Cantor: No emergency disastor relief without cuts

[teko]

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/cantor_no_emergency_disaster_r031861.php






If you can’t watch clips online, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) appeared on Fox News this morning to confirm what he and his office have been saying all along: Republicans won’t allow emergency aid in the wake of Hurricane Irene unless Democrats meet GOP demands: dollar-for-dollar spending cuts elsewhere.

In the interview, the dimwitted Majority Leader tried to make this sound like common sense — instead of an unprecedented move. Remember, no modern Congress, regardless of which party was in the majority, has ever demanded offsets in response to American natural disaster, not even Tom DeLay’s.

Cantor also said House Republicans have “already” dealt with this by approving $1 billion in disaster aid in May, paying for it by cutting funds for a renewable energy program. Whether the Majority Leader understands what he’s saying or not is unclear, but the costs associated with the weekend’s hurricane will far exceed $1 billion.

Let’s also not lose sight of the larger context here. As far as Eric Cantor is concerned, launching wars in Iraq and Afghanistan do not need to be paid for. Tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires do not need to be paid for. Bailing out Wall Street does not need to be paid for. But when American communities are struck by a natural disaster, all of a sudden, House Republicans discover a new standard: if Democrats want to help affected areas, the GOP has some demands that must be met.

And in case this story isn’t quite mind-numbing enough, also note that FEMA has been forced to temporarily suspend “some payments to rebuild roads, schools and other structures destroyed during spring tornadoes in Joplin, Mo., and Southern states and other recent natural disasters” in order to respond to Hurricane Irene.

That this is happening in the wealthiest nation in the world, simply because the Republican Party has been taken over by charlatans and fools, is a national disgrace.

For all of our differences over party, ideology, and creed, we know that when disaster strikes and our neighbors face a genuine emergency, America responds. We don’t ask what’s in it for us; we don’t weigh the political considerations; we don’t pause to ponder the larger ideological implications.

We act. It’s who we are; it’s what we do.

Or it was, right up until Americans elected a radicalized House majority.

[teko]

Can someone exterminate this vermin?

[adgal]

How can he put human life and well being on the back burner?  I thought the gov't was to represent the people...well, the people need help.  Honestly, I am beginning to think all the free worlds politicians are losing their minds.  Power happy.  Using human suffering for political gain.  Sad.

[teko]

Well, he must be what they call a flip flopper, ya think? Because....
Cantor didn't always prioritize fiscal "discipline" over helping his constituents recover from disasters. After Tropical Storm Gaston hit the Richmond, VA area in 2004, Cantor appealed to President Bush and DHS Director Tom Ridge for disaster assistance and took credit for securing federal funds when they became available. Go figure....

[MrsPincince]

"Republicans won’t allow emergency aid in the wake of Hurricane Irene unless Democrats meet GOP demands: dollar-for-dollar spending cuts elsewhere"

"Remember, no modern Congress, regardless of which party was in the majority, has ever demanded offsets in response to American natural disaster, not even Tom DeLay’s"

If people don't see what is going on, I'm not sure we have hope. I just don't get how people actually think Republicans care THAT much about the American People who work hard a pay their salaries..If this doesn't show that they don't then I don't know what will.

[margypops]

I have to say this surprised me aswell I always though disasters were taken care of ..I want to hear the reasoning behind it ..

[R Glass]

Did anyone actually watch the Video but me? The Title is deceiving. Not once did he say, No disaster Relief Without Cuts. I did hear him say, “Yes this is the Government’s Role and Yes we will Find the Money.” Please, watch the Video, set Pride aside, and don’t try to put words in his mouth.

[el_em_en_oh]

They are Sheeple, and will continue to hear what they want to hear, and see what they want to see.

Point out facts, and they will respond with rhetoric, finger-pointing and name-calling.

[brice1967]

I've got to agree with el and R Glass on this.  What the man said was logical.  It sounded nowhere dear as dire as the article above mentions.  Did anyone else notice how fast the article went away from the point of financially covering THIS emergency to Cantors stand on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq... (and Libya too I suppose.)

Also, did anyone take noet to the fact that whoever wrote this article was really quick to say that FEMA had to quit rebuilding roads and the likes after the tornado's in Missouri???  Couldn't be because they have to find funding, could it?  

Look folks, this money has to come from somewhere.  Organizations like FEMA only get so much money to operate on yearly.... that money is supposed to cover it's operational costs.  If there is more destruction and more emergencies than FEMA is prepared for..... that money has to be raised (taken) from other parts of the nations budget.  That's how this thing works.  It's how its worked since it's inception

[adgal]

I can't get the video to come up.  It might be just my computer, not sure.  Does anyone have a hard copy to be read?  I tried googling with no success.  Thanks.

[margypops]

I have to eat crow, I was in fact responding to the article above ,  I watched it on TV and actually I do see his reasoning ,he's usually a good guy I did wonder what  was going on ..This has been the main sticking point where does all the spending come from ..Maybe Buffet and Gates will shell out some to help ....

