Ron Paul is taking a lot of heat for his opposition to FEMA. I return their fire back at the critics. by Walt Thiessen
(libertarian)
Monday, September 5, 2011
Maureen Dowd of the New York Times is the latest columnist to put Ron Paul in her crosshairs over his opposition to FEMA, saying, "Should those whose job it is to prepare for the worst be punished because the worst didn’t happen?"
I would like to raise a question to all the Paul critics regarding FEMA. My question is this: what, exactly, does FEMA do that we cannot live without?
That's the elephant in the room where all this criticism is concerned. I have yet to see a critical article on this topic that actually addresses this most vital question. Instead, like Ms. Dowd does, the writers assume that the necessity of FEMA is not to be questioned.
Visiting FEMA's website sheds some light on the issue. It says:
"What We Do.
"Advising on building codes and flood plain management...teaching people how to get through a disaster...helping equip local and state emergency preparedness...coordinating the federal response to a disaster...making disaster assistance available to states, communities, businesses and individuals...training emergency managers...supporting the nation's fire service...administering the national flood and crime insurance programs...the range of FEMA's activities is broad indeed and spans the life cycle of disasters.
"The disaster life cycle describes the process through which emergency managers prepare for emergencies and disasters, respond to them when they occur, help people and institutions recover from them, mitigate their effects, reduce the risk of loss, and prevent disasters such as fires from occurring.
"And at every stage of this cycle you see FEMA -- the federal agency charged with building and supporting the nation's emergency management system."
This is what Paul's critics love about FEMA. It has a whole range of things that it supposedly does. Yet, when the disasters finally happen (as they always do), what is the net result? What net gain do we get for all the billions of dollars spent on FEMA each year?
The views expressed
in this article are those of Walt Thiessen only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Walt Thiessen is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Bentree
Date: September 5, 2011 04:08:43 PM
FEMA is but another vehicle to take advantage of an emergency, to extend the reach of government into our lives. After Andrew, Florida ended up with building codes that have added billions to the cost of new construction and at the same time are incapable of protecting citizens from tornado's. It was common knowledge that 80% of the damage from Andrew was do to poor workmanship and or tornado's. It is estimated that there may have been as many as 80 embedded in Andrew.
An example of poor workmanship, I saw the pictures, was a 4x8 sheet of sheathing plywood with one nail in each corner. Guess whose responsibility it was to ensure the nail off on roofs? Yes, thats right the government in the guise of building inspectors. Now we have building departments operating outside the constitution with dictatorial powers preying on both builders and home owners. Not all but enough of them between Cities and Counties the EPA, OSHA and FEMA. There was a time that to go into your back yard, pour a slab and build a storage shed you had to have an environmental impact statement in California, I don't know if that still holds true. In Laramie Wy. they made us plant trees in a desert environment for esthetics, they did it because they could, hundreds of dollars of trees that winter killed the first year all because they had to be planted before final and since projects typically finish in the fall, well there you go, this type of stupidity extends all the way to a city outside of Alexandria Virgina. End of a short Rant
Posted By: Bill Gee
Date: September 6, 2011 09:05:36 AM
It seems as though many of the supposed functions of FEMA are actually being handled by the Insurance and Reinsurance market. In order for homeowners to receive reduced rate homeowners and business property insurance, they must certify that the buildings meet ever-increasing disaster prevention standards. This is good for the building's owner, because the reduced insurance premiums will eventually pay for the cost of the improvements. This is good for the insurance company because they will see fewer claims due to the fact that the building itself will only have minimal damage even in a powerful storm. In other words, the market, not FEMA makes homes safer in the event of a disaster.
FEMA fails horribly in the issuance and administration of Flood Insurance. The reason why FEMA has to do this is because with premium to loss ratios of over 300%, no insurer in their right mind would ever issue such coverage. Therefore, it is the individual taxpayer that ends up covering the losses associated with flood events. The irony is that homes in flood plains should never be built in the first place! If a home has a 1 in 5 chance of being a total loss due to flood in the next 50 years, it should not be built - period! The fact that FEMA has a flood insurance program actually creates a moral hazard problem where homebuilders are willing to locate entire neighborhoods of low-income homes on flood plains knowing that Uncle Sam will eventually pick up the tab as these people have their lives and their homes destroyed the next time it rains!
