Politicians, most of whom are presumed to be adults, tend to emphasize aspects of the health-care debate that will give each of them some kind of political advantage.

Though most of them would deny such transparency and shallowness, it has become abundantly clear in recent years that the central focus of those elected to important public office is not the public's welfare or protecting the public treasury, but is instead to be re-elected - at almost any cost.

This belief represents a form of cynicism that is, essentially, verified every time a politician takes a stand or attempts to explain his or her position on important issues.

In fact, politics has managed to push aside the real reasons for making laws and public policy. There is, for example, the issue of poverty in America, and where it may be leading this nation.

Two reports in recent days have revealed some very real problems facing children in this country. But, unfortunately, children are among those basically underrepresented masses that get brushed aside, as our elected leaders scramble headlong toward the next election cycle.

The first report on the plight of U.S. children comes from the government's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, whose experts are studying this country's alarmingly high infant-mortality rate.

What the report boils down to is that the U.S. - with its highly touted, vastly superior health-care delivery system - has a higher rate of babies dying than most European countries. The reason is that poor people in this country tend to lack access to the kind of prenatal care that is generally available to the poverty-stricken in European countries.

That's a problem that could be, and likely would be, solved if our politicians would consider putting poor families and their neglected needs above their own political ambitions.

The second study comes from researchers at Washington University in St. Louis, and tells us that nearly half of all children in the U.S. - and 90 percent of the black kids - will depend on government food stamps at some point during childhood.

This is not strictly a recession phenomena. Researchers looked at data going back three decades, and insist the trend is beyond dispute. The numbers seem shocking to us, that so many of our children - our neighbors, really - rely on government handouts to keep from starving.

The problems associated with a high-infant mortality rate - amid the supposedly "best health-care system in the world" - and half the child population of the U.S. being on food stamps are not really being discussed by our adult lawmakers.

But the problems are real. The infant-mortality rate indicates a high percentage of premature babies - in large part because of inadequate prenatal care for poor families - which translates to greater health-care issues as the preemies who do manage to survive grow into adulthood.

The fact that such a high percentage of U.S. children are on food stamps hints at improper nutrition, in the years when eating right makes a great deal of difference in who will be a healthy adult, and who will be sickly.

These two reports are a warning that this nation does not do nearly enough to protect its most vulnerable citizens. What other interpretation could there be, in a country that prides itself on having the world's best health-care system, and whose privileged citizens routinely throw away more leftover food after a big dinner than many families have for an entire day?

Poverty and its high costs can only be ignored for so long, then the big bills start to roll in.

We, as a nation and as a functioning society, must do more to protect our children.