House Republicans are expected to vote this week for the fiscal year 2012 Agriculture appropriations bill, that has a provision on page 13 requiring the National Arboretum maintain a very specific portion of its azalea collection, because flowers are pretty and smell nice. Why does this matter? While provisions are being made to keep us fully stocked in flora, the bill would cut $832 million from the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program which provides food assistance to low-income mothers and children nationwide.
The reduction in funds could result in as many as 475,000 people turned away from the program — one can only assume — because Republicans view the federal program as a proponent of the often vilified institution of Socialism. It’s either that or someone believes their green thumb to be more important than feeding families across the nation.
Democrats are concerned by this move, as are most of us who believe assisting American families at their most vulnerable should constitute a priority, and conversely consider funding the care of pretty flowers a luxury in these still harsh economic times.
“Everyday people across the country leave their homes in search of work, only to return at the end of the day with more worries and less hope,” said Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.), the agriculture subcommittee’s ranking member. “At a time that people continue to struggle to make ends meet, Republicans want to cut funding to food programs that are helping put food on the tables of those most in need.”
When asked if they had any inkling Republicans would make this move, the National Arboretum denies culpability, instead insinuating that it probably came at the behest of a lone Congressman.
“We did not request the specific language in the bill, either through the Arboretum or the Department of Agriculture as a whole,” said National Arboretum Director Colien Hefferan. “I presume some stakeholders were eager to ensure that the azalea collection, as well as the boxwood collection, are protected at the Arboretum and probably requested through a congressman, but I don’t really know the source. … To my knowledge, there has not been an unfunded direction to the arboretum that’s come in the appropriations bill previously.”
Really, anonymous Republican? Those azaleas will keep a child’s belly full, and give countless citizens access to nutritious meals in the face of economic strife? Good thing you guys are putting in your chits to see who’ll be leading this country to glory in 2013 and not planning on choosing any group of random, crazy idiots standing behind doors 1, 2, or 3. Fantastic. Things like this shouldn’t worry us at all. We’ll just hang out here in our house/van eating azaleas and watching Jay Leno, just like your debate Monday night commands. Carry on.
To add insult to injury, azalea maintenance isn’t the only unusual provision in the bill.
The Huffington Post reports the following are also included:
Animal Welfare Act doesn’t Apply to Movie Sets: “APHIS is using vital animal welfare resources to regulate the pets of extras in filmed entertainment. While the Animal Welfare Act’s intent is to establish minimally acceptable standards in the treatment of animals in research, exhibition, transport, and by dealers, the law was not aimed at regulating companion animals used as extras in the background of movies and television productions. The Committee urges the agency to use the Secretary’s discretionary authority to seek alternative means of meeting its statutory mandate, including the option of issuing exemptions or master exhibitor licenses to these pet owners.” [p. 19]
Extra Money For Wolf Control: “Wildlife Damage Management – The Committee provides $72,500,000 for Wildlife Damage Control, approximately $4 million above the President’s request. … Special emphasis should be placed on those areas such as livestock protection…predator control, and other threats to agriculture industries.” [p. 20]
Less Money To Investigate Performance Enhancing Drugs: “The Committee is deeply troubled about the expenditure of scarce appropriated funds investigating alleged use of performance enhancing drugs. The Committee can discern no prudent interest for the FDA to investigate allegations that unapproved drugs may have been used outside the United States.” [p. 54]
So, when you think about what all those hard dollars at work gets you…, well, yeah. Here you go.
Top Image Via HuffP
