Posted earlier.That is not something you will hear Paul Ryan talk about this week at the convention, nor any of the other lawmakers who make simplistic promises about the power of slashing government spending. But the budgets assembled by Mr. Ryan and warmly embraced by Mitt Romney severely cut spending for emergency preparedness, exactly the kind of money needed in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and scores of other states for this and future storms.Between 2010 and 2012, House Republicans forced a reduction of 43 percent in the primary grants from the Federal Emergency Management Agency that pay for disaster preparedness. That is $1.8 billion that will not be available for evacuation equipment and supplies, communications gear that lets first responders speak to one another, and training exercises.(House Republicans tried to cut $354 million more in this year’s homeland security spending bill, but Democrats restored the money in a conference with the Senate.)
A forum, news site and archive begun in February, 2007 about politics and the environment in Wisconsin. And elsewhere.
Sunday, October 28, 2012
Ryan And Romney Endorsed Cuts To FEMA
As superstorm Sandy heads for the East Coast, let's not forget that Ryan and Romney backed budget cuts to emergency disaster responses:
The Republicans are directly responsible for this storm and made the FEMA cuts in order to punish the East coast for supporting Obama. This is a well planned event and Romney and Ryan are well pleased now that the Obama administration will not be able to adequately supply needed aid and will look incompetent right before the election.
ReplyDeleteAnon is right -- all of the rMONEY/rAYN hot air -- more than puffery, bold-faced lies and propaganda is creating a hurricane of historical proportions.
ReplyDeleteThese damn lyin' liars are dangerous!
I believe they would love to so impoverish emergency relief resources that a natural disaster like this becomes "Obama's Katrina".
ReplyDeleteI don’t see any national media coverage of the storm being directly caused by our use of fossil fuels. It looks more like they are considering it a normal pattern of extreme weather which occurs naturally as in the past. We need more attention to be given to the fact that this storm didn’t have to happen if we would just treat the planet more kindly. Obama needs to come out and say this directly and if he doesn’t I will not be voting for him and will vote third party.
ReplyDeletewait.... I thought we decided long ago that hurricanes and floods were Bush's fault?
ReplyDeleteYou are an idiot if you believe that R/R would like to see people suffer for political gains.
ReplyDeleteAfter all, that is the Democrat party's game plan isn't it?
You are an idiot if you believe that R/R would like to see people suffer for political gains.
ReplyDeleteActually, I think the political calculation is beside the point for them.
They like to see people suffer. Period.
Cutting FEMA funding will demonstrably cause greater damage and suffering. States are unequipped to cope with disasters of large magnitude, as amply demonstrated by Katrina.
After all, that is the Democrat party's game plan isn't it?
In a comment in which you call me an idiot, you turn around and make the EXACT SAME CLAIM about the Democrats? LOL.
It is called sarcasm...
ReplyDeleteThe difference is that you honestly believe what you said. I was simply mocking your thought process.
They ignore the fact that President Barack Obama's proposal for the upcoming budget sequester would cut nearly $900 million from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, including disaster relief, food and shelter, and flood management at both the federal and state levels.
ReplyDeleteI was simply mocking your thought process.
ReplyDeleteActually, you weren't. It was a simple schoolyard "I know you are but what am I?" taunt. But in any case, you didn't bother trying to actually refute what I said.
I mean, I realize you never argue in good faith, but even so that was pretty weak.
Given the policies Romney/Ryan espouse, what I said is a justifiable conclusion. Their policies WILL result in expansion of poverty, sickness, war and death.
Whether they will or will not result in the expansion of poverty, sickness, war and death is not the issue. While doubtful, I'll give you that they could, just as Obama's policies could.
ReplyDeleteYour statement was that they would LOVE to impoverish emergency relief insinuating that was their goal, which it clearly is not.
I also understand (having been in a union when much younger) what years of union newsletters will do to a persons mind to make them actually believe the garbage that you are spewing.