Skip to comments.Obama's sequester proposal slashes funds for FEMA, disaster relief
Posted on 10/30/2012 9:52:54 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
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....
Obama's proposed cuts to FEMA include the following: Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis Program - $8 million State and Local Emergency Programs (non-defense) - $183 million State and Local Emergency Programs (defense) - $5 million United States Fire Administration and Training - $4 million Salaries and Expenses (non-defense) - $75 million Salaries and Expenses (defense) - $7 million Disaster Relief - $580 million Emergency Food and Shelter - $10 million Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program - $3 million National Pre-disaster Mitigation Fund - $3 million
These cuts likely underestimate the total cuts proposed to disaster relief functions, since the U.S. armed forces--subject to separate cuts in Obama's sequester proposals--frequently provide support to FEMA operations, as well as essential search and rescue services.
While Romney and Ryan are merely proposing to shift some of the emergency functions to the states, or to balance further increases in FEMA funding with offsetting cuts in other discretionary spending, Obama has proposed actual cuts, at both the federal and state levels.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Well, well, well....this is the answer to the ObamaBots charge that Romney would gut FEMA. And contrary to his bald-faced lie in the last debate, the sequester was Obama’s idea, not that of the GOP Congress.
That and slashing support and security to our armed forces and embassy security so that an ambassador could get raped like Vlad the Impaler executing a Turk or supposed dissident, in addition to the killings of NAVY SEALS trying to guard the embassy. Obama could sit in his office making phone calls all he wants, but his administration is still a bucket full of puke.
I would too, but the point of this article (which I excerpted per FR rules) is to demonstrate that this is not an issue where Obama can attack Romney.
This is why we’re screwed. Both parties continue to subsidize failure. Why should my tax dollars go to subsidize other’s flood insurance. Let them buy flood insurance at free market rates.
Since we are talking hurricane politics, consider that the worst hit thus far are all blue states: NJ, NY, DE, MD, CT.
Electoral effect on Romney: Near zero.
Two swing states (VA, PA) have been affected, at least residually, in their blue areas (northern VA, greater Philly). This could affect turnout and certainly has affected early voting.
Electoral effect on Obama: potentially decisive in a bad way.
And Krauthammer made a good point: natural disasters can only hurt you politcally, not help you. No for Obama its probably a wash, and a net negative considering the lost campaign time.
I'm sure you're both familiar and not thrilled with the idea of mandatory "help" to a relocation camp. Lauding FEMA as necessary makes for political blowback when one tries to defund a legion of armed SEIU goons in military vehicles, hamstrung with PC union "worker safety" rules while offering to substitute for the Salvation Army or AAA. We need to teach America that voluntarism and free enterprise solutions are workable, more cost-effective, and less of a threat to our precious and fragile liberties.
I’m trying to click on the link in Breitbart.com to view the PDF’s, but it keeps shutting down my internet. Does anybody have this?