[brice1967]

I was going to drop it, but I just can't.  The very last thing the author of the article says is "right up until Americans elected a radicalized house majority".  That statement is numbing, and very biased.  The Americans elected a radicalized house during the Bush administration.  Does anyone remember Pelosi, Reid and company???  Pretty radicalized change there.

See folks, here's the deal.  For every action there's a reaction.  With politics it is like a pendulum.  It swings this way, then it swings that way, then it swings this way, then it swings that way.  Radicalism is what breeds radicalism on the other side.  It's been this way for eons.

The above article isn't as much journalism as it is biased journalism.  The author is Steve Benen who is a left wing columnist who has been on left wing shows like Rachel Maddow and Sam Seder, been on NPR.... POTUS....Huffington Post.  All of them are left leaning organizations.  This guy writes his blog in the Washington Monthly, whose owner clearly defines the publications stand as "left of center"....  Oh, the founder also wrote speeches for Clinton..... so tell me how the article isn't biased again?

[R Glass]

  Sorry but I didn’t have any luck finding another link. I thought I found one but I got Rick Rolled. I did find a couple of biased ones that just showed sound bites of what he said, (of course trying to make it look like something he didn’t say.)

[adgal]

Thanks for trying for me.  I didn't see anything but a brief reference on the news last night.  I wonder if they will replay the entire speech.  I do prefer to hear the whole thing beginning to end. I will admit, I jumped to a conclusion prior to reading or seeing it.  It sure sounded bad.  Still not sure what I think.

[R Glass]

Try this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SqIwTlXTK7U

[teko]

So you complain of a biased site and refudiate it with another biased site? Oh okay! What I heard was pretty much the same thing the article is saying, short version of course. Any other links that are not biased?

[brice1967]

I didn't refudiate the site/article with another site.  I simply showed the common sense approach.  The finger pointing and name calling can go on all day.  Basically the guy said the money has to come from somewhere.

Let me try to paint a picture here, then pose a question or two.  FEMA is a government agency.  Government agencies run off of budgets.  Without any budgets, all agencies can run rough shot so the budgets are set as parameters in which to operate.  When an agency like FEMA goes over their budget, they need to find money elsewhere.

So, if you're going to find money within an established budget (do we even have one yet?) wouldn't you have to take money allocated for somewhere else?

Hypothetically, let's say your power bill is all of a sudden $30 higher than it ever has been.  You take a look at the bank account and there just isn't a spare $30 sitting around.... do you not pay the power bill, or do you look at your budget and see where you can make some cuts. "Entertainment budget is $50 for the month, so I wont go to the movies like normal...there's $25 and I will buy lower cost items at the grocery store to make up the other $5".  Is that not something you would do, or would you let them cut the power off?

Americans adjust their budgets all of the time.  Why not the government?  All that guy is saying is that the money has to come from somewhere.  He is telling the truth!!!  Would it have been better if he just lied?  I do not get the beef here...hell, there isn't one.  A far left wing activist/writer and his left wing blog started this.

[teko]

Let’s also not lose sight of the larger context here. As far as Eric Cantor is concerned, launching wars in Iraq and Afghanistan do not need to be paid for. Tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires do not need to be paid for. Bailing out Wall Street does not need to be paid for. But when American communities are struck by a natural disaster, all of a sudden, House Republicans discover a new standard: if Democrats want to help affected areas, the GOP has some demands that must be met.

Let it start in Virginia......

[teko]

This one really bites me. Do you know what the E in FEMA stands for? Emergency.... And I dont know if anyone realizes this but Irene is up to 7 Billion right now and lo and behold, Katia is on her way.....with more forming behind her. Idiot is what he is.

[adgal]

So this is another one I have been thinking alot about.  I guess I can kinda see what he is trying to say...the amount of money they have is a finite amount, and you should live within your means.

But Brice, your post hit home for me.  I, like most people on here, live on a budget.  And we work really hard to stay within that budget.  But I can tell you this..if my family, friends or God forbid, my child was in trouble, I would rack up that credit card, take out a second mortgage, whatever I had to do to rescue them.  Because people come first.  Not saying I wouldn't have to make some sacrifices later to pay for it...I know I would.  But I would take care of the rescue and rebuilding first and sort it out later.  I think the final straw on this for me was just watching the news, and seeing that several towns (somewhere hit by the hurricane, I missed the beginning) are completely cut off..no road access.  They are out of food, clean water, etc.  Take care of these people, get them out of there.  Figure out the cuts later.

Maybe that is what he meant, but I can see how the way the message was delivered has enraged many.  Perhaps the timing of his speech was off?  Especially with so many without electricity, clean water, food....I don't know, I guess for me it's people first, money later.  Again, yes, other cuts may have to be made...but later.  THis was not the time to speak this way.  Just my opinion.

