Political strategist Newt Gingrich thinks Republicans should go after food stamps as a way to close the deal and get (re)-elected in the November 2010 elections.
While the two parties hash it out over whether tax cuts for the super-wealthy should be allowed to expire, Gingrich wants to frame the economic issues to say that Democrats bring down the economy, Republicans make it all better — debatable considering when the current economic meltdown began but that’s not my point.
My point is, guess who’s caught in the middle? The one in four children who rely on food stamps for dinner!
The Gingrich push to vilify food stamps will go something like, “paychecks, not food stamps,” which, sounds good, sure. But, as with many families including plenty of those who rely on food stamps, a paycheck doesn’t necessarily negate the need for food assistance.
Some paychecks aren’t big enough, especially to cover childcare so that they can be earned. Why not promise bigger paychecks, subsidized high-quality childcare. And while you’re at it, lawmakers, affordable housing. That would certainly cut down the number of kids who need food stamps.
New Law Bans 4-Year-Olds from Kindergarten
Eat at McDonald’s for a Month — Win Big
The Making of a Chicken Nugget
Gastric Bypass Surgery and Birth Defects
Louise Brown, Freaky Babies and the Nobel Prize
Why Groupon is Trying to Get You Pregnant
Girls in Sports Will Rule the Boardroom
Check Your Child’s Backpack for Valuable Savings. Ugh.
Act Like a Lady: Good Advice or Totally Sexist?
Tired Moms Won’t Vote This Year
Getting Pregnant at 50: What sas She Thinking?
Why Can’t This Mom Control Her Child’s Fits?
Why Does Everyone Have a Tutor These Days?
Is Your Pre-Tween’s Dentist Pushing Braces?
Could You Handle Postpartum Confinement?
Is Sookie Stackhouse a Good Fit for Sesame Street?
Really Nana? You Can’t Spell the Baby’s Name?
5 Lessons for Your Future Bill Gates