Quote:
Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord
There's a difference between eliminating FEMA and eliminating all emergency funding in the event of a major disaster. I seriously doubt Paul would object to allocating emergency funding directly to a state in the event of a major disaster.
|
I tend to think you're giving him too much credit here.
On the off-chance that you're right though, where would that hypothetical money come from? Does the state EMA just send a wish list to the President & he writes 'em a check?
Rational criticism of FEMA aside for a moment, at some practical level it seems to me that somebody has to handle the part where there's decisions to be made about what to provide the states ...
Quote:
|
"A state can decide. We don't need somebody in Washington."
|
If Washington is sending the check, at some point there's got to be somebody is Washington who can determine what's legit, what's overreaching by a state looking to grab what they can, etc. If that isn't FEMA, it still has to be someone under a different name, or else get out of the disaster-assistance business altogether.
My real guess is that the actual answer lies somewhere between babbling idiot & heartless robot, at Paul's frequent address of Batshit Crazy Lane.