E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe three states hardest hit by super-storm Sandy in October are requesting $80 billion in emergency funding, raising long-term questions about the federal government’s planning for seemingly ever-more expensive disaster spending.
In his press briefing Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters, “I met with Gov. (Andrew) Cuomo (of New York) yesterday; I understand Gov. (Chris) Christie (of New Jersey) is coming today or tomorrow.” Reid said he met with a White House aide Tuesday morning on the emergency spending and predicted that Congress would get a formal spending request “in the next 48 hours” from the White House.
J. Scott Applewhite / AP
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. gestures as he speaks to reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Dec. 4, 2012, following a Democratic strategy session. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
On Tuesday Christie requested 100 percent federal reimbursement, instead of the normal 75 percent, for his state’s costs in the aftermath of Sandy. In a letter to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator Craig Fugate, Christie said, “The financial burden and economic hardship still confronted by our state and communities threatens the ability to continue debris removal operations at the existing (75 percent) cost-share ratio.”
On Wednesday senators from the three states — New York, New Jersey and Connecticut — will make their case for emergency funds before a Senate Appropriations Committee panel headed by a senator who knows firsthand about the effects of a catastrophic weather event: Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu. After Hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit the Gulf Coast in 2005, the federal government eventually spent about $120 billion.
Landrieu said in an interview Tuesday that if Congress does start spending $80 billion every few years on disaster recovery, “it really throws the (spending) averages off and we’re going to have a very serious conversation about how to go forward in the next decade. We’re going to take a good look at that, but right now our job is to get help to the Northeast and that’s what we’re going to do.”
If the United States has entered an era in which mega-storms, perhaps related to climate change, are becoming the “new normal,” it will create new spending pressures at a time when federal revenues every year are falling roughly $1 trillion short of outlays. If you factor in a growing population and development in coastal areas, then storm damage is likely to become even more expensive over time.
Congress and Obama right now are working hard to figure out how to undo the spending cuts that both sides agreed to last year in the Budget Control Act. So adding another $80 billion every few years might not be so strange. It might just be another object lesson in the unpredictability and perhaps the unreality of the federal budget process.
Even with no emergency spending on disaster relief, the Congressional Budget Office forecasts that spending between this year and 2023 will increase by 55 percent. Demographic changes – ever-growing Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security spending on the aging Baby Boomers – could be colliding with climate change, leaving a very heavy burden on younger workers.
A senator whose state was hit by the catastrophic Joplin tornado in 2011, Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., said Tuesday, “You can’t plan for every disaster, but you can plan for a reasonable amount of annual disaster spending. And the other thing you can do is more clearly evaluate when something reaches the federal disaster level, when something is too big to be handled by a community and the state that community is in.”
He added, “One of the things we’ve failed to do in recent years is to really carefully evaluate the level of disaster. We haven’t increased the disaster criteria in a couple of decades.”
Blunt said a Government Accountability Office report he requested last year found that the federal government declares a lot more events disasters than it did in past decades “so that by the time you get to a real disaster the money is gone.”
The GAO report said that “The growing number of disaster declarations — a record 98 in fiscal year 2011 compared with 65 in 2004 — has contributed to increased federal disaster costs.” That was in part due to the FEMA standard (a per capita damage indicator) having remained unchanged since 1986, not reflecting the rise in per capita personal income since 1986.
In a House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee hearing Wednesday on how FEMA is responding to Sandy and how it could more effectively react to future catastrophes, committee member Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., whose district includes lower Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn that were devastated by Sandy’s storm surge, said that the city and the state of New York “do not have billions of dollars sitting in their coffers in advance to fund repairs, and FEMA reimbursement is slow and cumbersome. In fact, New York still is waiting for payment for Hurricane Irene (from August of 2011). And I’m sure many of my colleagues have had similar experiences in their states.”
Nadler and other congressional Democrats argue that the emergency money for Sandy should be spent without Congress making spending cuts elsewhere to offset the new outlays. Waiting for Congress to come up with offsetting cuts, he said, would simply get in the way of “our most important job — protecting our citizens when calamity strikes.”
The $80 billion should be spent, Nadler said, in a way that protects against future storms “and we have every reason to believe that future storms will threaten us again — and soon.”
At the House hearing, Rep. Donna Edwards, D-Md., was the first committee member to raise the topic of what she called “the elephant in the room: global climate change.”
In an interview outside the hearing, Edwards told NBCNews.com, “I do think we have to look seriously at climate change when we think about the way we need to build our infrastructure and to mitigate possible damage from future storms.” She said some protective infrastructure spending today could avert higher post-catastrophe costs in the future.
Edwards did not give a cost estimate for disaster-resistant infrastructure spending. “I don’t think we’ve even begun to explore the kinds of mitigation efforts we need all along our coastline in areas of very dense population where the impact when a disaster happens is tremendous.”
Leave a Comment:
Something tells me that the Right's mantra of "small government" is going to fly out the window. These mega storms, that seem to be getting more prevalent, cannot be financially handled solely on the state level. Sandy has been further proof of that. I hope government will get together and re-evaluate the federal emergency budget, which apparently has not been adjusted or looked at in a serious way in a couple of decades? And we pay these people, why?
Small government is a fallacy. I don't know what a Mega storm is. Is that the red spot on Jupiter? Just go nuke all the polar ice and see where the coastlines are and go from there.
This is something climate deniers fail to take into consideration when they come up with their conspiracy theories, as if the whole science is some sort of nebulous scam to push green energy on them.
