Comments On: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid by Goldy http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/01/02/house-adjourns-without-considering-sandy-relief-aid Comments On: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid by Goldy en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Sat, 18 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Sat, 18 May 2013 11:15:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]>
Last I checked, there are more than 24 states in the United States. In general, I'm suspicious of any attempts at cost-shifting, and fundamentally disaster aid is cost-shifting. People that live in Wyoming are already punished enough by the barrenness of their state to avoid having to subsidize people that prefer to live in civilization.
Posted by saeculorum]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 14:53:01 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]> We are not now required to ascertain the scope of the phrase "general welfare of the United States," or to determine whether an appropriation in aid of agriculture falls within it.
If you're arguing that the effects of Sandy are purely local and not in any sense national, then you're just a whack job. From Wikipedia:
In the United States, Hurricane Sandy affected 24 states, including the entire eastern seaboard from Florida to Maine and west across the Appalachian Mountains to Michigan and Wisconsin, with particularly severe damage in New Jersey and New York.

Posted by kk in seattle]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 13:07:43 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]> Posted by CbytheSea]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 11:44:17 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]>
So once again the poor and middle class are asked to tighten their belts so the wealthy can keep more of their excess money in the bank. That 2% is going to be around at least $500 a year for the lowest class of earners, which can be the difference between paying the rent, or having needed medicines for a month.
Posted by Theodore Gorath]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 11:16:25 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]> Posted by Some Old Nobodaddy Logged In]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 11:04:10 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]> Posted by NateMan]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 11:03:01 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]>
The diversity and cooperative nature of the United States is what has made it so strong this past century. The midwest depends on the shipping, fishing, and industry of the coasts, while the coasts depend on the grain, meat and industry of the midwest. Each area of the nation has an industry or product which contributes to the GDP and benefits the national economy as well as investors, suppliers, and distributors across the nation.

When one area of the country experiences a disaster, the supplies and aid brought in from other areas result in a faster recovery. Getting things up and running as quickly as possible benefits everyone in the economic system, not just those in the afflicted area.
Posted by wingedkat]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:20:26 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]>
Better plan on many many projects not getting funded. Because the money has to come from somewhere.

The middle class hasn't paid this little in taxes in decades.

I am so disgusted with our politicians and our electorate for falling for this most transparent of Republican ploys -- temporary tax cut, which suddenly becomes an "increase" in taxes when it expires.

I am all for progressive ideals. Part of that is PAYING OUR DAMN TAXES.

And stop already with the "payroll tax going up." IT ISN'T GOING UP. It is going back to where it has been FOR DECADES.

Crap. Just... Crap.
Posted by bareboards]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:15:25 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]> Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 09:53:14 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]>
if welfare is all this 'nation thing' means to you you should move to Belgium.

you are not exceptional and you do not deserve to live in an exceptional nation.
Posted by gbyu88fd]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 09:25:54 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]> Posted by saeculorum]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 09:22:42 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]> It's not really clear to me why the federal government should be subsidizing disasters in states where one should expect extreme weather. This is not a federal concern, and it's definitely not in the enumerated powers of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

Let me see if I can help you out here. From the very first sentence of of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution:

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States."


Posted by scott (the other one)]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 09:02:48 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]>
All states are not equal, and they are not men. It is fundamentally unbalancing for states to subsidize each other for risks associated with states without having to consider the corresponding benefits. Coastal cities exist at least partially because they tend to make excellent harbors. Des Moines does not make a good harbor and partially because of that, it is not a very big city. Oddly enough, it doesn't get many hurricanes. New York should pay for the costs associated with it's harbors because New York gets the benefits of the harbors. Similarly, Iowa should prepare for tornadoes while taking advantage of the great farm land. States certainly have the ability to tax; federal subsidies like this are just a way to offload local taxes onto the federal level.

(Yes, I realize that red states are disproportionately subsidized by the federal government in general. That is also a problem and should be dealt with.)
Posted by saeculorum]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 08:54:41 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]> Posted by Goldy]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 08:46:07 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]> Posted by Tracy]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 08:35:43 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]>
After Irene, it was largely democrats trying to block disaster relief bills going to many red states on the southeastern shore, and several blue and purple states farther up the coast.

Please prove your last assertion, or admit it is just partisan narrative nonsense. At least admit it is not nearly as black and white as you claim.
Posted by Theodore Gorath]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 08:33:41 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]>
If you live in the Midwest, prepare for tornadoes.
If you live on the East Coast, prepare for hurricanes.
If you live on the West Coast, prepare for volcanoes and tsunamis.

This is not a federal concern, and it's definitely not in the enumerated powers of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.
Posted by saeculorum]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 08:32:24 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: House Adjourns Without Considering Sandy Relief Aid]]> Posted by seatackled]]> Wed, 02 Jan 2013 08:28:13 -0800 The Stranger