Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nobody is arguing that emergency funding shouldn't go to those states just like it should go to any state that experiences a natural disaster and needs help. If we can't come up with a way to do that without overspending on pork projects then the people of the mighty Northeast should do something about it come election time. Maybe they should vote in all Democrats who seem to have no problem spending money we don't have on pork... wait they already did that.
Except that the pork was there to get republican support. If either party could vote without needing to push in their selfish agendas then Washington would work better.
How much of this bill isn't helping people that were affected by hurricane Sandy? What's the percentage?
Also living on the "coast" isn't a reason to get flood insurance. I live on the "coast" but don't have flood insurance because I don't need it because the area I live on is high enough to handle a flood because if where I live gets flooded that means all of Manhattan would be under water because I live at a much higher elevation that Manhattan.
If you are not in a flood zone, then there is little need for flood insurance. Is there a river or lake within a mile of your home? I bet you have flood insurance just in case. Also, often times people don't realize that flood insurance isn't apart of their home owners insurance or even a bigger issue with this area is renters, it doesn't matter if the home owner has flood insurance if you are a renter.
I don't live on the coast, I'm 85 miles from the gulf coast so I'm not exactly worried about flooding but I also know that if my home by some freak of nature flooded I wouldn't expect anyone else to pay to fix it.
I wouldn't consider them moochers. They already pay more than their fair share in federal taxes. NJ/NY coast isn't exactly cheap to live on. They are some of the highest earners. They should get a return on their taxes. Most of them had flood insurance. Flood insurance doesn't cover infrastructure damage and only provides temporary shelter for a limited amount of time. Usually long enough to rebuild flood-damaged homes but not long enough to rebuild entire towns that are considered inhabitable at the moment.
The problem isn't the funds going to disaster relief. The problem is the pork.... and unfortunately, the pork is inevitable the way Washington works.
They already get a ton of return on their taxes and they all choose to live in a high dollar area, nobody forces anyone to live on the coast of NJ (unless that's a new reality show I haven't heard of). If they are some of the highest earners and they pay a lot in taxes they should be able to afford to rebuild their homes, otherwise they're just moochers looking for a hand out. We should do whatever we can to provide temp shelter, food, water, etc etc etc but the gov. shouldn't be giving grants to rebuild people's homes.
Maybe the right thing was for everyone to vote against this bill until the billions and billions of pork is removed. Unbelievable the amount of non-Sandy related items that are burred in this bill. Things like money to fishes in Alaska, things like assistance to increase fishing in Massachusetts. This nonsense needs to stop. Bills should be 100% for what they are intended to fund, not payback to favorite companies (and 'sons') for significant campaign contributions to individuals.
Neither do you. The money is listed in the bill but I didn't add up the individual pieces.
So saying "most of the money is going to disaster relief" has no basis since you can't say how much either.
All those little "nickels and dimes" over the years is sitting at 16 TRILLION.
My comments are strictly on the pork and nothing else. Guam has no need for several hundred thousand for new roads.
So you read it, figured out what you wanted to freak out about and ignored the rest. Sounds like typical Conservative logic. So let me know when you finish adding up those numbers to prove how much money is going to pork in the bill. It will be interesting to see what the number is that you are so concerned about that you are willing to let fellow Americans suffer because you want to nickel and dime a bill, how American of you, you don't care about the pork when the Republicans are calling for war and needing to give our troops a signed blank check to aid them in battle, but you want to nickel and dime Americans in need after a natural disaster. Sounds like a true Patriot to me, our Founding Fathers would be proud.
Look at the link I cited - the YahooNews/AP link. It has the estimates. Did you even read it?
I read the bill itself. Did you ?
That yahoo article has no mention of the funds for Guam, American Samoa and other US territories.
Has no mention of ammunition for the military, HHS funding for substance abuse for states nor any mention of Max Baucus amendment for drought sticken farmers in the midwest.
So you read it, figured out what you wanted to freak out about and ignored the rest. Sounds like typical Conservative logic. So let me know when you finish adding up those numbers to prove how much money is going to pork in the bill. It will be interesting to see what the number is that you are so concerned about that you are willing to let fellow Americans suffer because you want to nickel and dime a bill, how American of you, you don't care about the pork when the Republicans are calling for war and needing to give our troops a signed blank check to aid them in battle, but you want to nickel and dime Americans in need after a natural disaster. Sounds like a true Patriot to me, our Founding Fathers would be proud.
Yeah..I IGNORED the rest. No, I skimmed the bill and read over the sections.
At least I have knowledge on what I'm commenting about.
More than those that just read the rosy MSM headlines, that's for sure.
They already get a ton of return on their taxes and they all choose to live in a high dollar area, nobody forces anyone to live on the coast of NJ (unless that's a new reality show I haven't heard of). If they are some of the highest earners and they pay a lot in taxes they should be able to afford to rebuild their homes, otherwise they're just moochers looking for a hand out. We should do whatever we can to provide temp shelter, food, water, etc etc etc but the gov. shouldn't be giving grants to rebuild people's homes.
I'd have to agree that we shouldn't be providing grants to rebuild homes. Disaster aid funding should be made available to provide temporary shelter, food, water, healthcare, to those who were displaced and rebuild infrastructure (roads, hospitals, schools, etc). Personal belongings (including homes) should not be the responsibility of the government.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Also, often times people don't realize that flood insurance isn't apart of their home owners insurance or even a bigger issue with this area is renters, it doesn't matter if the home owner has flood insurance if you are a renter.
