Editorial: Helping the poor

Monday, Aug. 6, 2007 | 7:09 a.m.

The House last week approved a $91.5 billion budget for the Agriculture Department and the Food and Drug Administration that will allow increases in the amount spent on food stamps and food safety.

President Bush has promised to veto the legislation because it is about $1 billion (or about 1 percent) more than the president had proposed. The House measure gives $1.8 billion to the FDA for food safety efforts and $70.6 billion to mandatory Agriculture Department spending on such programs as food stamps and crop subsidies. The House approved it on a 237-18 vote, with most Republicans abstaining over a procedural matter.

Although the legislation represents an increase over what the president had proposed, a story by Bloomberg News on Friday notes that it still is lower than the $97.8 billion that was spent on the same programs this year. The decrease is a result of less money being needed for crop subsidies, Bloomberg reports.

The lion's share of the money - almost $60 billion - would go toward increasing by nearly 5 percent the funding for food stamps and other food programs for low-income individuals and families. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., sponsor of the bill, says such an increase "brings our nation back to fundamental principles" of helping needy Americans and those who live in rural communities.

The Bush administration's budget office, meanwhile, called the increase an "irresponsible and excessive level of spending" - a response that's hypocritical, considering Bush has presided over enormous deficits.

The president has been a zealous proponent of huge tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans . He recently vowed to veto legislation that would increase federal funding for health care coverage of children in poor families.

Meanwhile, the Bush administration has given FDA managers huge bonuses designed to keep them from moving to jobs in the private sector - at a time when the FDA's poor management of drug approvals and food imports has fallen under intense criticism. Evidently, Bush considers government spending excessive only when it assists those weakened by poverty.