition bill, George Miller’s Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act, which the House Education and Labor Committee marked up earlier this year. That bill has no pay-fors yet attached. But in a letter to Nancy Pelosi cosigned thus far by 50 House Democrats, most of them from the Progressive Caucus, demand that she schedule the House version of the bill for a full vote, rather than the Senate child nutrition package.

Yesterday, the House passed the state fiscal aid bill, which also used the food stamp program to pay for a worthwhile measure of saving 318,000 state and local education and health care jobs. The theory behind the reduction is that food prices did not rise as anticipated when an increase in the program was put in place through the Recovery Act, and this reduction would simply have the expanded benefits run out on time, in 2014. But many liberals were irked by this cut, and vowed to revisit that offset, which wouldn’t take effect until four years from now. “Food assistance works for working families, making sure that children, young mothers, and our most vulnerable workers will never go to bed hungry,” said John Garamendi (D-CA). said. “The cut to food aid doesn’t take place until 2014, and by then, I hope this Congress can have a more reasonable conversation on the wisdom of exposing millions of Americans to hunger.”

The child nutrition bill is probably a good place to use some leverage. It’s a priority for the First Lady, and with 50 House liberals opposed to the food stamps offset, they essentially hold veto power over the bill.

The list of 50 co-signers includes the usual suspects like Progressive Caucus co-chairs Raul Grijalva and Lynn Woolsey, as well as House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers and Transportation Committee Chair James Oberstar, but also freshman and sophomore Democrats like Mike Arcuri and Ben Ray Lujan.

This isn’t the only offset in the state fiscal aid package which has House Democrats upset. Speaker Pelosi herself extracted a personal promise from the White House to restore some loan guarantees for renewable energy which were cut to pay for the bill.

---

The full letter is on the flip.

Dear Speaker Pelosi,

We write to express our concerns with several bills that have been recently referred to the House by the Senate. H.R. 1586, funding for Medicaid and education jobs, as well as S. 3307, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, both use improvements made by the ARRA to the supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP) to pay for the programs included in each bill. While we are strong supporters of the programs funded in these bills, we are disappointed that the Senate used SNAP, a safety-net program that literally keeps families from going hungry, to pay for programs to help provide healthcare for low income individuals and to help teachers keep their jobs. As you know, prior to this vote on H.R. 1586, the Democratic majority has provided historic increases in the SNAP program; yet we are now forced to choose between jobs and healthcare or food for hungry people. This is one of the more egregious cases of robbing Peter to pay Paul, and is a vote we do not take lightly.

While we did not oppose H.R. 1586 because of the critical need for immediate action on state Medicaid funding and education jobs, we respectfully request that the House not consider S. 3307 either during the special recess session or when the House returns for the post-recess session. Instead, we strongly urge the Leadership to schedule H.R. 5504, the Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act, for floor consideration in September. This bill provides critical improvements in the school and summer meal programs and will help reduce hunger and obesity in children around this country. The House Education and Labor Committee has completed the mark-up on this bill. We recognize that H.R. 5504 must be offset, and we urge you to work with Chairman Levin, Chairman Peterson and other relevant committees during this recess to identify proper offsets so that the House can consider Chairman Miller’s bill upon return from recess.

posted August 11, 2010 05:32 PM         

sounds like once again the voters in congress didn't read what they were voting on. one of jwhop's proposals that i happen to like is that no representative/senator should be allowed to vote on an unread bill...

the problem with teachers not doing their job is another topic altogether. i've always thought tenure was an ugly tradition that shields the incompetent, and that hasn't changed since i was in grade school a LOOONG time ago.

posted August 11, 2010 06:24 PM         

It starts at the top and trickles down. It irks me when I read how much even our local politicians will spend on a dinner party for visiting guests at a time when people can barely put food on the table.

