What: All Issues : Aid to Less Advantaged People, at Home & Abroad : Children : (H.R. 2112) On an amendment that would have cut $82.5 million from the Breastfeeding Peer Counseling Program, which provides information and guidance to new mothers about breastfeeding and child nutrition. (2011 house Roll Call 431)
 Who: All Members : New York, District 2 : King, Pete
[POW!]
 
(H.R. 2112) On an amendment that would have cut $82.5 million from the Breastfeeding Peer Counseling Program, which provides information and guidance to new mothers about breastfeeding and child nutrition.
house Roll Call 431     Jun 15, 2011
Member's Vote
(progressive
or not)
Progressive Position
Progressive Result
(win or loss)

This was a vote on an amendment by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) that would have cut $82.5 million from the Breastfeeding Peer Counseling Program, which provides information and guidance to new mothers about breastfeeding and child nutrition.

Foxx urged support for her amendment: “I want to say that I very much believe in breast-feeding. We wouldn't have a human race here today if it weren't for the fact that breast-feeding has been in existence since the beginning of time; however, I am opposed to the federal government funding breast-feeding programs….We are facing a national debt of over $14 trillion. Spending taxpayer money to promote breast-feeding is simply not the proper role of the federal government and serves to illustrate just one reason--government mission creep--that we are so deeply in debt….If we want to promote the health and well-being of women, infants and children, then let's get serious about it by creating a job-friendly environment that puts people back to work and allows American families to keep more of what they earn. Let's stop spending money on every well-intentioned program and return the federal government to its constitutionally mandated purposes.”

Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA) opposed Foxx’s amendment: “America has long decided that we ought to be taking care of the most vulnerable people in America. There are women who are pregnant, low-income, and what we've found is if you don't invest in teaching them how to have proper nutrition during their pregnancy, you have a risk of having a low-weight baby. A low-weight baby…can cost up to a quarter of a million dollars in incubation and hospital costs, and this is preventable with good nutrition. We go on to teach women, once that baby is born, how to breast-feed that child. We know that is good health practices….There is a lot of value in keeping women well-nourished during pregnancy and certainly keeping that newborn child well fed and nourished. To strike money from this program is ill founded, and I strongly oppose the amendment.”

The House rejected this amendment by a vote of 119-306. Voting “yea” were 119 Republicans. All 188 Democrats present and 118 Republicans voted “nay.” As a result, the House rejected an amendment that would have cut $82.5 million from the Breastfeeding Peer Counseling Program, which provides information and guidance to new mothers about breastfeeding and child nutrition.

N N W
Issue Areas:
Key: Y=Yea, N=Nay, W=Win, L=Loss