Ron Paul speaks on Federal Aid for Tornado Victims.

by Staff March 6, 2012 18 Comments Politics

Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry

(ThyBlackMan.com) Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul is widely celebrated for his staunch support of libertarian principles. Ron Paul’s libertarian principles, however, often lead to statements that enrage critics. After tornadoes devastated Kentucky and Indiana Friday, Ron Paul said that he would not give federal aid to tornado victims.

“There is no such thing as federal money,” Ron Paul posited on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday, adding that “federal money is just what they steal from the states and steal from you and me.”

NPR reports that the death toll from Friday’s tornadoes has climbed to 39 people. The severe weather was the worst in southern Indiana. NPR’s Karen Grigsby cites a sheriff who said that Marysville, Indiana is “completely gone.”
Although damage estimates have not been completed, the cost of last week’s tornado outbreak will likely come to many millions of dollars. However, Ron Paul is adamant that federal aid should not be used to rebuild broken homes and businesses.

“The people who live in tornado alley, just as I live in hurricane alley, they should have insurance,” Ron Paul, who lives in Texas, argued.

The former Air Force surgeon, however, accepted the fact that the National Guard has an important role to play in aftermath of the tornado outbreak. The Texas congressman Ron Paul, however, slammed the Federal Emergency Management Agency for making a mess of disaster management.

“To say that any accident that happens in the country, send in FEMA, send in the money, the government has all this money—it is totally out of control and it’s not efficient,” Ron Paul professed.

Do you agree with Ron Paul on this matter? Shouldn’t we help out fellow citizens in time of need? Still nice to see Ron Paul voice his opinion even if it’s not popular.

Via AP

0 Shares

Flip

Karizmata says:
March 18, 2012 at 3:21 am
In my opinion, the Feds just want a piece of the pie. The American people are the most generous in the world. Charity is going worldwide from even poor and middle class families. There is a tax deduction for giving to these charity orgs and churches who are there to help needy, rebuild,and restore. But if the Feds are in charge of the money, and the medical treatments, and all other services, then there is no more tax break for the givers, their pocketbooks bleeding out for every state and local agency, some of those do not spend wisely and are not easily accountable. Let the people give of their own hearts, and give them a tax deduction dollar for dollar, just don’t let the Feds run everything like it’s a benevolent dictatorship.
Reply
Xavier says:
March 8, 2012 at 6:25 pm
Heres an interesting question: If FEMA and insurance companies didn’t provide help to people who live in areas consistently prone natural disasters…would they still be living there after the 17th time their house is destroyed?…
Reply
ARealEngineer says:
March 7, 2012 at 9:52 am
There are three levels of morality:
1. Those who give out of their own pocket to those in need
2. Those who do not give to those in need out of greed
3. Those who do not give to those in need and force others to give out of their pockets, while claiming to be the benevolent ones
The whole concept of a Federal Safety Net is preposterous. What if the government was broke? What if there were a string of natural disasters and there were no more resources for those last affected? Would a homeowner with a $300k home get money to rebuild if their home were destroyed?
Media has reinforced 2 misconceptions:
1. Those affected by natural disasters are poor and/or have no insurance
2. There are offices of infinitely well equipped, caring relief workers sitting Washington waiting for a call for help
Reply
faiz ahmed says:
March 7, 2012 at 5:07 am
What a stupid article. Seriously, are you trying to lose credibility? I believe that helping people should be done by choice. If the government did not take my hard earned money away from me, i would be in a position to make a donation for the victims. If the government and the banking system did not corrupt the market, my wages would be high enough for me to make a donation.
It is absurd, to force people to pay for others. Charity should be a choice not a mandatory expense. It is one thing to have your religion tell you to give charity. It is entirely different to have a government deny you full wages.
Reply
seldDisteuct says:
March 7, 2012 at 2:36 am
This is just another example of why this man needs to be I charge. He is no bull shit. You always know where he stands.
Reply
Cam says:
March 7, 2012 at 2:12 am
Attempts to use snippets of Dr. Paul in order to make him look bad is the biggest mistake a media outlet can do. The internet is powerful, and news organizations lose credibility every time they try to spin a story because the consumer can instantly research the accusations for themselves. No longer will yellow journalists trying to sell a headline make it in this business. They’re actually going to have to be *gasp* objective and honor the real truth! Or fear the repercussions of the consumers on these comment boxes
Reply
Nicholas says:
March 6, 2012 at 9:37 pm
How will we insure that food is safe and sanitary?
How will we insure that our airports and air traffic in operated safely?
Can the states protect our borders and seaports?
What about building and maintaining our roads and bridges?
Who should regulate our natural resources?
There are somethings a state or local communities cannot afford to operate without Federal subsidies like.
Reply
Mike Blevins says:
March 6, 2012 at 9:07 pm
Americans are so accustomed to depending on federal aid for practically everything, their brains go into vapor lock whenever somebody suggests another way of doing things.
People who choose to live in disaster prone areas should have sufficient insurance to cover potential losses and not depend on the feds to bail them out.
Reply
Eve Marie says:
March 6, 2012 at 6:38 pm
Furthermore, here is a good article written by Dr. Paul that helps explain it a little more in depth than the soundbite for the article.
This seems shocking to those who have never been subjected to the secondary disaster that is the arrival of FEMA on the scene of a catastrophic event. But explaining FEMA’s ineptness is not the same thing as saying no one should help people affected by disasters. Quite the opposite.
Victims of disasters should get any and all help possible, and there is virtually no limit to the generosity and compassion of good American people after devastation hits. One only need to remember the outpouring after Katrina to know this is true. FEMA, however, did more to get in the way of relief than to actually provide and facilitate it.
The examples are numerous. When the call was put out for volunteer firefighters, they volunteered by the thousands. It was FEMA, for reasons of control and bureaucratic ineptitude, who made sure they were not, in fact allowed to actually help. When a group of firefighters arrived from Houston, instead of being put immediately on the job, they were told to sit around and wait. After waiting for two days doing nothing, they were simply sent home. One thousand volunteer firefighters were sent to Atlanta to undergo sexual harassment training while fires actively raged in the city. The ones that remained through this stupidity were sent to escort the president around or to distribute fliers instead of putting out fires. Computer engineer Jack Harrison was told his skills were needed to rebuild technological infrastructure. After being given the runaround for about two weeks, he was misallocated as head of security on the cruise ship FEMA had leased, when he should have been using his skills to help. All manner of help was turned away or mismanaged by FEMA while people suffered and waited. Even the Red Cross had its hands tied by FEMA.
Continue reading: http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2011/09/ron-paul-explains-why-fema-shouldnt-help-with-wildfires-or-anything-else/
Reply
Eve Marie says:
March 6, 2012 at 6:35 pm
Do I agree with Ron Paul- YES!
Should we help others- YES!
What you are failing to mention is how inept FEMA is. If you need a reminder, just view some of the old Katrina videos on youtube. Ah, Bush’s fault, right? Well then, look at the recent wildfires in Texas. Thousands of volunteer fire fighters showed up to help and what did FEMA do? Get in the way!
Furthermore, living on the beach must be an awesome experience. Or living in Hawaii. But, I wouldn’t buy a house in either of them. They are high risk. More power to the people who chose to do so, but it’s not for me. I don’t want to have the threat of the ocean or hot lava wiping out my house. And, I don’t want to be forced to pay for someone living in a “high risk” area.
What is the answer? For local government to handle it and for American’s to keep being the kind and caring individuals that they are. Does anyone remember how much money we sent to Haiti? If the federal government would get out of our pockets and out of our way, we could do so much more. I don’t like being “forced” to help with my tax dollars. The federal government is to inept to handle them properly and responsibly.
Reply
AgentWu says:
March 6, 2012 at 5:55 pm
Here you guys go again in an attempt to make the only honest individual in Washington out to be a bad guy. This isn’t that hard to figure out. You as an individual have to bear some responsibility for your own life. If my pipes burst in my house, I am resposible for the damage and the repairs. If you live in a place prone for national disasters why should someone in another state have to pay to help you rebuild? What’s wrong with you buying insurance? How many times are the taxpayers expected to cover your losses? Why can’t this be a state issue? Ron Paul is merely applying common sense to this situation. That doesn’t make him heartless.
Reply
Mike says:
March 6, 2012 at 5:06 pm
The bottom line is it’s not the role of the Federal Gov’t. The Federal Gov’t does not have the authority be in the “Insurance Business.” Especially with the taxpayers paying the premiums. By giving Federal Aid, we encourage people to build and rebuild their homes in dangerous locations. If you owned a home on the Gulf Coast and it got wiped out by a hurricane, and the Gov’t gave you money to rebuild it, you’re more likely to rebuild right where it is; right in harms way only to probably be destroyed again. No worries though, if it get’s destroyed again. The Gov’t will give me more taxpayer money to rebuild!
Let Ron Paul end the Income Tax and people will have a lot more money to be charitable with. I gave $100 to Japan after their Earthquake. Millions of other Americans and folks from around the World did the same thing. There will be millions of dollars donated to Red Cross to address this recent tornado tragedy, and that’s the way these things should be handled; by private donations and not taxpayer funds.
Reply
Ryan says:
March 6, 2012 at 2:40 pm
You are creating a false dichotomy here. You are accusing Ron Paul of not wanting to help people in times of disaster because he doesn’t want to use tax payer money to pay for it. That does not mean he doesn’t want to help. That is a complete misrepresentation of his message. Of course he wants to help people in times of disaster. He just doesn’t believe using a bloated bureaucratic government agency is the most effective way of doing it. This is a typical accusation that gets thrown at Libertarians all the time. “Libertarians are heartless and don’t want to help people in times of need.” But we do want to help people. We desperately want to help people. We just want to hep people in a more effective way. Government is horribly ineffective at almost everything. Just look at it’s track record. We Libertarians do want to help people. We wouldn’t be so passionate about our beliefs if we didn’t truly believe it was for the betterment of society.
Reply
hermannr says:
March 6, 2012 at 1:57 pm
Should the Federal Government (FEMA) their regulations and their money be involved in a local dissaster? NO!
Do I car about my fellow citizen and would I help? Yes?
Should the National Guard be involved? Maybe, the National Guard is supposed to be the STATE milita, and if the STATE wishes to use their National Guard in disaster relief, that is up to the particular state, not the Federal Government.
Do I think the state should involve itself? Only if absolutely necessary.
Word for thought: Charity come from the Heart, not the government. Voluntarily helping other people in need is(at least was) one of the crowning glories of our great country. However, this is falling into “let the government do it” instead of “let’s help” or “how can I help”.
Reply
Anonymous says:
March 6, 2012 at 12:36 pm
If government got out of the way, gave people their own money back, and let them use it how they see fit, not only would we have the greatest economic expansion in history, but there would be plenty more money to go around for various purposes and much more efficient mechanisms of aid when disaster strikes. What’s more, people that are impacted can feel more confident knowing that they’re responsible for “self-rescue” with competent and efficient aid and assistance on the way and a strong National Guard that isn’t off fighting in some foreign war zone guarding some other nation’s interests. People can also feel more confident knowing that their efforts won’t be stymied when the federal government rolls in and starts throwing red tape around and doing more harm than good. Finally, everyone can stay out of a poisonous FEMA trailer and maybe stay at a Holiday Inn Express instead paid for by the exponential generosity of the American People rather than the exponential generosity of self-serving politicians posing for photo ops while taking credit for whatever they can manage to accomplish while wasting everyone else’s money
Reply
Brian says:
March 6, 2012 at 12:35 pm
Do you agree with Ron Paul on this matter? – Yes
Shouldn’t we help out fellow citizens in time of need? – Yes
He is not saying there should be no help. He is saying our current methods are wrong and highly inefficient. These people should get help through insurance and through their local government. Instead, the Federal Government has been taking money from everyone and then inefficiently distributes it back and we act like that is amazing of them.
and I also agree that the National Guard should help (if allowed by the state), but the Fed has no right to give them money.
Reply
Serge says:
March 6, 2012 at 12:09 pm
“Shouldn’t we help out fellow citizens in time of need?” yes
Should the goverment use the taxpayers money to aid? No
Reply
faceh says:
March 6, 2012 at 12:08 pm
Of course we should help them. But why would we expect the government to do it? Why not lean on private donations? Why not have a private disaster response agency which states can pay into or not, to protect their own people?
Americans aren’t heartless, they’ll give of their own accord. Morsel if their money isn’t snatched by the government.
Reply