Even though Bear and I are doing well, we had to budget knowing that moving back from Germany would mean I would be without a job for at least 6-8 months. This county has had major issues as far as employment. I always use coupons and look for the best bargains I can find because why waste money. Then I see some of the aholes spending our tax money stuffing their already bloated faces and it ticks me off.

posted August 11, 2010 10:44 PM         

Love the fact politictions and their cronies are eating high on the hog while needy children are left hungry. Nice

Oh yes, it`s election time... who wants to bet another Dem WON~T be elected behind D. Gov. Granholm.

If everyone is too hungry and broke to get to the poll to vote, then another Dem may just be "elected" by default. And the beat goes on'

------------------
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted August 12, 2010 09:57 AM         

Seems demoscats are more interested in supporting their party than in feeding hungry people.

"Party of the People"
"Party of compassion"

posted August 12, 2010 05:00 PM         

I saw a group of slackers standing on the steps of the stock exchange protesting.

What were they protesting for?

Well, they weren't protesting for JOBS.

They were protesting for more government handouts.

posted August 12, 2010 05:39 PM         

quote:

---

Yes, Republicans wanted Congress to use the money already appropriated from the so called Stimulus Bill and TARP...to fund unemployment benefits extensions.

---

------------------
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted August 15, 2010 11:16 PM         

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.

Party leaders raided the budget to find off-setting tax increases and spending cuts to pay for their top legislative priorities, including the roughly $900 billion healthcare law. Congressional pay-as-you-go rules require lawmakers to offset all non-emergency spending.

Democrats have turned to the food stamp program because funding increases enacted in the stimulus package last year were already scheduled to phase out over time. The changes proposed in the state aid and nutrition bills would simply cut off that increase early, in March 2014. Because the cuts would not take effect for more than three years, Democratic leaders have voiced the hope that they will be able to stop them in future legislation.

But House liberals are balking now, saying that while they swallowed the food stamp cuts to pay for urgent funding for Medicaid and teachers, they will not vote for more cuts in the child nutrition bill. In a letter sent this week to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), 106 House Democrats urged the speaker to take the House version of the child nutrition bill, which does not slash food stamps, rather than the Senate version.

“This is one of the more egregious cases of robbing Peter to pay Paul, and is a vote we do not take lightly,” the lawmakers, led by Reps. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) and Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) said of their vote on the state aid bill.

The House version of the child nutrition bill, authored by Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), passed the Education and Labor Committee earlier this year, but lawmakers must find a way to pay for it before it comes to the floor for a vote. “Chairman Miller is working to find other ways to pay for this bill,” a spokeswoman said when asked if cuts to the food stamp program would be used.

A House leadership aide noted that the food stamp decrease approved in the state aid bill will not take effect right away and will leave the program at the same funding level it was at before the stimulus law was signed. “That doesn’t mean many Democrats are not concerned about the issue, but this is a process which gives us time to deal with immediate issues (like jobs) and helping the economy grow, while giving you time to deal with the food stamp issue,” the aide said.

The nutrition bill is clearly a priority for Michelle Obama, who has made a push for healthy eating one of her signature policy issues at White House. When the House version of the nutrition bill won committee approval in July, it marked the first time she weighed in publicly on pending legislation.

The Obama administration has not directly addressed the debate over the food stamp cuts, but it is backing the Senate bill. “We strongly supported the Senate action and look forward to working with the House to get a final bill onto the president’s desk,” an administration official told The Hill.

The $4.5 billion Senate bill would expand eligibility for school meal programs, establish nutrition standards for all food sold in schools and provide a 6-cent increase for each school lunch to help cafeterias serve healthier meals. The $8 billion House version includes more money for expanding access to school lunches for children in low-income households.

The deeper food stamp reductions in the Senate version would set an earlier date — in November 2013 — for eliminating the increased benefits passed last year. A family of four would see their benefit reduced by $59 a month, or about 9 percent. The bill would also cut funding for nutrition education programs aimed at low-income neighborhoods and households.

“It’s very sad. I think it’s just illustrating what dire straits our federal government budget is in,” said Sheila Zedlewski, director of the Urban Institute’s Income and Benefits Center. “It’s unprecedented to raid one safety net program to feed another.”