Climate changes affect everything. The cost of food goes up as farmers pay more for crop insurance. Homeowners pay more for their insurance. Utilities cost more as infrastructure collapses more frequently. Water is more expensive as aquifers and reservoirs dry up. Governments at all levels pay more to clean up after disasters (as this article points out), which comes out of our taxes.
Who do you think is paying for extreme weather? We are. If we can mitigate it in even a small way, we'll save much more than trying to adapt to it will cost us.
Mother Nature is angry with GOP denial of climate change...but mother nature was wrong in causing problems to innocent people. A stern lesson learned.
.
We all need to help those victims out: donate more, volunteer more, pray more, vote more GOP out of Congress in 2014
AG99,
You said all that to say, there are just TOO many people. Every problem we face is because of TOO MANY PEOPLE!
Nah, the GOP-heads would just tell the states to pick up their own tab and screw the common folk. They don't have a concept of shared sacrifice. To them that's code for taking their money.
The RepubliCONs don't want big government...even when people need help in tragedies like these.
The only big government the GOP wants is pig brother, a.k.a., big brother, to spy on us or big military to destroy the world.
Ya know, Piggytree, if the GOP does cease to exist your life is going to be booorrring!
You finally said something today that I actually agree with, Malcontented! The GOP does provide much fodder. It really is enjoyable watching the implosion. This election sure has thrown the entire party into such a tizzy!
Seems like an expensive way to buy votes. There is a cost to living with a coastal view and those who don't want to pay for it (insurance) should be willing to lose everything. There is no reason for the taxpayers to foot the bill. How about low interest loans (that likely will ultimately be defaulted on) to help people get back on their feet instead of handouts?
Life is not about avoiding risk, it is about managing risk. People that live below sea level (New Orleans) or with coastal views in Florida, NJ, etc. should expect hurricane damage and be prepared to foot their own bills.
So, norm, I suppose you think it's OK for someone to go die in a useless war, but you don't want to help them recover from storm damage?
Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't sound right at all.
Alaska girl - the "small government mantra" is not going to "fly out the window". The reason that this storm cannot be handled at the state level is because the states in question - NY, NJ, and Conn, are broke due to deficit spending. They can't cover their current pension obligations much less their 25% of the cleanup.
The Wall Street Journal just last week had all three states among the worst to retire in. Another article on November 13th about fiscal health of the states: "New York, New Jersey and Connecticut are (the) three lowest-rated states."
These states are pathetically run by their governors and legislatures when it comes to fiscal common sense. But everyone is getting used to the Federal government doing every thing for them instead of taking care of it themself...
Hey Tim, let Trump pick up the tab, it'll be a great tax write-off and would actually help some poor people. (That's poor as in unfortunate, not poor financially)
It seems now days the states and the people run to the Federal Government, to have them take them out of the problems caused by a disaster, Except the Mid west states handle the problem themselves,, This is what the admidastration wants they want to control the voters... Most states stand on their own two feet except the south east and the east coast....and some parts of the west coast Now like it used to be.. and now the Politicans want to change social secuity and medicare.. on most of the senior citizens the working class who paid into the social security every pay check for their retirement, This is like the people in congress and the president they pay part of their salary into a reirement fund... Maybe they should not even take a salary.. They don't need one..
Not arguing...but did Joplin MO get a bunch Federal Dollars after the tornado. I live in Springfield MO and our local paper said they did. Along with Sen Blount and Rep Billy Long...Republicans...stating how they got Federal money for Joplin. Last I looked Joplin is in the Midwest.
Dan,
Roughly 50% of the population lives on the narrow coastal fringe comprising 17% of the contiguous land area (http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/population.html). They've been paying for crop subsidies to the big farms in the mid-west, paying farmers when there are droughts, paying when the Missouri / Mississippi Rivers and their tributaries flood towns and homes. And the east coast has been paying more taxes and getting less back in funds to the states, while the mid-west and south have been paying less taxes to the feds, yet getting back more than pay. It's the midl-wests time to pay back.
If you really want a shock to your standard of living in the mid-west just think what all those people (150 million) moving to the mid-west would do. Wages would drop, house prices would double/quadruple, etc.. etc.. etc...
Malcontented: Are you suggesting two wrongs make a right? Either way we don't have the money to pay for this sort of thing, be it a war or bailing out people who make a decision to live on the ocean in a hurricane zone.
I grew up in the areas affected by Sandy. 50 years ago, when hurricanes hit, you mopped up and rebuilt yourself or with the help of neighbors. Local tax dollars went to repair public roads, and hopefully your insurance would kick in the rest. If you live on a coast, you need to understand the risks.
norm93,
It wasn't actually in a high risk area. Anyway, it don't matter if it was high risk. Being an American means helping other Americans, even those who make poor choices. Let's just suck it up, help the folks and get on with it. It really shouldn't even be an issue!
You sound like Obama. Give, give to irresponsible people or other countries. If the people can afford to live in expensive coastline homes they should be able to pay for insurance. I am sure they will be happy to take your donation to help or do you only help with taxpayers dollars.
Malcontented: Tom says it all. Thanks Tom, you summed it up beautifully.
JustOlJoe: the various gov't programs you mention in your post #1.15 all need to go, too! Crop subsidies? Really? Really?
Why should anybody carry insurance. LET UNCLE SUGAR FOOT THE BILL.
