Democrats’ big-government agenda to dip into food-stamp program … again

posted at 10:55 am on August 16, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

When Democrats paid for their EduJobs bill last week by taking money out of the food stamp program, the media barely noticed it.  Undoubtedly that has created an incentive for Democrats and the Obama administration to steal from the poor once again.  This time, they will pull $8 billion already allocated to food stamps and other aid in order to fund Michelle Obama’s pet project, the anti-child-obesity bill:

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.

Really?  In the entire panoply of federal spending, Democrats have no other area to find funds for their pet projects?  The Hill, while doing a good job in reporting this, somehow glibly accepts this despite the existence of a $3.8 trillion federal budget.

Eight billion dollars in a $3.8 trillion budget amounts to … 0.21%.  What about the other 99.79% of federal spending?  And let’s not forget that last year’s omnibus budget bill that completed the FY2010 budget contained in itself over $17 billion in earmarks. I guess Congress gets to pork out while the poor and unemployed sacrifice.

Maybe we should be looking at Washington DC for our anti-obesity efforts.

The Boss Emeritus has a few choice words for this project, and reminds us of the SEIU connections to the anti-child-obesity campaign.  We’ll talk more about this on The Ed Morrissey Show today, when Michelle Malkin joins me to discuss the paperback edition of Culture of Corruption, with three new chapters.  Join us at 3 pm ET today!


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I think the most reasonable method of administering the correct nutritional program to the citizenry

GTR640 on August 16, 2010 at 1:53 PM

Every democrat knows, it’s always best to steal from the weak, poor and defenseless – they have no money for lawyers, no money to contribute to campaigns and no education to understand what’s happened to them. It’s Win-win-win.

WashingtonsWake on August 16, 2010 at 11:03 AM

Plus, you get to blame the evil Republicans for forcing you to cut aid to the poor, and use their aid being cut as justification for increasing the budget for pork.

tom on August 16, 2010 at 1:57 PM

Dems only cut:

1) Defense
2) Social programs

Because they know that Republicans will rebuild #1, and they can use that spending as a hammer, and that they will always pass #2 as an emergency, and use Republican opposition as a hammer.

It’s all “structural spending,” they do it that way on purpose.

November had better be a bloodbath, or we’ll never get out of this hole.

Merovign on August 16, 2010 at 2:19 PM

may have to do so again to pay for a top priority of first lady Michelle Obama.

Remind me again as to which office she was elected to and why we’re needing to fund her top priority.

slug on August 16, 2010 at 2:38 PM

This is really ironic! Cutting food stamps for a child obesity program?

katablog.com on August 16, 2010 at 4:25 PM

I guess the “good” side of this cut would be the Gallup shows that it is the poor that best supports Obummer. He’s going to pay mortgages for Peggy Moocher, bought her a car with cash for clunkers, weatherized her taxpayers’ bailed out home, but steal her food stamps! It’s all about “shared sacrifice” Peggy.

katablog.com on August 16, 2010 at 4:28 PM

Comment pages: 1 2