As we all know by now, unfortunately, we had another unexpected natural
disaster last week, this time in a vast multi-state reach, covering much of the
Midwest and into parts of Tennessee. This was a deadly storm that took many
lives resulting in tear jerking tragedies.
Like this heart wrenching story, where a 15
th month old survived
the initial trauma from being thrown by a twister into a nearby field. Her
entire family perished that day; both parents and two siblings. Sadly, she
suffered the same fate just a few days later. Or
like
this 36-year old mother, who lost both of her legs; in order to protect her
children.
The economic impact of this storm will be in the hundreds of millions, if
not approaching the billion dollar range when its all said and done. This will
require all hands on deck including those at FEMA. With that said, it appears,
like every Tornado and Hurricane season,
a
reporter (
or
I should say reporters), tap Congressman Dr Ron Paul on the shoulder to ask
him his view on the role of government in the event of natural disasters. This
is by no accident.
Dr Paul's response was already prerecorded and written on their notepad, all
the crossing of the t’s and dotting of the I’s was already done. That is
because Dr Paul’s consistency, can and will always allow, a lazy reporter to
get a cheap story that will attract buzz, with little effort in terms of leg
work. All they need him to do is go on record and their story is complete, a
Presidential candidate says something off the beaten path; It’s a win-win for
the reporter and his publisher.
Here is the problem with this.
Does Ron Paul believe FEMA should exist? No.
Does he believe in the federal government having a hands on role in natural
disasters? No.
Is FEMA one of the worst bureaucracies in government in terms of lack of
accountability and waste? YES.
Why does Dr Paul feel this way? Its because the constitution doesn’t
specifically allow for it to be funded… period. It’s that simple. So why do
they cherry pick this story? Because, asking him what role we have in building
up an empire then the subsequent invading of other country’s or
allowing the FED Reserve to manipulate interest rates, creating bubbles, isn’t a
story. Even though the amount of wealth, blood and treasure those “programs”
waste are astronomically higher and oh yeah; neither are written in the
constitution either (sorry neo-conservatives, what we have isn’t a defense, its
clearly offense).
Now, as Ron Paul has said many times, he has a prioritized pecking order in
which he would see programs and departments eliminated and/or trimmed down;
specifically aiming at the most costly and unconstitutional programs or
agencies we have. Do you know where FEMA would rank on that list?
First, you would have to look to see where FEMA's budget comes from and
that would be none other then Homeland Security. How fitting, an agency that
was created in 2002 overseeing another program that was initially funded and
created in 1979. Hardly constitutional and it fits the exact model and voting
record of the self described “defender of the constitution”, but I don’t want
to defeat my own point before I have even made it, so I will ignore that
tidbit.
Last year, FEMA spent about 13 Billion dollars. That is a big number but it
terms of our budget? Is it? It is roughly 0.003% of our budget. I would assume
clearly, Dr Paul would look elsewhere for the cuts. Why not start with the
national debt? Sure, we couldn’t pay off the 15 Trillion, but what about that
250 Billion interest payment on that debt? Imagine the savings if we actually
started to balance the budget annually?
Why not defense? The funding for defense,
as
I have reported numerous times, is outright offensive and hardly a defense
department. Its become a slush fund for big business and a "global force
for good", their words, not mine. There is not any justification i can
understand in fighting rouge terrorists who claim no allegiance to any nation
on principal, let alone for the amount we have spent, and to boot - in this
economic environment. The Department of Defense’s base budget has increased
81% nominally and 43% inflation adjusted
since 9-11. Throw in the Nuclear budget, and that spending itself has
increased 21% (inflation adjusted) since 9-11.
Imagine the savings if we knocked those back to the 2001 levels or at least
cut them in half? Or, what about the 1.3 Trillion spent in endless wars in the Middle
East? Surly we could find savings there. We are talking about
saving TRILLIONS, not to mention lives on both sides and actually using our defense
to I don’t know, maybe even defending our own borders? Now that is a novel
approach, eh? Using the National Guard to actually guard the nation, as opposed
to fighting wars across the globe? Who knows, maybe even providing assistance,
logistics and overall support for natural disasters would be available??
Quit these wars, bring the troops home. Let them spend their money
here. Let’s have a real stimulus package. We are up to our ears in debt.
Trillions and trillions of dollars and no end in sight for these wars. Then we
could take care of our people. Matter of fact, I have even proposed on many of
these programs that I don’t fully endorse because technically they are not
permissible under the constitution. But taking care of sick people and the
elderly and children I have nothing against that… IF YOU CUT THE SPENDING. -
Ron Paul
Those are places where Ron Paul would start. Even though FEMA is one of the worst bureaucracies
in terms of waste and inefficiency, its small potatoes in the grand scheme of
things, it would not be a top priority. Cutting FEMA or asking about the role
of food stamps surly create emotional responses, but in reality these issues
are not what is draining us. In a vacuum, those are philosophical questions
that would make an interesting debate… but we are living in a time where the
stakes couldn’t be higher as we fight to remain solvent, vacuum type thinking
is irrelevant. We need solutions to problems and until we start asking the
right questions, we will never have those debates; thus we will never fix the
real problems.
"Republicans are starting to realize you cant say “oh, lets cut
money for food stamps but not the food stamps for the military industrial
complex” because its just not going to work. - Ron Paul
So, the next time a reporter wants to tap Dr Paul on the shoulder for a
quick story when hurricane or tornado season comes around, he wont be around.
He is retiring form congress at 76 years old. He, as I write this, is well
behind on Super Tuesday; thus he will not be our next President. They will have
to find someone else to do the work for them. Maybe, they could go out and do
actual reporting. Cover the minutes from the FED meetings. Maybe go out and
find Stephanie Decker, the mother who lost her legs and bring her story to the
masses. Or maybe seek out
these
heroes from Branson Missouri, who
risked their lives in order to save others in the face of a deadly tornado or
the hundreds of others if not thousands from this past week who saved
lives.
There are plenty of stories waiting to be told, they just need to be reported. If
that’s not juicy enough, cover the destruction of our dollar and our nation
through crony capitalism, fractional reserve banking and a debt driven economy
that results in war and more spending (debt) to finance it. That, however, may
not make it past their publisher or editors desk. We can’t have people actually
learning how bad off things really are, now can we?