Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TomCADem

(17,390 posts)
Sat Oct 27, 2012, 06:33 PM Oct 2012

Mother Jones - "What Would Romney-Ryan Mean for FEMA?" - Notable In Light of Sandy

Just a reminder that under Romney-Ryan, FEMA spending would dramatically cut and the responsibility for handling huge regional disasters would be pushed to the States, which are often in worse position than the Federal Government.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/paul-ryan-mitt-romney-tampa-fema

When Republicans gather in Tampa next week for their national convention, they may have some unwelcome company. No, not Ron Paul's army of supporter—Tropical Storm Isaac, which is currently winding its way through the Caribbean, is expected to pick up hurricane status and slam into South and Central Florida—directly into Tampa, according to at least one model. What that means for the convention is unclear, but since a direct hit would likely flood most of the city, organizers, city and state officials, and relevant federal agencies are planning accordingly. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has downplayed the threat to the city, but is reportedly preparing to mobilize to assist in the disaster response in South Florida, should that become necessary.

But under a Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan administration, FEMA's ability to respond quickly and effectively to natural disasters could be severely inhibited. In a 2012 report on Rep. Paul Ryan's "Path to Prosperity" roadmap (which Romney has said is similar to his own), the non-partisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noted that, due to the severe cuts to non-entitlement, non-defense spending, the costs for things like emergency management would have to be passed on to the states—which, with just a few exceptions, are currently in an even tighter financial bind than Washington.
"FEMA also helps states and local governments repair or replace public facilities and infrastructure, which often is not insured," the CBPP report explained. "This form of discretionary federal aid would be subject to cuts under the Ryan budget. If it were scaled back substantially, states and localities would need to bear a larger share of the costs of disaster response and recovery, or attempt to make do with less during difficult times."
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Mother Jones - "What Would Romney-Ryan Mean for FEMA?" - Notable In Light of Sandy (Original Post) TomCADem Oct 2012 OP
They would mean nothing good for FEMA...n/t CaliforniaPeggy Oct 2012 #1
Thanks TOMCADem Cha Oct 2012 #2
Don't be silly... malokvale77 Oct 2012 #3
Reality should st in. Sandy one Oct 2012 #4
Make this go viral! n/t courseofhistory Oct 2012 #5

malokvale77

(4,879 posts)
3. Don't be silly...
Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:33 AM
Oct 2012

It's a dog eat dog world, doncha know.
You're on your own.

Just make sure your boots have straps to pull yourself up by.

Sandy one

(24 posts)
4. Reality should st in.
Mon Oct 29, 2012, 04:18 PM
Oct 2012

Romney continued to campaign this morning until he was shamed into cancelling. Remember he and Ryan want to do away with FEMA. "Just let people take care of themselves". Well, the Governors of the thee states effected asked for and immediately got the approval for Federal aid. Reality !!!!!! Ryan voted 7 times to cut FEMA.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Mother Jones - "What...