Don't expect to hear this from any but a few freedom-loving members of the House, whose opinions no doubt will be relegated to the written record rather than articulated in real-time floor debate, but: The federal government has no role to play under the Constitution in the reconstruction of the Gulf Coast.
Just wish those in Washington, no matter what party they belong to, would understand this.
bump
Or any other place hit by a natural disaster.
That's our money. And Congress is refusing to cut waste. I think we should all contact our legislators and voice our displeasure about this.
A whole lot a wishin' and a hopin' goin' on here these days.
What with all the Hatin' being expressed by the empty-handed (and headed) Dems, all those hopeful yearnings sure seem unrealistic.
With no other agenda,save for hatred, what are the poor Democrats expected to do but jawbone?
If the President had cut spending early on, the way he cut taxes (8.1%), fiscal conservatives would be jumping for joy. Most would have accepted an across the board freeze. While tax cuts are part of a sound fiscal policy, if you don't cut spending some future Democratic president could use that as an impetus to raise taxes. In fact, this is exactly what occured during Bill Clinton's first term. Reagan held down social welfare and entitlement spending and handed things off to GHWBush. After his first year in office Bush41 became fiscally irresponsible. Not only did social welfare and entitlement spending go up, so did taxes. Probably more then half of the Bush43 tax cuts were neeeded to offset the Clinton tax increases.
Just skimmed through my copy of U.S. Constitution and I didn't see anything about Congress being required to pass appropriations to pay for Natural Disaster recovery.
I think the title says it all. Wish I had thought of it ...
Most of them already know this. Unfortunately, most voters either don't know, or disagree. They're the ones who need an attitude adustment.
It just doesn't make sense. Why spend $200 plus billion for a city that only had 500,000 people. It is equivalent to spending over $1,000,000 on every family. It is crazy.
Wow, I just likened President Bush to FDR two days ago. Maybe I should have written this article.
I don't agree with this. Not because of blind Bush allegiance, but because of ONE commitment that Bush made. He noted after his address and commitment to rebuild New Orleans that the money would come from reductions in government spending.
IF Bush keeps his word on this one, it will be the biggest anti-Socialist blow in the last 60 years. This will be the FIRST TIME in America's 40+ year socialist history that non-disaster related government spending was reduced.
It spells a high-water mark that may be the beginning of the end for the rabid socialists, IF Bush keeps his word to offset the rebuilding costs by reducing government spending.
ANTI-DNC Web Portal at ---> http://www.noDNC.com
Walter Williams' Wisdom of the Month
President Grover Cleveland's Respect for the Constitution"I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and the duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevailing tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that though the people support the Government the Government should not support the people.
"The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood."
-- President Grover Cleveland, upon vetoing a bill appropriating money to aid drought-stricken farmers in Texas [February 16, 1887]
Beyond search and rescue, there's no proper role for the Federal government in the reconstruction following a hurricane. Are the victims of Rita going to get debit cards? Will there be federal repair of the Galveston seawall? How about the victims of hurricanes past?
Article the first [Not Ratified]
After the first enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor more than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons.
That's the first article in the BOR, as submitted. Even the blind can understand that we are not represented when one person "represents" over 500,000 citizens.
.....The federal government has no role to play under the Constitution in the reconstruction of the Gulf Coast......
Interstate commerce will be curtailed as a result of infrastructure loss. The federal infrastructure must be returned to working order.
We should not have to pay for this, but we will.
Well... I cannot find it on the main page, in the archives or with a search.