Select geographies in the temperate zones, rarely succumbing to the annual or once-in-a-decade ravages of natural disasters. will become one of the extremely desired prerequisites for solid investments in good, long-term real estate.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16287-death-map-usa-natural-disaster-hotspots-revealed-.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news
Leave it at the 75% funding level. The reason is simple- since the federal Government has no say in allowing building permits for expanding areas prone to Hurricanes, Tornados and River flood areas why should it pay for a States greed to get more money from property taxes? Second fact is that people are supposed to buy Insurance against disasters such as these, so why does the Federal Government need to pay for their losses? Too much coastal development just like those million dollar homes built on Cliffside lots and in brush filled canyons in California are not the average taxpayers problem to pay for are they? Same goes for a city built below sea level and when power goes out the pumps do not work. Why did we rebuild New Orleans? (I realize we are not even finished there yet as well) And now we get to pay for Gov. Christie and his Oceanside Gambling Resorts?
JustOlJoe - At least you get cheaper food on your dinner table with crop subsidies. What do the taxpayers get for paying to rebuild all those structures owned by idiots too stupid and cheap to carry insurance? Targets for the next Sanday to roll through, that's what.
Dave1501 - Joplin got Fed dollars to be sure (I'm a MO boy myself). That wasn't right either...
Nope, Sandy will have nothing to do with Mr. Obama's and his Congressional surrogates agenda:
Heck, how much Stimulus does he want for his "Fiscal Cliff" Progressive agenda ? $ 50,000,000,000 or is that $ 150,000,000,000 ?
Plus, don't forget he wants to "Waiver" ALL Student loan debt of $ 1,400,000,000,000 and eliminate the requirement for our National Debt ceiling.
Pssssst Progressives: the National Debt is ABOVE $ 16,000,000,000,000 and climbing.
If this really is about climate change, the federal government should invoke imminent domain, pay fair market to the owners and leave the rest as beaches to be invaded by the rising sea level.
If you allow people to rebuild, increase the building standards to those of the Cayman Islands. Otherwise, you can't rebuild.
Fed Money goes primarily for the cost of infrastructure IE Roads, Bridges, Etc rebuilding. Some goes for temp housing and some goes for low interest loans for repairs. THe majority have their own ins and if you live in a flood zone (as I do) you are required by the bank to have the flood ins as well as your regular home ins (Or the bank will take it out for you).
Almost everywhere has some potential for natural disasters, River Flooding in the RIver plains, Earthquakes, Tornadoes, Wildfires, Volcanoes, landslides, sinkholes, avalanches, dust storms, drought, etc. Many have several of these. If you think your area has none, then you know nothing about geology, meteorology, etc.
If you want to change the policy, you can going forward, but not on those in the past. How about all insurance policies have a small add on to the premiums to pay into a federal disaster fund. Honestly we have that now, it is just in our taxes, you can change the way it is collected but it is still money out of your pocket.
Face the facts....Global Warming is real, it causes the weather to do odd things. You can if you want to try to argue causes...but you cannot argue facts and consequences. We have to prepare, and working to lessen any man made causes won't kill you. if only 1/4 of the billions on the earth did just a little bit each, the difference would be astounding.
Use reusable bags at the store, I am sure just in the US we use over a billion plastic bags a day, if you are buying one small item just put it in your purse or knapsack. Tell them to keep the bag. IF just 100 million bags a day could be cut that is over 35 BILLION a year in the US alone. Plus the reusable ones don't break and your stuff falls to the pavement breaking your eggs.
Do you really need a gas guzzling SUV, if you own two cars would it hurt if the second was a smaller hybrid?
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle---less garbage equals less landfills, less garbage to collect, you pay for that. If something is over packaged, don't buy it.
Call catalog companies and ask them to take you off the mailing list, who needs ones you would never order from. When ordering things online tell them not to sell your name and not to put you on the mailing list, it is all online anyway.
Use the new light bulbs, you will save tons on electricity, and buying bulbs and less bulbs in landfills. The LED ones are great and the prices are dropping all the time. Turn them off when you go out. Mom told you to do that years ago.
They have had to consolidate garbage pick up routes in NYC, we have cut down our throw aways so much they no longer need as many--saving tax dollars.
I am not perfect, but it dose not hurt me to try to be. We all have to.
NFIP backed Flood insurance is capped at $250K per house and usually has a 5 to 10K deductable. Privately backed/sourced flood insurance costs more than it pays out. Home Owners insurance does not cover anything damaged as a result of flooding.
There is lots more to come it hasnt even started yet, ,money before our planet that just about says it all, and the population is not out of control greed is, there is more than enough to go around but, most ends up in the garbage
SteveJ120 is right. In 1913 The Miami valley in Ohio got hit with a perfect storm and suffered a terrific flood. The local counties created a tax district for flood control and in about 6 years built 5 dams, and miles of levies still in business today. Today on each property owners tax bill is a line item to pay for the upkeep on those dams. Now, every disaster, and every large and little component of every disaster is always the Federal gubmints responsibility. Local people don't do a thing to prepare for these things, and they deny all responsibility for dealing with it after it happens. The worst are the people on the beaches who don't pay for insurance and want others to rebuild their beach houses. I remember a woman being interviewed on a NC beach years ago who said her house had been built three times, she paid the first time, the Feds paid the next two times. It's an old problem and it is not right. Much of Manhattan infrastructure is below sea level. A really dumb idea knowing what we know about rising sea levels. During this rebuild, Are they taking steps to move it up higher, or are they just putting it back the way it was? Are the NJ beaches adopting Florida hurricane codes for re-construction, or are they just going to put new structures up they way they used to ? Do it dumb, and you guarantee another disaster when the next storm comes. New Orleans is just another disaster waiting to happen as they choose to listen to the bartenders and musicians instead of the scientists and engineers, and they rebuilt it below sea level. Why? Because they can send the bill for it off to some nameless, faceless people who have no say in the matter. As they say, you can't fix stupid. Over reliance on the central socialist gubmint to do everything for you is just stupid.
