CNN: Bush 'Cuts' Threaten Effort to Fight Obesity in Poor
Posted by Brad Wilmouth on April 29, 2007 - 01:12.



On Saturday afternoon, CNN Newsroom ran a report by Dr. Sanjay Gupta in which the CNN medical correspondent plugged a proposal for the WIC (Women, Infants and Children) program to begin supplying vouchers for fruits and vegetables to its recipients to combat obesity in the poor, and fretted that budget cuts by President Bush could "threaten" a proposed plan to do so. Recounting that the problem for WIC recipients when the program was created 30 ago was "malnutrition, not obesity," Gupta relayed plans by the Agriculture Department to supply vouchers for fruits and vegetables. But Gupta cautioned that because Bush is planning to put WIC on the "chopping block," the plan may be endangered. Gupta: "But some say that might not happen because WIC is on the chopping block, slated for a $145 million cut in President Bush's 2008 budget. ... Nutritionists say that's not good because the WIC produce vouchers could help control obesity." (Transcript follows)




Revised February 8, 2007PRESIDENT’S BUDGET WOULD CUT FOOD FOR 440,000 LOW-INCOME SENIORS
by Dorothy Rosenbaum
President Bush’s fiscal year 2008 budget would eliminate funding for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), terminating food assistance to 440,000 low-income seniors in an average month.
CSFP provides monthly nutritious food packages primarily to low-income seniors aged 60 and older in parts of 32 states, the District of Columbia, and two Indian reservations.[1] The typical food package, which is designed to supplement low-income seniors’ diets with nutrient-rich foods, costs the government less than $20 per participant a month and includes items such as canned tuna fish, peanut butter, cheese, cereal, and canned fruits and vegetables. Because USDA can buy these items at a discount the package is worth significantly more than $20 to recipients. More than a third of seniors who receive CSFP food packages, about 150,000 people, are over age 75.

i believe i asked for a non bush bashing page

and where is my 300,000

sorry i forgot i will also need enough to pay for the taxes on the 300,000 too

The Bush 2008 Budget CUT funding for WIC. YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!

How is it that "no one" but you, knows what they're talking about? Isn't that a little presumptuous?

Gideon How do you explain away the Police, Teachers who make 1/2 the minimum needed to purchase the average home! 20% of Americans are POOR. WHY don’t you try to live on 20-30K?

Fool. I can and DO live on 30K AND I own a house.

danielost


Oh and if you do decide to I could use 300,000 so I can put it in the bank and live off the interest Answer:

Just as soon as my annual income is in the top 10% and your income is below the federal poverty line

The two articles I posted PROVE what I said about Bush attempting to CUT WIC funding ( as well as funds for the poor) while trying to make tax cuts permanent for multi millionaires is true.

drmiler

“Fool. I can and DO live on 30K AND I own a house.”

If you earn 30K and support Bush you are truly the FOOL. On 30K you can not purchase the average priced home today in MOST areas. I do not know where you live or what type of home you own or how you got your home but if you think most people can live on 30K today you are an idiot as well as a FOOL!

i get 600 a month i am one of the dead beats

and according to the democrats if you make 200,000 a year your rich

and i knew you would come up with some excuse as to why it wasn't going to be your money

you want to redistribute wealth as long as it isn't your wealth

just like any other democrat all words no action

and bush can't make my tax cuts permanent


and again it is the congress that pays ie votes on spending not the president

the president only proposes a budget

and if we really wanted to balance the budget and pay off the debt we would stop spending more and more on intitledments

you said you owned business how many of those went under becouse you were just giving money away to your employies for doing nothing

“And according to the democrats if you make 200,000 a year you’re rich

And I knew you would come up with some excuse as to why it wasn't going to be your money.”

The REASON is I am not among the RICH!!!!

“and if we really wanted to balance the budget and pay off the debt we would stop spending more and more on entitlements”

If you ONLY get $600 per month someone or some government program must be providing you help. Section 8, Medicaid, Food Stamps or help from some non governmental agency or person. NO one can pay ALL their living expenses on $600 a month!

“And again it is the congress that pays i.e. votes on spending not the president”


You are incorrect.

The President sends a budget to Congress.
Congress passes both a budget and actual spending appropriations.
The President approves the spending Congress passes.

Thus it is BOTH the Congress and the President that approve the spending. The only way spending would be approved ONLY by Congress is if Congress passed a spending bill, the president vetoed the bill and Congress passed the spending bill OVER the President's VETO!

isn't checks and balances such a great thing

and the only way this could get any better is if the president had line item veto

that way a 10 million dollar relief bill doesn't become 100 million dollar pork bill
which is what happened when reagan was in office

i live with and help my father

he wants me available to do what he wants at the drop of a hat

and the 600 is ssi

my medical is through the va

and he gets about 1200 social and va benefits

i give him 400 a month for rent

and use some of that for food

“isn't checks and balances such a great thing”

Only when they work. There were NO effective checks on Bush for the first 6 years because the GOP gave him everything he wanted. There was also no oversight by Congress. They just allowed Bush to do as he pleased!

“and the only way this could get any better is if the president had line item veto”

NOT ON YOUR LIFE. I would NEVER give a President that power seeing how Bush acted. We need a Balanced Budget Constitutional amendment!

as far as the money i asked you for i didn't/don't want it i didn't earn it

i was making a point and that is no one is going to reach into their own pocket to redistribute wealth. they want someone else to pay in your case you want drenginal to do it

and i do know of one person who gives/or at least gave 300 million a year to charity. but your buddy bill thought he was to rich and tried to take away his company. now that he has retired i don't know if he is still giving that much money.

danielost

My point is that we need to balance the budget. People like dregional would do that by cutting all help to people that need help and not keeping the promises made to workers and need their Social Security and Medicare benefits. I say let's restore the Tax rates for the wealthy to the pre Bush rates because they who can afford to pay a little more they are the BIG WINNERS from the Bush tax cut. That added tax revenue from the top 10% would be used not to fund NEW benefits but to help pay for what we are currently spending!

and i say if you tax the rich all you do is increase the price of things

that is called inflation i am sure you have heard of that