Saturday, August 27, 2011

Ron Paul Protects Your Right to Hurricane Damage

In an interview on MSNBC, Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul said that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is a great contributor to the federal deficit and that we don't need its help with Hurricane Irene. Says he:

"We should be like 1900; we should be like 1940, 1950, 1960," Paul said. "I live on the Gulf Coast; we deal with hurricanes all the time. Galveston is in my district."

Well Ron, I live on the east coast (in 2011, by the by) where we have a few more people than Galveston (about 40 million more according to a, well, conservative estimate) and we don't have to contend with hurricanes or earthquakes on a regular basis, so any help we can get from FEMA would be appreciated.

And in case you haven't noticed, Ron, New Jersey, along with most other states along the non-Galveston axis, have severe budget problems that would preclude it from providing the kind of help that might be necessary, given that this hurricane could cause catastrophic damage. I appreciate your wanting me to have the freedom to my wreckage and ruin, though.

This is Exhibit A in the case against the anti-government radicals who believe that the states should pay for services they can't afford. It's also a strong argument against a balanced budget amendment because vital agencies like FEMA must be available, but President Paul would sign it out of existence. Then what? Do states tell their citizens they're on their own? Do they say that we can't keep shelters open because there's no money? Does Ron Paul think there's a capitalistic option? What private business would get into the business of giving money to help people who've lost their possessions? Where's the profit?

The main question with Ron Paul is, "What other great ideas do you have?"


  1. This is the problem with libertarian thinking and that end of the Republican/Tea Party mindset. There is a general selfishness that overwhelms everything else. Government works best when it does for citizens that which they need but cannot do for themselves. If a person's anti-government and pro-self-reliance philosophy obscures or shuts out the person's ability to empathize with the needs of the public, then that person really has no business making public policy or leading a country.

  2. Excellent point Chris. They accuse the left of running a "nanny state," but their solution is for daddy to tell you "no."