The GOP TeaLoonies have the Fix, Drill baby Drill !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Here is my plan for recovery from mega storms....
Congress needs to decide on which foreign aid handout to cut and divert that money to taking care of business at home.
That's what we as responsible adults have to do. If a storm comes up and a tree falls on your roof, the insurance company dances around on paying up or if you don't have coverage, but you have to fix the roof to protect your family from the elements, you divert the money from that vacation you wanted to take, or from that new car you wanted to buy, or from that new central HC system you should update but will have to wait another year or so.
You take from what you have available somewhere else, you don't go to the basement and crank up the memograph machine and print more money, and you don't "borrow" what you know you will never be able to repay.
Time to cut back on foreign aid.
The problem which is overlooked, is the problem of money solves everything. It doesn't. So many people, are displaced from their homes because their home were damaged, correct? The government sends a check. The problem still remains, no housing to move into. The closest available housing which is affordable is too distant from one's work, to make the drive to work and back not economically feasible for the worker.
Thus relocating from a storm disaster, means not only housing issues, but job issues in the new area the individuals were relocated too. Since the storm (Sandy) was massive in geographical terms, the move to find housing might also force the displaced to adjust to a new economic wage and benefit package standard, social service availability, and etc. The government financial aid package for storm related population moves is not accommodating these realities. Building back the storm damaged areas also means a new type of resident moving in, those which can afford the newly remodeled real-estate, new property tax base, and etc.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the money was for debris removal, restoring/rebuilding infrastructure, and housing assistance until the homeowners can rebuild. Everyone is talking about the government rebuilding the houses but I have seen news reports on people complaining about getting kicked out of FEMA trailers before they could afford to finish rebuilding.
In many areas that were hit by Sandy, houses were in, on or against each other so getting someone's insurance to pay to remove it is probably impossible. Do you expect the insurance agents to agree to which debris came from which house? It makes more sense to have FEMA involved because they do this all the time and have access to the equipment, can work with EPA on which debris can be landfilled and which can't, and can assist residents until they can rebuild. Otherwise, each state would have to go out and purchase trailers to house the displaced, obtain the large equipment needed to remove this level of debris and, be sure of exactly where the disasters are going to hit so they can place their disaster response infrastructure out of harms way. (offices and such that organize the response.)
As for rebuilding too close to the water, the government could draw a line in the sand(or soil if it's rivers) and tell communities we will help with your needs up to this line. If communities build on the other side they can be solely responsible for the debris and infrastructure costs on that side. That would encourage city planners to think before building in those areas.
I wish, Witty One, that it was so. We had a flood in the next county this summer. Bad for those in it. I know a guy who had no damge, water came to within 3 ft of his door. Many neighbors did get flooded. FEMA came and wrote checks to people. He said there were people like him, with no damage, bragging they got $30k from the FEMA rep as she went through the neighborhood. They said she never went to their house - just wrote a check from her claims station (vehicle). Also, Fed checks were givien to people who had no insurance, since they were hurting and all. Yes the Feds do give moeny out to individual homeowners for their losses. IT's the moral hazard problem. Some people pay premiums for the flood insurance, others don't. Both get paid by the Feds. ONe as an insurance claim, the other gets a gift because they are needy -. Crazy, huh ?
Well, duh! Suck it up and pay for it. If taxes need to be raised for storm recovery then raise 'em. Don't whine about it. Just do it. There are folks in the northeast who are homeless. Give 'em some of that tax money to stay in a hotel until their homes can be replaced. Idiots just want to whine, Suck it up and take care of the folks.
Don't whine about it!!!
.
But GOP is stuck with its dogma. Unfortunately, the Republicans would rather have a big government (pig brother) to spy on you since 9/11, but never a strong government to do good.
If there's money left over after we've sent money to Israel, Africa, and S America to help fund this that and the other, and after they've funded "the arts", Obama will be happy to send what's left over to the storm areas, but first things first.
A lot of people from Katrina are still waiting for their money to rebuild the last time I heard, the money instead was spent on other things according to articles I have read.
I say give money to the poor and screw the rest.
hey, Texan, what do you care? Many of you have already petitioned for secession anyway..but you won't get it...we won't allow you to be independent and slip to become a Third World country. We will share wealth with you, although you don't want. All the red states get more federal money than blue states for every dollar paid in taxes, but red states are more anti-government than blue states..what a shame. That's why we're blue states..we are all blue with sadness and anger.
Paul,
You are right, a lot of idiots took there aid and blew it on bourbon street. You can't fix stupid. But you can't let stupid people ruin the lives of the "good" people. Unfortunately, there's no way to know the stupid from the not-stupid until it's too late.
STexan, you do realize that Galveston alone has rec'd over 2 billion in federal dollars for storm recovery? And how about the federal money being spent for the "Ike Dike"?
Insurance company's don't like payouts, they just want your money, the law is rigged for them !!!
Malcontent says: There are folks in the northeast who are homeless. Give 'em some of that tax money.
You should send a check to a national charity helping those folks. I did- so I'm not talking out of school. All people everywhere should learn what thier local hazards are and tax themselves to both get ready for it and to recover from it. The idea of taxing somebody far away so you don't have to to it yourself is a major cause of all our disfunction and debt at local and federal level.
Hey Tex -- it was less that 2 years ago that your moron governor was whining because the feds where't coming up with enough money to fight the fires in your state. Yep -- you guys are all for small government -- until YOU need government.
i'm confused...why does the whole country pay for the damages.shouldn't it be up to each state involved.?? plus doesn't ins cover most of the cost?? don't the states have ins coverage for events like this??
