At least we won’t have to listen to rhetoric claiming Bush is starving children:
e Senate on Tuesday voted an additional $6 billion for child care for welfare recipients and the working poor as part of a bill to renew the landmark 1996 welfare reform law.
The measure easily won Senate passage, 78-20. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and 30 other Republicans voted for it, but the Bush administration opposes the provision and House Republicans did not include it in the version of the legislation that passed the House last year.
The provision would send states $20.5 billion over 5 years in the form of block grants for programs for children up to 13 years of age. Its authors, Sens. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, and Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said hundreds of thousands of children could lose child care without the extra money, which in turn could force thousands of low-income parents to give up their jobs.
Norbizness
Time for another non-veto veto via conference committee?
James
How exactly does this innoculate Bush from the charges you mention?
From the article:
“The measure easily won Senate passage, 78-20. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and 30 other Republicans voted for it, but the Bush administration opposes the provision and House Republicans did not include it in the version of the legislation that passed the House last year.”
Yes, more children would have child-care as a result (I’m not sure where the “starving” jab came from, the measure addresses child care), but no thanks to Bush.
Do you read what you post?