We need FEMA

[Eric Hibbert]

When tornadoes leveled Tuscaloosa, it wasn't FEMA on the scene saving lives. It was neighbors and local first responders. All FEMA did was write out checks to those without insurance, and those checks would only buy a 30 year old used mobile home.

It was the same in Pleasant Grove. It was all about neighbors helping neighbors. You know, those things liberals insist can't happen without the government.

 

[doubtingmerle]

It was the same in Pleasant Grove. It was all about neighbors helping neighbors. You know, those things liberals insist can't happen without the government.

No liberal ever said this and you know it.

Do you happen to own a little black book with the command not to bear false witness?

 

[grasping the after wind]

I see. So if disaster strikes, if people are clinging unto the roof to stay alive, if people are stuck with no way out, you would send the area...dollar bills? What are they going to do with those dollars? Swim to the WalMart and use your dollars to buy a boat?

I wondered when Mr. Strawman would show up.

Wouldn't it be better to have a federal emergency team that is prepared, that is fully stocked with supplies, that has the equipment needed to quickly move those supplies where needed, is staffed with trained people who know how to respond, and already has the links to local governments to work in a cooperative effort to respond to an emergency that is too big for the local government?

No. It would be better to have the funds available for the local authorities, which BTW include state governments as well as county, and town or city government to hire those that have experience with disaster recovery which is basically what FEMA does except it also adds a further level of bureaucracy which inevitably leads to more confusion, red tape and costs.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

It was the same in Pleasant Grove. It was all about neighbors helping neighbors. You know, those things liberals insist can't happen without the government.

One newspaper yesterday had the headline "18 months later and still waiting on funds from FEMA". Doesn't make a good case for a national FEMA organization to exist.

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

One newspaper yesterday had the headline "18 months later and still waiting on funds from FEMA". Doesn't make a good case for a national FEMA organization to exist.

Your best bet if to be ready on your own.

*hoards calcium carbide*

 

[doubtingmerle]

It would be better to have the funds available for the local authorities, which BTW include state governments as well as county, and town or city government to hire those that have experience with disaster recovery which is basically what FEMA does except it also adds a further level of bureaucracy which inevitably leads to more confusion, red tape and costs.

Funds do no good if there are no supplies. If a town is underwater, then dropping off dollar bills at city hall will not solve the problem. It is better to be prepared with helicopters, water, meals, boats, etc. That is where a federal agency that can quickly move such supplies with skilled rescuers into an area can be a great assistance to local emergency teams.

 

[SimplyMe]

Funds do no good if there are no supplies. If a town is underwater, then dropping off dollar bills at city hall will not solve the problem. It is better to be prepared with helicopters, water, meals, boats, etc. That is where a federal agency that can quickly move such supplies with skilled rescuers into an area can be a great assistance to local emergency teams.

But to use Sandy as an example, it is the Red Cross, and other private groups, that has moved supplies into the affected areas that can be distributed once the storm ends. It is the Red Cross that has set up shelters, assisting local government.

It is the Coast Guard and military (often the state's National Guard under direction of the governor) that provide helicopters, rescue, and additional security. At this point, FEMA has done little, other than in cases having given money to the Red Cross and other relief organizations in helping those groups to buy supplies -- so basically just done what you say is such a bad thing.

Perhaps I'm wrong but, from what I'm seeing, all FEMA has really done so far is add another layer of bureaucracy.

 

[doubtingmerle]

It is the Coast Guard and military (often the state's National Guard under direction of the governor) that provide helicopters, rescue, and additional security. At this point, FEMA has done little, other than in cases having given money to the Red Cross and other relief organizations in helping those groups to buy supplies -- so basically just done what you say is such a bad thing.

Talk about straw men! I nowhere said that giving money to the Red Cross is a bad thing. The point is that we cannot provide assistance by simply sending money to an area. There needs to be preparations and supplies ready. And federal agencies play an important role in that.

The Coast Guard and Military are federal agencies. Responding to a huge emergency requires local, state, federal, and private efforts. Nobody is saying that only one is important. What I am saying is that there is a vital role for well prepared federal agencies that can provide help in responding to emergencies.

 

[drjean]

We don't need FEDERAL... local is fine...let the States divvy it up with the Federal Government after the fact... but let the local and State handle the needs.

As for the American Red Cross we don't need them the way they either. Look at how much of the millions they received after 911 in NY... and see how much were spent on PAST disaster needs and administration, for one example.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

We don't need FEDERAL... local is fine...let the States divvy it up with the Federal Government after the fact... but let the local and State handle the needs.

You are right on target! FEMA has proven itself worthless ever since Hurricane Katrina, and based on our experience with the tornado outbreak, it hasn't gotten any better.

 

[SimplyMe]

Talk about straw men! I nowhere said that giving money to the Red Cross is a bad thing. The point is that we cannot provide assistance by simply sending money to an area. There needs to be preparations and supplies ready. And federal agencies play an important role in that.

The Coast Guard and Military are federal agencies. Responding to a huge emergency requires local, state, federal, and private efforts. Nobody is saying that only one is important. What I am saying is that there is a vital role for well prepared federal agencies that can provide help in responding to emergencies.

If anything, yours is a strawman. You set up a strawman by trying to claim we are saying that there should be no federal help and then attempt to knock it down by claiming that the giving money to the Red Cross is not a bad thing, and that the military is a federal organization -- ignoring the point about the National Guard (which is controlled by the state governor) and that FEMA isn't needed for Federal agencies to provide support.