Insurance helps some people, government subsidizes the insurance companies. However, people lose things during storms that money can never replace. The government is more than happy to take our money so, why shouldn't they clean up the mess? Sell off the Navy (the ships, not the people) to the Saudis and use the money to pay for the damage Sandy caused.
We are the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. Our UNION gives us strength to face adversity, be it from nature or an outside force. Unfortunately the people who cry the loudest against paying for our shared burden, seem to be the ones most in need.
Mike, the trio of NY, NJ, and Conn are the three states in the worst fiscal shape according to a Nov 13th article. They have no money to spend and they are running a budget deficit. What makes matters a lot worse is the fact that many people did not have insurance on their property. So instead of their insurer paying for the cleanup and repair, they have to go begging to the state and Federal governments for it...even though it is not their responsibility. But we have made it so easy for the idiots of the world to have someone else pay for their shortsightedness that it's no great surprise that there isn't enough money to cover the cost...
Tim...I believe it is a tossup at this point between California and New York. New York is still paying bills from 9-11 and the Feds SHOULD pick up the bill for that. Cali has issues with their voters taking all the taxes down to nothing when Hollywood generates BILLIONS in profits and then every year they whine about losing million dollar homes to Canyon wildfires and floods taking homes down the hills and cliffs. They need to stop putting the homes in harms way for starters.
Cali was high up in that article too, Davey. So was Illinois. I agree with you though on Cali.
The TeaLoonies in Congress say we are here to Help ?????????????????????????????????????
Dan, "Except the Mid west states handle the problem themselves".
How about the latest drought in the West and the Midwest? I remember the federal coffers opening up to help you all out there. It's OK to give handouts to those in the midwest, you self reliant types, huh?, but trash other parts of the country that need help too. Great American you are.
Many people have decided not to carry inurance. They have been watching for many years other people getting money from the gubmint because they did not have insurance. So they quietly cancel their policies if they ever had one. If and when they get clobbered they expect to receive the same treatment they saw other people get. Actually there is a fair logic in that thinking. The gubmint bureaucrats are pleased to grow their empire by filling the demand of the people who want more givien to them. Unfortunately, it is very bad news for the Federal taxpayers. Before you can deliver money to the victims you first have pay hundreds of thousands of gubmint employees federal wages and benefits. Charities will use volunteers organized by a modestly paid staffer. The Feds use well paid Fed employees paid by very well paid managers - lots of them. And when there is no disaster they are all getting paid to think about it.
The best "mitigation" is to limit carbon emissions and prevent even greater extremes. The costs of adaptation (e.g. building sea walls which may fail anyway) to real mitigation is 6 to 1. The most painless form of mitigation is the carbon fee and dividend (carbon tax) which a. can be used to lower other taxes, support renewables research, lower the deficit, repair infrastructure, etc. and b. shift the nation's energy choices to low carbon energy to reduce by 80% the current emissions - by 2080.
If we don't mitigate, there is no amount of FEMA money, no brilliant legislation, no citizen "points of light" than can put Humpty Dumpty together again. We have only a few years to wake up. Please WTFU.
Yes, well at least I am glad to see no that Republican Governors are coming in looking for Federal Assistance -- Oh wait a minute, that's not correct either, is it. Sorry Gov'nor. Chrisite, better re-route your calls for help to Mr. Grover Norquist -- I am sure he can tell you how much better off you will be WITHOIUT that useless Federal money.
Sorry but Christie handled this like a true gentleman... he doesn't support the Dem's, but he had the guts to thank Obama for coming to the state and now it's costing him with the GOP.... Heck, I could even vote for Twinkie for President... the guy has class!
Christie may be a Repub, but his legislature isn't, and Christie AND the legislature have managed to run NJ into the ground fiscally. They have no money because they didn't BEFORE the storm hit...just like NY and Conn. All three states are broke...
NJ was in bad shape before Christie was elected, that's the issue that got him elected and he's done a great job getting things under control. It was Corzine and his predecessors that ruined the state... before he took over and ruined the investment firm MF Global. Now he's going to jail. Big Obama supporter however.
hey NORM... don't go throwing stones...remember Ken Lay and the Enron gang and then we get TYCO and after that we still are providing free housing and medical for the 50 billion dollar former head of the Stock exchange.... the fact a crook is a-crook is true but you still got us out criminaled by 3 to 1.
The Greedy Insurance Company's are Controlled by the 1% and the Rules are setup by them for them !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When are people going to wake up and accept some responsibility for building on unsuitable lands? NO barrier reef, NO sand dune, NO flood zone should ever have been developed. Now, those same people expect the rest of the taxpayers to bail them out. Tornadoes are the only "natural" disaster for which you cannot plan proper building methods because there is NO predictability to them. Even earthquakes have building techniques now available to protect the structure (proper foundations, interlocked with walls and roofs, etc. and this is the same necessary technique for hurricanes.) If we don't correct our building/zoning codes to prohibit construction in zones that are unsuited to safe construction, then we can expect huge annual increases in the cost of local, state, and federal financial assistance to recover from the disasters that we, in our greed, have helped to create (climate change or whatever term you want to use for it.)
If the government would save all the money they waste on wars and solyndras and salaries and Acorns and all that other BS, it really wouldn't be as bad. Real people plan for emergencies. The government doesn't plan for the future.
Between hurricanes that affect all states from Texas to Maine, tornadoes in the the South East and Midwest, Earthquakes on the west coast and Alaska, I'm not sure your plan would work.
