Re: Tim McCulloch...are you alive?
Since politics are not verboten here, I will post an agreement.
I see this more a matter of public policy and governance than politics, but IMO anything can be discussed as long as it is done with respect for other opinions.
Imhofe and Coburn present an interesting dichotomy to voters: presenting disasters as something states should be responsible for and demanding that any federal relief funds be taken from other programs.
A fair suggestion, government does not have a bottomless pocket to draw money from... They are spending money they get from us. If some state needs emergency aid, some other program can be trimmed. The amount of waste in government is significant, while that is yet another subject.
It reflects a lack of compassion and understanding that relief from natural disasters is one of the things the federal government SHOULD do.
Why exactly is that? Because they have deep pockets? Which is our money BTW. It is not literally the responsibility of the federal government to make citizens whole after any and every loss. I suspect this is an extension of the congress whose day job is to fund federal agencies and is already busy spending money hand over fist on so many things, that they would feel guilty if they don't slide some of that big money to OK.
I don't recall when it became common practice for the federal government to act as an emergency responder for weather events. I do recall Bush getting severe criticism for how badly N.O. was handled after Katrina, but LA certainly contributed to their own problems with dysfunctional local services. After NY/NJ experienced what hurricanes can do, they demanded federal aid instantly and were angry because it came in the middle of a contentious (still contentious) federal budget process.
This is the current law (FEMA) and accepted public policy, that said somebody still needs to be adult about government spending.
So now that Oklahomans are in need of help, will their senators oppose relief efforts? Will they promote taking funds from other programs?
Nobody opposes helping people in need. That said we always need to be prudent about spending. There will never be a lack of worthy causes or disasters du jour.
While I hope families and businesses in Oklahoma receive the help they need,
I do too, tornados can be pretty destructive if you are in the wrong spot at the wrong time.
I also hope voters that elected Coburn and Imhofe will see what kind of senators they have elected and not repeat their mistake... but having lived in Oklahoma I'm fairly certain they will re-elect these two. Now that Kansas has gone batshit wacky, too, I'm looking for a place where sane people predominate, and mostly that doesn't seem to be between the Rocky Mountains and the Blue Ridge Mountains...
This is an old screed, and it isn't quite that simple, but I see some merit in term limits. There is something about spending too much time in DC that causes a disconnect from the rest of us (and reality). I think we the people (including Tim) have a surplus of common sense, that I don't see in the legislature as they become perverted by their political pursuit.
=====
I wish nothing but the best outcomes for OK residents and see this as pretty low on the list for my criticisms of federal government. Seriously funding FEMA is the best we can find to complain about?
I suspect the government is relieved by the opportunity to change the subject, as they juggle multiple self-inflicted political disasters.
JR
