FEMA shifted to states?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guess people should get ready for their state and local taxes to raise.

Further, infrastructure investment is something Democrats have been calling for which is why they created whole funding and programs for it last administration. Becuase you know helping states and the country make sustainable infrastructure investments is good for everyone.

Not sure why we need another review though when ACoR, FEMA, DOT and state agencies can already answer most questions.

States like Florida should not have no income tax and then rely on the Feds to bail them out each and every year for hurricanes. Raise their taxes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I loathe Trump and all that he represents, but this actually makes sense. There is no real Constitutional justification for FEMA being a federal government responsibility. Which is not to say that it hasn't done good and important work. It has. But it also wasn't something that the founders would have ever considered to be a power of Congress.

Huh? There are multiple statutes enacted by Congress. FEMA was created by Congress, and it would be unconstitutional for the president to delete it. That is how the "founders" are implicated.

[Anonymous]

Huh? There are multiple statutes enacted by Congress. FEMA was created by Congress, and it would be unconstitutional for the president to delete it. That is how the "founders" are implicated.

Agreed completely, and I should have said that above. FEMA doesn't really have any Constitutional justification, but that doesn't mean that the executive can just make it go away because he doesn't like it. Congress needs to do that.

But the founding fathers wouldn't have envisioned Congress as having the power to create FEMA in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The goal is to destroy the United States and sell it off to the billionaires

This. And to fulfill all of China and Russia’s wildest fantasies.

[Anonymous]

So a state and its residents who are dealing with a disaster, will need to fully mobilize to also rescue/rebuild?

Sounds easy peasy, lemon squeezy. /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So a state and its residents who are dealing with a disaster, will need to fully mobilize to also rescue/rebuild?

Sounds easy peasy, lemon squeezy. /s

Voting has consequences. Whomp Whomp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I loathe Trump and all that he represents, but this actually makes sense. There is no real Constitutional justification for FEMA being a federal government responsibility. Which is not to say that it hasn't done good and important work. It has. But it also wasn't something that the founders would have ever considered to be a power of Congress.

The reason FEMA was created was because states have been unable to respond to major disasters. The state becomes overwhelmed- like Louisiana during Katrina.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loathe Trump and all that he represents, but this actually makes sense. There is no real Constitutional justification for FEMA being a federal government responsibility. Which is not to say that it hasn't done good and important work. It has. But it also wasn't something that the founders would have ever considered to be a power of Congress.

The reason FEMA was created was because states have been unable to respond to major disasters. The state becomes overwhelmed- like Louisiana during Katrina.

Or they give l their money away to former football players. Ahem Mississippi.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guess people should get ready for their state and local taxes to raise.

Further, infrastructure investment is something Democrats have been calling for which is why they created whole funding and programs for it last administration. Becuase you know helping states and the country make sustainable infrastructure investments is good for everyone.

Not sure why we need another review though when ACoR, FEMA, DOT and state agencies can already answer most questions.

States like Florida should not have no income tax and then rely on the Feds to bail them out each and every year for hurricanes. Raise their taxes.

California too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think FEMA has lost all credibility now that they were housing and looking after illegal immigrants. That was supposed to be a cost borne only by the “sanctuary cities” whose citizens voted to allow them into the country and pay to support them. Federal money and resources should never have been used for that.

What are you talking about? When economic migrants or asylum seekers come here, they’ve been through a disaster. Would you have them be homeless? Biden fought a battle for the soul of America for this kind of thing. we are talking about migrants who are fleeing horrific conditions in pursuit of the American dream. Supporting them, with disaster relief among other things, is who we are. It’s our values.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Huh? There are multiple statutes enacted by Congress. FEMA was created by Congress, and it would be unconstitutional for the president to delete it. That is how the "founders" are implicated.

Agreed completely, and I should have said that above. FEMA doesn't really have any Constitutional justification, but that doesn't mean that the executive can just make it go away because he doesn't like it. Congress needs to do that.

But the founding fathers wouldn't have envisioned Congress as having the power to create FEMA in the first place.

Lots of things weren’t envisioned by the “founders” because society was fundamentally different 250 years ago . Think of everything now that did not exist in the late 1700’s. Air travel, cars, IVF, gene therapy, computers, the internet, AI, cell phones, nuclear weapons, light bulbs, etc. Congress needs the authority to create new government agencies and functions. Otherwise we will be unable to adapt with the times and we will be left in the dust by other nations with more functional government systems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think FEMA has lost all credibility now that they were housing and looking after illegal immigrants. That was supposed to be a cost borne only by the “sanctuary cities” whose citizens voted to allow them into the country and pay to support them. Federal money and resources should never have been used for that.

The reason that FEMA was doing it was because they have a system set up for housing and did it for ICE, which does not. In this instance, it made sense for FEMA to use their system rather than having ICE create their own - in the federal government, some agencies handle things for other departments. For example, my DH receives his paycheck from a different department than his own because they handle payroll for multiple departments. I think there are several departments that handle these sorts of issues for other agencies and departments. DOGE seems to want to create one HR department that will handle that for every department, although they don't realize the scope of what they are proposing. Even if the federal government were reduced by half (which it won't be), using economies of scale in places makes sense but having one department handle everything for the entire government does not.

You can argue that “it made sense” all you like but that doesn’t change the fact that this should not have been done. What “makes sense” to me and apparently more than half the country is that if some people want to bring people here illegally then they should at the VERY least be on the hook 100% for supporting them. Even if it means that it costs them more than if they used federal government resources to do it. The ENTIRE cost should be borne by the people who want these people here, not at all by the majority of the country who wants our laws enforced and our money spent on our people (or better yet not taken from us in the first place unless there’s a very good reason for it). Our country has enough problems as it is - hurricanes, fires, earthquake risk… I don’t want to be supporting other people who aren’t even American and who have no legitimate business even being here.

[Anonymous]

Lots of things weren’t envisioned by the “founders” because society was fundamentally different 250 years ago . Think of everything now that did not exist in the late 1700’s. Air travel, cars, IVF, gene therapy, computers, the internet, AI, cell phones, nuclear weapons, light bulbs, etc. Congress needs the authority to create new government agencies and functions. Otherwise we will be unable to adapt with the times and we will be left in the dust by other nations with more functional government systems.

Agreed, and that is why they allowed the Constitution to be amended in the future. But, as it is written now, Congress has limited, enumerated powers, and those powers not specifically granted to it are reserved to the states. FEMA may be a great idea, but there is no Constitutional justification for it in the Constitution as it now exists.

I am not defending anything that is currently happening in the executive branch right now. I am just stating that, per the Constitution, non-defense emergency management is a state power, not a federal one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guess people should get ready for their state and local taxes to raise.

Further, infrastructure investment is something Democrats have been calling for which is why they created whole funding and programs for it last administration. Becuase you know helping states and the country make sustainable infrastructure investments is good for everyone.

Not sure why we need another review though when ACoR, FEMA, DOT and state agencies can already answer most questions.

States like Florida should not have no income tax and then rely on the Feds to bail them out each and every year for hurricanes. Raise their taxes.

Since 2003, Florida has received around $28 billion in hurricane disaster related federal aid.

Florida's annual sales tax revenue is around $40 billion. They should be able to afford a $1-2 billion/year state-run disaster aid program without requiring an additional income tax.

https://patch.com/florida/southtampa/fl-has-gotten-28b-disaster-aid-2003-what-if-fema-was-cut

Florida's population is big enough to take on this responsibility. I would be more concerned about small, poor, states.

[Anonymous]

I was told Trump has a mandate and this is what the people want.