"Real People"??? Have you planned for surviving the total loss of your home and all of your possessions? Or do you have a mortgage payment that you couldn't afford to still make if you lost your home because your home insurance didn't cover the total replacement cost of all of your losses PLUS the outstanding mortgage. That is where most people make their "insurance" mistake. And the insurance companies know that when they write the policies. They line their pocket with no intention of ever covering your total loss (even after they raise your premiums with each claim you make.) And stop including ACORN in your accusations. More money is wasted on Congressional PORK than was ever given to that organization for their community organizing efforts. Government waste? Yes, it exists at every level of government from the local level to the federal level, and a lot of that waste starts right with the businesses that contract products and services to the government agencies (overprice the product/service and make a "killing" is the attitude of too many businesses dealing with government, and it starts at the top with the Military/Industrial Complex that Eisenhower warned us to beware.)
@Matt. Earthquakes can happen anywhere in the US and its territories, not just the west coast and Alaska (which is part of the west coast.) There are modern building techniques as I noted above for structures to survive both earthquakes and hurricanes.
Well, hoss, I own all my "stuff". I don't have a mortgage. Nobody can ever prepare for losing everything, but as long as there is life, there is hope. Nothing material on this Earth matters to me. If all my "stuff" is gone tomorrow, so be it. I ain't gonna whine about it, but my wife will.
So sorry to offend an Acorn supporter, it was just an example of money the government shouldn't be spending.
When someone like Malcontented spouts off Acorn and Solyndra, it is further proof to many of us that they really have no idea what they are talking about.
Gosh, gee, Malcontented, you did mention war, but how about those TWO UNFUNDED WARS that will continue to haunt us financially(not to mention the physical and emotional scars on our military heroes) for decades to come? You know, the ones that were started due to very misleading, oh hell, very big lies that were told(by the guys running things at the time, you know, Bush and Cheney) to get everyone to vote yes, let's go to war?! The failure of Solyndra was a mere pittance when you compare that to the financial burden that two unfunded wars is costing us. Hell, there is no comparison.
Absolutely no comparision at all AGirl, but it is still wastful spending. For the cost of two totally useless wars we could pay for everything Sandy destroyed many times over. But, the amount doesn't have anything to do with it being wasteful. But that money is gone, kinda, and we have to suck up this disaster and pay for it. If I had my way, I'd sell all those useless Nuclear warheads to the folks in the mid-east and spend the money on the people who live here.
Yes, I think many of us can all agree that there is alot of wasteful spending on the state and federal levels. I didn't know up until a just a few years ago that when each department gets their yearly budget that if at the end of the year they haven't spent every last cent, their department is subjected to a reduced budget, so each department does its best to spend it all even if they don't need something. That is not something that is original to this current administration, this is just what goes on. It is completely wasteful. The only power that any of us really has over them is our vote, otherwise the fate of our country is in the politicians' hands.
For the record, I do not believe that Solyndra was a waste. They came up a very innovative product, but it just happened at a time when people could not afford their new style of solar energy. That coupled with some poor management is really what did them in. But, unless we take a chance on innovation, we are being left behind in this global world. Governments all over the world know this and that is why governments like the United States continues to invest in its people. We must strive to stay in the number one position.
Alaska Girl - Solyndra, like a lot of "alternative energy" companies, was a failure because they couldn't provide a useful product at a marketable price. All they did basically was to develop a more expensive way to harness solar power than current conventional methods. Yes, they did have poor management, but that only quickened their destiny. It didn't create it.
It should be noted that private funding sources quickly dried up before the Feds gave them their 500 million, which was a pretty sure sign that they didn't have anything worth investing in. The return on Federal invested dollars is brutally horrible...
Insurance Company's take in Billions & Billions and pay out Peanuts, wow-someone is living high on the hog !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If you build on a delta, or the Outer Banks or the beach, or close to a river, sooner or later you ARE GOING TO BE AFFECTED by water. Here in land locked Iowa we have been drowned out with floods. People who built their houses on a flood plain were bailed out more than once. In '93 and 2008 it happened. People couldn't get insurance again if they kept building near the water. In a neighboring town they were told by the government you can have money to build on higher ground or build where you are, but you will not be bailed out again after this. We all choose to live where we live. Everyone should get one bail out and then no more if they choose to live on the beach! There are spaces on the Outer Banks in N.C. that had homes and they were wiped out by hurricanes. Personally I would much rather see a pristine untouched beach that everyone can enjoy than see houses stacked one on the other with over-development! Reclaim the ocean front as it should be, and remember we all make our own choices where we live. New Orleans would have been spared from flooding if the whole delta had been left as marshland. The hurricane would have discipated over the marshes and then not had such a huge catastrophic effect. When you build below sealevel, what do you expect? Cruel but honest.
All the southern states are simple... they want to form their own country or whatever.... let them sink, burn or whatever floats their boat...and if any of you want to see what a "real" hurricane can do... Google the Galveston Hurricane.
With the exception of the New Orleans whiners, the south can deal with her storms. Of course, it takes some federal aid but southerners come together during a crisis and things get better. Seems like those northeasterners just want to hem-haw around while someone else takes care of the problem. I don't really care how it gets done, but the government should be doing a better job.
MAL, who am I to argue with your screen name??? You know what, maybe you goobers down in the land of Dixie would be happier on your own? After all, the South leads the nation in poverty, illiteracy, teenage pregnancies, religious and sexual intolerance, lack of health care for millions of it's citizens. Yep, you folks sure do know how to run a railroad.
And as for your claim that you an deal with storms all by your lonesome, I'll remind you the next time there is a crisis from either nature or man made.
