I noticed that you didn't provide examples of this FEMA privatization and what went wrong with it. It's hard to respond generalizations. But I guess you knew that didn't you?
There have been some articles posted in the last week on this. Google yields a lot of info too.
One example would be "
Why FEMA Was Missing in Action" from LATimes.
Exactly who drew down the armed forces? Maybe you should make yourself aware of the NG role in every war we have ever had. Do you just make this stuff up or what?
Largely, Clinton and the Gingrich congress. But as we finish the fifth budget cycle led by Bush (starting with FY 2002) and while the Congress was effectively controlled by Republicans, at some point we have to ask when Clinton's shortcomings cease to matter. Most people would say that time has already passed. Perhaps you think that maybe in 2020 we should finally hold Bush accountable for maintaining a proper balance between funding and provisioning the Guard vs. regular Army. Well, I would disagree.
The role of the national guard, particularly in operating beyond our boundaries, is largely a post-WW II story. Their role has been subject to much debate over the decades. Their deployment in Vietnam was somewhat controversial and involved our current president during his NG service. What you don't deal with here is the use of National Guard as though they are regular troops. Again, there are already announced hearings on this topic, probably yet this fall. Short-term Guard deployment overseas is not the issue. It's whether they're going to be there for 20-30 years. Many people feel that's a job for regular Army staff as it has largely been in Germany, Japan and South Korea. But if you hate the idea of your senators discussing it, you'd better start writing some letters because my senators have promised hearings and neither one cares much what anyone else thinks. Heh-heh, I guess they do represent me better than I sometimes give them credit for.
Do you want a refinery in your backyard? The chemical plants and refineries are where they are because that is where the oil is and LA, TX, MS and Al are the only states that would allow them to be built.
Well, you know so much I hate to interfere with your opinions but in
this thread I posted today, Congress will be holding hearings on increasing the number of refineries. I guess you think they'll be wasting their time. But I welcome this. So does Rush Limbaugh who's been plugging it pretty hard as a political opportunity for the GOP.
This is a political decision by the Congress not by the President, the Cat 3 vice Cat 5 decision was made decades ago in the Johnson administration, I believe. Money for Africa had nothing to do with this; if you don't understand that you don't have a clue.
I thought the current flood control plan was the one passed by Congress in '95. That's the impression I got from reading on the Corps' site and various articles. And my mention of the $15 billion for Africa (helping Third World with health issues) compared well with the estimates I've read of $15 billion for NOLA Cat 5 protection. But if you don't see the connection, you just don't.
A more apt comparison would be federal funds that went to construction elsewhere. The boondoggle in Boston can be multipled many times. Something else that might be looked at, if they really get down to the nitty gritty, is the quality of construction work on shoring up the levies. In the end, the levy that broke, should not have. Why?
"I noticed that you didn't provide examples of this FEMA privatization and what went wrong with it. It's hard to respond generalizations. But I guess you knew that didn't you?
There have been some articles posted in the last week on this. Google yields a lot of info too.
One example would be "Why FEMA Was Missiing in Action"."
"Three out of every four dollars the agency provides in local preparedness and first-responder grants go to terrorism-related activities, even though a recent Government Accountability Office report quotes local officials as saying what they really need is money to prepare for natural disasters and accidents."
Ooops - another casualty of the new Homeland Security.