How do you feel about the recent talk about Obama cutting back on the WIC infant formula program? Should the program be cut, or would such cuts harm poor children? Do you think that the program should contine as it is and perhaps even grow?
Or has this program reached its limit? Is it time for "mothers to start using their own natural resources to feed their children"?
"As for Obama's invocation of baby formula for poor children, most doctors and nutritionists have been insisting for years that mother's milk is best for babies. Still, some mothers cannot nurse. OK, let's imagine a federal program that subsidized formula only for poor women who cannot nurse. Would it look anything like the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program? Fully 51 percent of infants now get WIC funding, along with 25 percent of young children. Is a majority of infants in the United States poor?
Even the most heart-stirring of liberal programs — formula for babies! — has become bloated beyond reason and could easily be cut."
The facts about the WIC:
http://www.faqs.org/nutrition/Smi-Z/WIC-Program.html  - This data shows 45% participation between 1975-1995.
http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/26wifypart.htm  - 9,172,000 participated in WIC in 2010 ( is that families or each family member?). Only 4,500,000 million babies were born last year.