[MrsPincince]

"Remember, no modern Congress, regardless of which party was in the majority, has ever demanded offsets in response to American natural disaster, not even Tom DeLay’s"

I'm sorry did I miss something? How is this bias or putting words in his mouth? It's Cantor in his OWN WORDS.. What I got from the article and the video (Which came up fine and was presented by FOX NEWS) was he's saying the emergency disaster relief funds have to be offset. Why does it need to be a bargaining chip. It was never an issue before....I personally think it's a way to push their agenda. It's a DISASTER no one planned it, Sh*it happens. So what are they going to cut? SS, Medicare? They can't agree on what to cut now never mind trying to "offset" the cost of a Natural DISASTER. Hard working, Tax Paying People have no electricity. they prepared for the storm by buying all this food and supplies to take care of themselves and now it's all going rotten because they have no electricity. Businesses are flooded losing money EVERYDAY, homes are ruined.There should be funds set aside already to address DISASTERS...Oh sorry they spent it all on other things.......Let's wake up people, it's not about left or right, it's about doing the right thing for the American People that have had their lives turned upside down because of Hurricane Irene AT NO FAULT TO THEM. They are the Government, they should INTERVENE when a NATURAL DISASTER happens. NO IF'S, AND'S, OR BUT'S, about it. Forget trying to offset the funds. Help the people that NEED IT

[teko]

Could federal disaster relief become the next battleground over the federal deficit?

The Federal Emergency Management Agency said over the weekend that because of the string of natural disasters in the past year, its disaster relief fund had dwindled to about $900 million.  The agency said it might have to restrict recovery spending for other, recent natural disasters if Congress did not approve additional funds — a stark warning after the estimated multibillion dollars in damage caused by Hurricane Irene.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano today urged Congress to avoid “political gridlock” and move quickly to approve more federal disaster funding in the wake of Hurricane Irene.

Political gridlock “should not be the first concern of the Congress,” Napolitano said. “I think the first concern of the Congress is what do we need to protect the health and safety of the people that we’re all privileged to represent. Congress knows that this is historically the way disaster relief has been funded.”

Video from the Christian Science Monitor:


House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said Republicans would approve more disaster relief only if spending cuts were made elsewhere in the federal budget to make up the difference. Napolitano and others fear that disaster relief could become the latest political football in the emotionally-charged debate over the federal deficit.

“At the beginning of the fiscal year, they don’t give you a crystal ball,” Napolitano told reporters this morning. “So the way they do the [Disaster Relief Fund] is they get the three-year rolling average. And then if you need more, then at the end of the year there’s a supplemental” bill passed by Congress and money is held up until more funding is provided.  She said Congress should continue to play by the established rules.

Read more about the aftermath of Hurricane Irene.

While calling for more funding, Napolitano said it was too early to tell just how much Hurricane Irene was going to cost.

“This was a very expensive storm,” she said, “It was a devastating storm and many people lost their lives.”  She said critics who charge that the government overreacted to the threat of Irene “are working with the blinding clarity of hindsight.”


So Congress is holding FEMA hostage now? That is what it sounds like to me! Never before has this ever been an issue until now, hmmmm go figure! ALL POLITICS

[R Glass]

“But I can tell you this..if my family, friends or God forbid, my child was in trouble, I would rack up that credit card, take out a second mortgage, whatever I had to do to rescue them. Because people come first. Not saying I wouldn't have to make some sacrifices later to pay for it...I know I would. But I would take care of the rescue and rebuilding first and sort it out later.”

He agrees with you 100%   .22-.44

No one is going to be held hostage. He clearly states .58 they will find the Money.

I don’t understand what the argument is. It is clear to me; it is a deceiving article, There is more than enough going on, we have no need to go Witch Hunts.

[el_em_en_oh]

You can make the article say whatever you want it to say... just depends on which way you want to SPIN it.

I don't agree with the way the Right is being painted here, but I can see how those on the Left see it the way they see it.

It's all about 'wagging the dog' (sorry to be cliché, but it fits).

[brice1967]

It is a spin and the left certainly had their way with this one.  As for credit card spending???  Uhm, this nation is in the financial pinch it is because of credit card spending.  Keep using the credit card, the debt increases and pretty soon you find yourself with a debt you can cover.  Does that not look somewhat familiar to anyone?  

Look, Cantor said it was going to be paid for.  It will, eventually.  And like he said, they will have to make cuts elsewhere.... this is absolutely nothing new people.  This is how the government has operated for better than 200 years.  Cantor made this policy public knowledge....

This is just a little lesson as to how  your government works, folks.  There is a big lesson to learn about all of this if one has the time to disect the spending revolving the aftermath of Katrina.  You've got to open your mind in order to get the big picture.  There are plenty of spins there too.  Take your party affiliation out of the story and take a few hours to look at all of the misappropriated monies used and still being used in the aftermath of Katrina.  This event will be no different.  There will be plenty of misappropriation regarding money and effort, and in the long run a giant portion will go on the nations credit card..... it always does.... but they are going to cut some budgets and get some of that money liquid right now to get things underweigh.  It always happens this way folks.

None of the affected area's will be rebuilt over night, so put that to bed.  People will be outraged for one reason or another.  Some people are going to be mad because they didn't have flood waivers on their homeowners insurance.  It's going to be a bit like Katrina, but the majority of the people affected this time are seen as more affluent.