No one has said that the Federal Government should not help, just that FEMA is not needed to provide that help. As we keep pointing out, giving money to private organizations (such as giving money to the Red Cross to help cover their costs) is just as, if not more, efficient.

Also, why does FEMA need to exist for the military (or other federal agencies) to respond in an emergency? Especially since, in most cases (outside of, at sea in International waters where the Coast Guard helps out), it is the National Guard under the direction of the state governor, not the federal government, that is the military response?

 

[doubtingmerle]

No one has said that the Federal Government should not help, just that FEMA is not needed to provide that help.

I thought I made it clear that it is not the initials that are important. It is the services. We need coordinated services from federal agencies supporting rescue efforts.

As we keep pointing out, giving money to private organizations (such as giving money to the Red Cross to help cover their costs) is just as, if not more, efficient.

And I keep point out that giving money to the Red Cross is important.

That still does not negate the role of a centralized federal response to emergencies.

Also, why does FEMA need to exist for the military (or other federal agencies) to respond in an emergency? Especially since, in most cases (outside of, at sea in International waters where the Coast Guard helps out), it is the National Guard under the direction of the state governor, not the federal government, that is the military response?

It's not the initials of the agency that is important. It is the federal function.

 

[AceHero]

Yeah, FEMA concentration camps are an old tinfoil hat subject that goes way back. Bush was going to send us to them and before that Clinton was too. They just never got around to it apparently.

See? That shows how inefficient FEMA is! They can't even enslave us properly!

Don't they say to plan on being cut off for a minimum of three days?

If you want to feed yourself in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, start stockpiling MREs and getting prepared now. Don't want until the last minute to descent on the grocery store like a ravening horde of locusts.

Or know a really generous Mormon family. They're always ready for situations like this.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Don't they say to plan on being cut off for a minimum of three days?

If you want to feed yourself in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, start stockpiling MREs and getting prepared now. Don't want until the last minute to descent on the grocery store like a ravening horde of locusts.

Absolutely. Be prepared. You will notice that nobody--nobody!--on this thread suggested that there is no need to be personally prepared.

The point is that there are times when an area needs additional supplies and skilled rescue support, and strong government agencies such as FEMA should be a big part of the overall recovery efforts.

 

[doubtingmerle]

It was the same in Pleasant Grove. It was all about neighbors helping neighbors.

Absolutely. Neighbors should help neighbors.

You will notice that nobody--nobody!--on this thread suggested that we don't need neighbors helping neighbors.

The point is that we also need strong federal agencies such as FEMA when a major disaster strikes.

 

[doubtingmerle]

One newspaper yesterday had the headline "18 months later and still waiting on funds from FEMA". Doesn't make a good case for a national FEMA organization to exist.

Or it could make the case for a strong federal agency that is well funded and is able to respond when needed.

You cannot do massive cuts to federal programs, and then complain if there is not enough money in the pot to do what is needed.

 

[doubtingmerle]

But to use Sandy as an example, it is the Red Cross, and other private groups, that has moved supplies into the affected areas that can be distributed once the storm ends. It is the Red Cross that has set up shelters, assisting local government.

You will notice that nobody--nobody!--has suggested that we don't need organizations such as the Red Cross. I have personally contributed to the Red Cross. It is a great organization.

But that does not change the fact that we need a strong federal agency that is directly accountable to leaders that are directly accountable to the people to provide coordinated support operations when disaster strikes.

We need accountability. The government is accountable to We the People.

 

[doubtingmerle]

We don't need FEDERAL... local is fine...let the States divvy it up with the Federal Government after the fact... but let the local and State handle the needs.

How can local governments all be expected to stock up on all the needed supplies, helicopters, rescue boats, etc.? Sure local governments should be prepared for ordinary disasters. But when a major disaster occurs, they need additional help. The best way to assure that additional help is there is to have organizations such as The Coast Guard and FEMA that are directly accountable to elected leaders to be prepared to help We the People.

 

[doubtingmerle]

If anything, yours is a strawman. You set up a strawman by trying to claim we are saying that there should be no federal help and then attempt to knock it down

Please read the thread. Post 2 does indeed claim that there should be no FEMA or similar federal agencies to provide direct federal help. I was simply responding to what was said here. It is not a strawman when I quote back what was said and respond to what was said.

 

[grasping the after wind]

You will notice that nobody--nobody!--has suggested that we don't need organizations such as the Red Cross. I have personally contributed to the Red Cross. It is a great organization.

But that does not change the fact that we need a strong federal agency that is directly accountable to leaders that are directly accountable to the people to provide coordinated support operations when disaster strikes.

We need accountability. The government is accountable to We the People.

My bold.
I haven't seen that very much in evidence and each year it seems to me that the idea that government ought to be accountable to the people is being replaced by the idea that the people ought to be passively subservient to a government that is increasingly less concerned with the welfare of the general populace and more concerned with the welfare of special interests. A government run by people that have the audacity to verbalize their lack of respect for the general populace by saying such things as
“We could give it all back to you and hope you spend it right.” Bill Clinton on surpluses
"If you've got a business—you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." Barak Obama on the inability of private individuals to accomplish anything without government assistance through public work projects.
"Well, when the President does it, that means that it is not illegal." Richard Nixon on breaking the law.
"It takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people." John Dingell on the reason Obamacare doesn't take full effect until 2014.
" When the deal goes down- all this talk about rules- we make 'em up as we go along" Alcee Hastings
“There ought to be limits to freedom." George W. Bush