Ron Paul Takes on FEMA

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Paul's right
I am from Florida and have been through 7 tropicals and 1 tornado and they are the biggest set of crooks around.They use the national guard to stop local contractors from getting in the wealthy neighborhoods with the FEMA guys escorting their already millionaire cousins in to steal the most lucrative insurance contracts.The great part is WE PAY FOR OUR OWN ROBBERY!,or as Ron keeps reminding us,we borrow from really rich people,to pay for our own robbery.That money should go right to the State.They know what to do with it unless you have an evil man like Jeb Bush in charge who lets old people freeze in winter with no roof in Northern Florida.

Julian Alien of FL 12:11AM August 30, 2011

Why is it so hard for some people to accept the fact that FEMA is nothing more than another wasteful and financially bankrupt federal program? They have no money, and they do nothing that the Red Cross and local, county and state governments don't already take care of. FEMA only comes in after a disaster has already occurred and they get in the way. It's wasteful spending at its worst! Anyone who thinks that FEMA does a good job only needs to look back to Hurricane Katrina as a classic example of why we don't need FEMA.
If you live in a dangerous area like along the coast, within Tornado Alley or along an earthquake fault, take some responsibility for your own actions. There is a reason why you can't buy insurance in places like this, or if you can it will be very expensive. It's called taking a risk. The taxpayers should never have to pay to rebuild someone's home just because they want to live along the beach. I would like to live along the beach too but I wouldn't want to worry about my house blowing away, or put the burden on someone else. If you think that this is acceptable, you need to grow up and take responsibility for for yourself and your stupid and selfish choices. Ron Paul is 100% correct on this!

Bob Vondruska of CA 7:24PM August 29, 2011

>> Ron Paul? Doesn't like FEMA? Then why did he acceept more than $220M from FEMA when hurricane Ike hit Galveston harbor?
Paul has rebuttaled that by stating that he's more than happy to take money handed out to use for his constituents. He considers it the same as giving his constituents their tax money back. So, while he doesn't like a lot of the mismanagement many government dept's do, he's more than happy to take money they'll give him and give it back to his folks.
Think of it. You may not like the Bush tax cuts, but even if you didn't you were probably more than happy to take that check they cut you and go cash it and put it to use (either savings, retirement, buying something, etc). If someone's gonna give you cash, you're not going to be an idiot. Likewise, it's not like he pocketed $220M, and is keeping it in an off-shore account; his constituents got it for Galveston repairs.
His point here in this article is that why should we bail folks out when they knowingly build in a flood plain, a hurricane zone, etc? Leave that up to their insurance and their own cognizance. Leave that to the local and state governments to coordinate their own, area-specific disaster relief programs. Get the federal government's nose out of it. The most the fed gov't should do is call in the national guard to mobilize resources, not provide some umbrella catch-all program that will save everyone that didn't account for stuff like this happening. I guess I'm callous about it, but I'm not sure why I, as a person that pays for my own insurance and takes care to have money saved for emergencies, should have to pay taxes to cover for folks that don't. If you keep bailing folks out, they'll just keep expecting it and using it as a safety net.

blah blah of TX 3:24PM August 29, 2011

Ron Paul? Doesn't like FEMA?
Then why did he acceept more than $220M from FEMA when hurricane Ike hit Galveston harbor?
http://moondogs.org/ron-paul-says-fema-is-immoral-takes-fed-funds-anyway

OKParrothead of OK 3:04PM August 29, 2011

My point remains. We all have our opinions about what FEMA does or doesn't do. But this reporter, or commentator, or whatever he calls himself, is simply regurgitating what Paul says with no investigation of his quite serious claims about a major government agency -- an agency that just happens to have plenty of agents in the field right now. There are claims made that are either true or not true -- but we don't know from this blurb.
I used to read U.S. News & World Report growing up. They used to do more than this kind of quick-hit job. It's just lazy -- not journalism.

mypitts2 of NC 2:13PM August 29, 2011

I think it depends on who is in charge at FEMA. I live where there is hurricanes and I know what FEMA can do and I have seen it suck also. FEMA is not the only one who decides who comes into the area hit, the governor and the mayor of the town also decide along with all the rescue people. So you can not just blame FEMA. We seen the bad with FEMA during Katrina, we seen it in Texas where people sat on freeways for a day or longer while trying to get out of towns. We also seen it with parts of Ike. But during Ike it was a little better but that was because the world was watching how Bush would handle that one after the messes of the past ones. We have to remember after a hurricane there is debris every where and I mean every where, the Galveston Causeway "bridge" had boats and trash like you would not believe, and the rescue people had problems getting in. And they were local. So you can not just hop in your car and go home no matter how much you would like. We could not get water,ice where I live even though we knew it was just outside of town waiting. Why because the gov did not do his part when it came to that. I found that out after making way to many phone calls. So each part of your government has a part to play from FEMA, President,Governor,mayor and local rescue teams. I have never heard of FEMA stopping people from going into their homes once they get there, it is usually the mayor or the local police,rescue teams that may not let you for safety reasons.
I agree with Ron Paul that we should not build on beaches, but then people should not build on lakes or rivers or mountains or fault lines but we do . We do not know where any disaster will hit so how can we say they cant build there. On beaches it is a little different because we know they will probably be hit with a hurricane, if you live where they have them. Is FEMA always good, no it is not. But after this weekend I think we can agree it has gotten better. And after the other natual disasters since Obama took office yes it has.

of TX 1:56PM August 29, 2011

Ron Paul is all about cutting DoD down to a more appropriate size as well. He is the only mainstream candidate calling for an immediate end to our several undeclared wars, and our international empire of military presence.

Josh of OR 1:35PM August 29, 2011

Look at the evidence before dismissing what Dr. Paul says.
FEMA wouldn't ALLOW people to protect their own homes during the Katrina debacle. We've become waaay to reliant on our "friendly neighborhood" Federal Government.
It's time to take the Country back from the special interests imo.

Jeff of CA 1:11PM August 29, 2011

Once upon a time, reporters actually investigated claims made by politicians. I've seen FEMA operate up close and don't find them to operate in the way Paul claimed yesterday on Fox News Sunday.
Many national political journalists have a curious lack of interest in the truth of the matter. They cover the horse race only. As a journalist I find that not only odd but troubling -- to not make the search for truth essential to the reporting. What are we in this for?

mypitts2 of NC 12:45PM August 29, 2011

Without our federal government we would be nothing more than a loose balkanized collective of disorganized, insignificant third world nations. Paul's vision spells certain disaster. In the absence of federal government, wills states pick up the slack? NO. They are broke and getting rid of federal government will not magically solve their financial issues any more than solving private sector's financial issues - in fact, it will only compound their issues.
That said, is there inefficiency? Heck yes. BUT... Note that most of the areas of biggest inefficiency have been the golden geese and sacred cows of the GOP - i.e. defense - and that the vast majority of "federal government getting bigger and out of control" is actually the result of the vast outsourcing of federal government to private sector. Consider that there are actually less federal employees today than there were in the 1950s - despite the population they need to support more than doubling in the time since.

Gunter 11:56AM August 29, 2011