Yep, ozzie, after those northern aggressors came down here and took our slaves away, there just wsn't nothing to live for anymore. So, we just sit around and collect government subsidies.
"And as for your claim that you an deal with storms all by your lonesome, I'll remind you the next time there is a crisis from either nature or man made."
"Of course, it takes some federal aid but southerners come together during a crisis and things get better."
Check out that last line, oz. Did I not mention fed assistance?
I live in the South. Can't wait to leave in May. So many delusional people that refuse to even entertain the idea that maybe they just aren't doing somethings the correct way. That's why nothing ever, ever gets done down here.
Matt, there's an old saying about the grass being greener. There are delusional people everywhere. And I'm not sure what you mean when you say nothing gets done.
You can't boycott the Insurance Industry because they made it Law forcing Americans to buy into their Monopoly !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Those were the summer storms...wait for the winter storms...they should be doozies
Wonder how many Righties effected by the storm will be bitching about the evil influence of "Big Government" and reject it all in the name of States Rights???
The fact is, nobody loves welfare more than the Right, they simply have other priorities than those of helping the average American. Just mention the slightest cut in "defense" spending and listen to them howl. Then when they leave Congress they land plum jobs with the very contractors they protected while in office.
National defense is not welfare Boy. It is one of the few things that the Constitution expressly gives the Federal government instruction to do. Unlike welfare it provides jobs, technical training and learning, supports a huge number of union jobs (I thought Democraps liked that), and creates technological advances that become useful for the country at large (like the very internet you are using now, assuming you know Al Gore didn't invent it).
As for your "plum jobs" comment, I have to laugh. You know damn good and well that all politicians have those jobs waiting for them if they want them. To make it sound like it is just the GOP with that deal is completely dishonest and you know it.
Tim. Did you see the information on the 100 mile traffic jam outside of Moscow? Seems that it has it's roots in Soviet Era defense spending at the costs of re-investing in infrastructure. Personally, I do not want to live in a third world country because everyone feels so much safer with that latest state of the art Aircraft Carrier.
What this article and too many politicians fail to realize or accept is that to use per capita income for the entire US population is a real error, since the per capita income for the middle/lower classes have been on a huge decline while the wealthy per capita income has been on a huge rise since Reagan was elected to office. It creates a real imbalance in how such disasters are determined.
The same goes for the COLA for both Social Security and Medicare. If these two COLA's were calculated on the same formula as all other wage calculations, there would be a much larger increase in each of these COLA's each year. And right now, the increase in Medicare premiums far outweighs any increase in the COLA (1.7% for 2013 according to the information sent out to SS recipients a couple of months ago.) SS COLA does not take into consideration some of the most basic expenses of the elderly in making those calculations.
If you live on the coast, you should be able to fend for yourself. This storm has no importance to the country and hence is not the responsibility of anyone other than the property owners (who should have insurance) or the states affected.
Let's start putting the burden of costs back on the fools who have property in obvious danger zones and demand that they pay for their own recovery!
LASER, Wait, don't tell me, you must be that new breed of "Compassionate Conservative" right fella???
The entire island of Manhattan is close to the ocean not to mention the rest of New York City. Is it your contention that anyone within 20 miles of the sea is on their own? The people of Staten Island are primarily working class people who have lived there all their lives. They are not rich folks building mansion on Nantucket or the Vineyard, that is another case entirely.
I live on a barrier island in a house that is over 120 years old. Of all the hurricanes to make landfall north of Cape Hatteras, Sandy's storm surge was the highest of any storm on record. On top of that we had a high tide with a full moon. We had ocean water in places where it had never reached before.
Laser, laser, laser,
That's just.......
People gotta eat.......
That's all!
Malcontent can lick my hind end.
We can spend trillions waging wars --but, can't afford to help our own people at home?
Uh, now you're catching on my friend. Blowing up things and people is so much more fun than the numbing work of cleaning up devastated communities.
In honor of those who lost everything to Storm Sandy, the Pentagoon
will name the next $60Billion nuclear attack submarine the 'USS Sandy'.
Makes everyone happy, right?.......
Wonder how long it will take before Cantor and DeMint demand $80B in cuts to offset the expenditures???
The Dems have already said that they don't think the 80B should be offset by other cuts...because what's a little more budget deficit this year and a little more debt for our kids to pay off, right woodbutcher? Screw the next generation, let's give money to the three worst run states fiscally speakng to clean up all that mess that no one had insured. Great idea...
Maybe we should quit bailing out the rich people who can afford those beach front homes. Let these folks assume the risk or have the insurance companies jack up their rates for buildings on the beach and in flood zones.
In related news the world continues building more coal burning electrical generators. Thus insuring climate change will continue and grow worse.
I know, I know. It just costs too much to protect the environment. But what is the cost of doing nothing? Much, much higher. Short sightedness and greed will be the end of civilization as we know it.
You might be right BooCoo.
Storms shouldn't be a problem for the government. All congress has to do is tell all the Ambassadors that there are no funds for the next few years for them to GIVE AWAY like the $760 million to help rebuild Cairo's 'SEWERSYSTEM". This "cultural" fund is nothing but a big joke. It's this program and many others just like it that is costing this country big time. When will our paid politicians realize we can't be ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE.
Another, no brainer. "No Money, no honey."
Don't re-build residential areas so close to the shores! Just because Granddad left the house to your father who left the house to you doesn't mean you have a right.
I doubt the stupidity will end!!!!!!!!!!!!
1. the constant screaming about federal TAXES. Every state has raised REVENUE with either fees or taxes as federal support for everything from education to roads is cut!!
