Considering the gloomy prospects which were held out for the poverty program six months ago, Thursday's House passage of the Johnson Administration's anti poverty bill was a significant victory. Sargent Shriver, whose skillful legislative diplomacy was a major factor in the bill's success, said the felt "almost like the Boston Red Sox." The various programs of the Office of Economic Opportunity were not scattered among other government agencies, as foes of the bill had threatened. Nor were any of the controversial programs of the OEO, such as the Job Corps eliminated.

But it was a deceptive victory. A coalition of Republicans and conservative Democrats was able to pass a number of crippling amendments before the measure was approved by the lower chamber.

The House voted 221 to 190 to limit authorizations for OEO to $1.6 billion--even less than last year's act provided. President Johnson had requested $2.06 billion, and the Senate version of the anti-poverty bill allowed a total of $2.25 billion.

If the House Provision is kept in the final act, it will render the administration unable to undertake much needed expansion of its anti-poverty effort. In fact, OEO programs will have to be cut back in several areas.

Sen. Robert F. Kennedy '48 (D-N.Y.) indicates that he will try to restore cuts voted by the House when the bill reaches the Senate-House Conference Committee. But even if he is successful, Rep. George H. Mahon (D-Tex.), chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee, has said the House will not approve an appropriation above the $1.6 billion figure.

In addition to the authorization curback, the House voted to accept an amendment offered by Rep. Edith Green (D-Ore.) giving control over Community Action Programs to state, county and city governments. The amendment, which was designed to break up the Dixiecrat-Republican coalition, also received support from big city Democrats.

City Halls have long been indifferent to the problems of the poor. Garbage collection, road repairs, and health services are traditionally less efficient in ghetto areas. By placing authority over the Community Action Programs in the hands of local governments, the House has run the risk that this part of the anti-poverty war will simply become a vehicle for handing out patronage. The ability of poor people to participate in the very programs designed to help them, which has been one of the most creative, innovations of the Community Action Programs, is also jeopardized by this provision.

Although passage of the anti-poverty bill in any form amounts to a victory, the sacrifices which were made to bring about House passage this week cripple the measure's effectiveness. At a time when bitter unrest is growing at an unprecedented rate in the ghettos of our major cities, the nation can ill afford this sort of backward step in the war on poverty.