Republican tactics didn’t work. On Thursday, December 2, the House of Representatives passed the child nutrition bill by a vote of 264 – 157, largely along party lines. The bill, a top priority for first lady Michelle Obama, now goes to the President’s desk to be signed into law.
After some scrambling, Democratic House leaders managed to arrange matters so that the Kline amendment, referred to below, would be voted on separately. Kline called the move by Democrats “nothing more than a cynical ploy to prevent members of Congress from legislating.”
House Republicans have blocked legislation that would have fed school meals to thousands more hungry children.
They accomplished this by adding an amendment that would have required background checks for child care workers, in a clear move to kill the bill. Because this nutrition bill is identical to legislation passed by the Senate in August, its passage would have sent it to the White House for President Obama’s signature.
An Increase Of 6 Cents A Meal
The legislation would both create standards for healthier school food, and also provide money to serve more than 20 million additional after-school meals annually to children in all 50 states. It would increase the amount of money schools are reimbursed by 6 cents a meal, and that’s a priority for schools that say they don’t have the dollars to feed needy kids.
Compared To $4 Trillion To Extend Tax Cuts To All
Let’s compare 6 cents a meal to the Republicans’ insistence that the Bush era tax cuts be extended to cover everyone, not just those making under $250,000 annually. This would result in adding about $4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade.
Feeding Hungry Children Costs Too Much?
What’s wrong with this picture? How can the GOP Senators send a letter to Harry Reid, the majority leader of the Senate, threatening to block all action unless the tax cuts are extended to all, while on the same day GOP Representatives refuse to feed hungry children? This is outrageous.
Watch Representative John Kline, R-Minn, explain that feeding our children costs too much: