Romney wants to increase war/defense budget by $2.1 trillion; but wants to slash FEMA funding for Hurricane victims
Monday, October 29th, 2012What it amounts to is reasonable thinking and common sense that is in the best interest of Americans and the United States of America.
Romney wants to increase war and Defense Budget by $2.1 trillion even though our military did not ask for it.
It doesn’t make sense to increase the war / defense budget by $2.1 trilllion dollars — especially when our military did not ask for the increase to begin with. It is time to focus on Homeland issues, and Romney is on the record for wanting to increase the Defense War budget by $2.1 trillion dollarseven though our military didn’t ask for it.
That said, how is Mitt Romney going to explain his wanting to increase the defense war budget by $2.1 trillion, but on the other hand, can’t find it in his heart to keep FEMA going? He want to privatize it when he knows darn well that these Wall Street ‘fat cats’ are responsible for the Housing crash that helped spiral our U.S. economy into a recession during the Bush years.
Bottom line?
If we have $2.1 trillion to fund wars, we sure as hell should have money to fund hurting Americans here in our Homeland. Protecting what is here at home is part of the national security agenda.
From the WAPOST:
Hurricane Sandy’s battering of the East Coast is expected to produce historic rainfall totals, billions of dollars in damage and wholesale disruptions to the close presidential race. The storm could also provide a moment of sharp contrast between President Obama and Mitt Romney and how their different ideas of governing apply to the federal response to large-scale disasters.
Obama has been aggressive about bolstering the federal government’s capability to respond to disasters, while his Republican challenger believes states should be the primary responders in these situations and has suggested that disaster response could be privatized.
More from Mother Jones:
Watch: Romney Proposes Gutting or Privatizing FEMA, Leaving Disaster Relief to States
Update, October 29, 12:29 a.m. EST: With Hurricane Sandy set to make landfall in the Mid-Atlantic, Mitt Romney’s policies for federal emergency management seem as relevant as ever. And the candidate’s budget, as described below, isn’t the only indication Romney would slash funding: As the Huffington Post‘s Ryan Grim noted, the presidential candidate suggested during a GOP primary debate that he would diminish the agency’s role and leave responsibility for helping imperiled Americans to the states:
Here is the transcript:
Here’s a transcript of the snip.
KING: What else, Governor Romney? You’ve been a chief executive of a state. I was just in Joplin, Missouri. I’ve been in Mississippi and Louisiana and Tennessee and other communities dealing with whether it’s the tornadoes, the flooding, and worse. FEMA is about to run out of money, and there are some people who say do it on a case-by-case basis and some people who say, you know, maybe we’re learning a lesson here that the states should take on more of this role. How do you deal with something like that?ROMNEY: Absolutely. Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that’s the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that’s even better.
Instead of thinking in the federal budget, what we should cut—we should ask ourselves the opposite question. What should we keep? We should take all of what we’re doing at the federal level and say, what are the things we’re doing that we don’t have to do? And those things we’ve got to stop doing, because we’re borrowing $1.6 trillion more this year than we’re taking in. We cannot…
KING: Including disaster relief, though?
ROMNEY: We cannot—we cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids. It is simply immoral, in my view, for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids, knowing full well that we’ll all be dead and gone before it’s paid off. It makes no sense at all. [emphasis added]
