In a pseudo tight economy, can anybody explain this one to me?

KEZI--

Washington, DC --
A bill which includes spending increases for education, veterans, and the AIDS battle in Africa which covers 1/6 of the federal budget swept through the House on Wednesday by a 286-140 vote, with 57 Republicans voting in favor of a $463.5 billion spending bill

The content is a heck of a lot better than most expected we'd come up with," said the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Rep. David Obey, D-Wis. He worked with his Senate counterpart, Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., to add money for initiatives popular with both Democrats and Republicans.

It (the bill) would grant remarkable flexibility to the administration in determining how much money would be an agency accounts.

They were especially pleased with a $260 boost, to $4,310, in the maximum Pell Grant for low-income college students, and with a 40 percent increase, to $4.5 billion, for fighting AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis overseas.

here is what I get confused at. Locally, voters continue to vote down any increases in taxes and spending , yet we have no say (except for writing our representatives of course) on what happens at the federal level.
We're being told by the government at least locally, that the economy is getting better although I am not seeing it personally as I watch my personal expenses go up with increased taxes and fees. Additionally, Oregon's unemployment rate still remains the one of the 10th highest in the nation at 5.5% as of November 2006{OLMIS}--
I guess my point is, even though they say it "federal" money, is still boils down to that it is still "our" tax dollars.