I love the Idea that Jan Brewer, Rick Perry and other Tea Party heroes get to decide who gets to vote or have insurance, health care, what schools get funding, and local school boards in red decide the earth was formed 6000 years ago, God will not allow global warming to harm Christians, sex education is harming the youth and which founding fathers beliefs should be taught in school.
Even the "ONE NATION" pledge is not as important as a Grover no tax pledge!
Right wing states take more than they give to the federal budget and give lowest quality of roads,education and healthcare back to the nation.
As a simple example. I live in Texas where every time a used car is sold by a private party it is taxed at market value and paid registration is not transferable so a 1000.00 used car from the guy next door with current plates will cost 200.00 in fees or 20% tax. Yes there is no state income tax but schools have poor funding except high income districts.
Oh ya we had wild fires and begged for federal money as did Arizona, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, North and south Carolina, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas.and the list goes on as climate change that they all say does not exist gets more dramatic.
As the ability to do any critical thinking declines across the public in general and is exemplified by the politicians we can only decline as a nation!!!!!!!
Chris Christie had balls asking for 100 percent for rebuilding Jersey. If he and his tax cutting cronies hadn't done that, maybe his state would have more money to ante in. I could see 80 percent Fed match, but no more. Hey, the US has a budget they want to cut too, Gov. Christie!
Funny isn't it? On the other side both NY and Conn are broke because they spent too much and are running on deficits. They don't have the dough either.
NY, NJ, and Conn are, fiscally speaking, the three worst run states according to a November 13th article by the Wall Street Journal.
Makes we wonder why you would want to take the side of either one...
ahhh, yes. The mantra of the Right, Industry, and the US government for the past 30 years... "It's too expensive to do anything about global warming. It will harm the economy." Looks like there is another saying they ignored... you can pay a little now, or pay a lot later. Well, it's later. You are and will be paying for it.
Obama is the one who just said he won't do anything about carbon emissions if it costs jobs...which means he won't do nothing because there is no way to NOT impact jobs when dealing with global warming.
Both sides are to blame for inaction on the global warming front David. Keep it real please and try telling the truth...
Tim that was about the political climate in Washington but raised fuel economy standards as well as trying to push renewable s like wind and solar. YES one Bush funded solar did fail but does "Bush" sponsored say enough or not. We now have an electric and hybrid explosion now in the market so there is some progress. Not that I think it is enough!!
No one side keeps denying climate change because the big carbon industry known as the oil companies will not pay for their reelections.
What's wrong, Tim? The truth hurt? Is Obama not part of the Government? Maybe you need a dose of truth.
The excuse of impacting jobs is complete bull$it. New industries will grow out of alternative energy efforts and with that, jobs. Old jobs will go away, new jobs will take their place. If alternative energy got as much Gov support as the oil industry has had in the past 100 years, we'd all be in a much better place and there would be plenty of jobs to be found there.
Let's be clear... no Republican has pushed for taking action to mitigate AGW or its effects. Plenty of Democrats have and do. The Government as whole has not taken action because they can't agree on anything except to disagree on everything.
The Dems haven't done anything about global warming. They've promised and pushed and had lovely sound bites (just like the Repubs on abortion for example), but they haven't passed anything meaningful. It's one of those oft-promised but never delivered platforms that both parties have many of.
New industries will eventually grow out of alternative energies, after all the coal and gas and oil are used up. Because those will always be the cheapest energy alternatives around, and the world will go with those first. Makes economic sense. Doesn't to a thing to help global warming, but that's reality.
All the government support in the world will not make solar/wind/ethanol cheaper than oil. Oil is also used for way too many things (eneregy, plastics, medicine, lubricants, etc). It is possibly the most valuable commodity the world has ever seen.
It's easy . Raise the highest tax bracket back to 50%
Great idea, except that you can't raise enough money that way. But, hey, why bring math into this discussion...
Go back to what it was under Reagan? The Republicans, no matter how much they idolize Reagan, would never go for that.
why not 90% which gave the biggest growth history in the 50s and 60s and was the norm after the depression. and yes the math could work if defense was the same percent of GDP as it was in the 50s and 60s. as well as an effective corporate rate to what it was then.
And I suppose you want wages to go back to the level of the 50's and 60's.
Tim The average right now that individuals in the 1% alone is 30%. They pay 37% of the federal income taxes. Thats just the 1 percent.
Just figuring that if we took a wealth factor, since the 1% have a288times more wealth on average than the 57,000 median income we could come pretty close with that. Add in a transaction or Robin Hood tax for every Wall Street transaction. This country would be back on its feet, and the wealthy would have less of a loss than they did in2009.
I keep posting this link and as usual the B. S. from the re-writers of history have won over much of the public. Your arguments are sound. But learning from history and thinking a little out of the box is not allowed in dumbed down American politicians and general public.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/business/questions-raised-on-withdrawal-of-congressional-research-services-report-on-tax-rates.html?ref=business&_r=0
If there's any money sitting in the global warming hoax account, transfer that out. Otherwise we're broke. So solly!!!
the entire GOP is a giant hoax, too!
Crawl back into your pig pen.. What do you want, the govt. to pay for everything..? You are a dumb pig..Obama is just using this as an excuse.. He spent more than any cuts will come close to.. Use your brain not your fat ass.. This is just another way the Media is brainwashing you, getting you to side with Washington.. Are you really that stupid PIG... How about Obama doesnt fly around and spend our money on golf games and travel.. That money can be used , it would pay for alot of it.. What does he spend in fuel for that freaking plane he uses so much? How about the suits and dresses.. Designer of course.. Tell him to stay in Washington and play President.. Pig Pig