Congress Turns Back On Hurricane Sandy Victims

[LineCapt 134]

'They told us to basically drop dead!' Angry New York residents and pols fuming over latest Sandy snub

Local leaders had been hopeful that the House of Representatives would vote Tuesday on the $60 billion Hurricane Sandy recovery bill already approved by the Senate -- but they were wrong

By Jonathan Lemire , Daniel Beekman , Clare Trapasso AND Joseph Straw / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Tuesday, January 1, 2013, 8:36 PM

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/told-basically-drop-dead-angry-new-york-resident-pols-fuming-elongated-wait-sandy-relief-money-article-1.1231206#ixzz2Gq9ZZFjB

[ex-commish 490]

As much as I am outraged about this lets not blame the entire Republican party for this....Rep King and Grimm lashed out publicly against their own party ( Republican) and said it was a disgrace what was done. I think all legislators both Republican and Democrat should put pressure on Speaker Boehner who basically walked out of the chambers last night and put pressure on him to get this going and help these people

[JM15 386]

The problem I have with it is wasn't there a lot of "extra" money budgeted in it? It wasn't all for Sandy relief and recovery.. I can't remember where but I read an article that other improvement projects were included in this package.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

Everything I'm reading says they voted no because Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillebrand packed the bill with pork projects such as $150 million for the NOAA to assist Alaskan fisheries. Sandy was a big storm, but Alaska? Come on.

[JM15 386]

Everything I'm reading says they voted no because Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillebrand packed the bill with pork projects such as $150 million for the NOAA to assist Alaskan fisheries. Sandy was a big storm, but Alaska? Come on.

Exactly what I was talking about!!

[antiquefirelt 994]

This is the problem with all these "tack ons". What may have started out as a true necessity quickly becomes a place for pet project funding, they tack stuff on because they no no one would say no tot he bill, but in fact now we have a few people in government that are willing to say no when they smell a rat (until it's their rat).

[JM15 386]

This is the problem with all these "tack ons". What may have started out as a true necessity quickly becomes a place for pet project funding, they tack stuff on because they no no one would say no tot he bill, but in fact now we have a few people in government that are willing to say no when they smell a rat (until it's their rat).

and unfortuantely now the people who acutally need the help are getting screwed....

[SageVigiles 1,194]

and unfortuantely now the people who acutally need the help are getting screwed....

Exactly. But they're being used as a political pawn.

[CTFF 65]

Two ways to fix this.

Give The President line item veto power.

Or

Bills need to be singular in nature ( no more pork, the Sandy Relief bill would about sandy relief, not Alaska fisheries)

[Dinosaur 844]

Is this really an issue? FEMA has enough money to operate through February so there's plenty of time for Congress to appropriate more before that runs out, right?

Or is that another lie from the government perpetuated by the media?

[Mac8146 61]

Hopefully this gets done ASAP but really how much more can this area take. New Orleans got money real fast after Katrina and the midwest gets money for the twisters and storms they deal with. Maybe time for all to remember these Senators and Reps when they have hand out for campaign money and looking for reelection. Obama must have forgot that Christie most likely got him reelected when he spoke praise on Obama during Sandy. How quickly they all disappear ...........

[INIT915 1,119]

Everything I'm reading says they voted no because Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillebrand packed the bill with pork projects such as $150 million for the NOAA to assist Alaskan fisheries. Sandy was a big storm, but Alaska? Come on.

I see the entry for Alaska fisheries, but what is your source that Schumer/Gillibrand demanded it?

[INIT915 1,119]

As much as I am outraged about this lets not blame the entire Republican party for this....Rep King and Grimm lashed out publicly against their own party ( Republican) and said it was a disgrace what was done. I think all legislators both Republican and Democrat should put pressure on Speaker Boehner who basically walked out of the chambers last night and put pressure on him to get this going and help these people

Wow, two whole Republicans? If that's true, I think that's means basically "the entire Republican party" is accurate.

[ex-commish 490]

Wow, two whole Republicans? If that's true, I think that's means basically "the entire Republican party" is accurate.

There were alot more that were outraged...Gov Christie also...the end result is people got screwed, people who pay taxes and are now homeless.

[gamewell45 258]

and unfortuantely now the people who acutally need the help are getting screwed....

It should also be noted that congress voted/received pay raises.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

I see the entry for Alaska fisheries, but what is your source that Schumer/Gillibrand demanded it?

My mistake, I misread. They were ones strongly supporting the bill and did not ask the pork to be removed. Not the same thing. An amendment was brought forward by the GOP to remove that part and it was unfortunately voted down.

All these politicians from NY/NJ/CT should be more angry with the fact that their fellow members threw in all their pet projects instead of just passing the money for Sandy relief. Clearly helping the people of this area isn't enough for them. And yes, I know BOTH parties do this all the time, but that doesn't make it (or them) right. They put this bill out there, added a bunch of crap to it, then dared the GOP to vote it down, knowing that they would and they could use it to score points in the media, saying the Republicans don't care about Sandy victims.

[efdny2003 16]

The fact that the politicians voted this down is beyond disgusting. The fact that instead of just letting money be given to those who lost everything, some including family; and had to try to make it a personal gain for them as well is disgusting. The said part is as Gamewell45 said that Congress received pay raises because we're only billions of dollars in debt. Instead of giving themselves pay raises, take a pay cut, and help the victims of Sandy. Make every politician take a pay cut so that we can start re-building the economy. Just more proof about how screwed up this government is, and it's only going to get worse.

[helicopper 1,050]

To be fair, does anyone know if/how many pet projects were included in the Katrina spending bills? If the NY delegation did the same thing then, we can't really complain about it.

[INIT915 1,119]

http://m.nydailynews.com/new-york/51-billion-sandy-relief-bill-jeopardy-passing-house-article-1.1235337

[Danger 160]

Sorry Kool Aiders, this is all your GOP pals holding this up. Sooner you realize neither party has our interest in mind the better we'll be

[SteveOFD 176]

Here is the bill in its' totality that the House of Represenatives voted on H.R. 41:

I

113TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 41

To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency

Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 3, 2013

Mr. GARRETT (for himself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN,

Mr. LANCE, Mr. GRIMM, Mr. HANNA, Mr. KING of New York, Mr.

MEEKS, Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York, Mrs. MCCARTHY of

New York, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. NADLER, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. RUNYAN,

Mr. LOBIONDO, Ms. MENG, Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York,

Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. TONKO, and Mr. BISHOP of New York) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services,

and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to

be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration

of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee

concerned

A BILL

To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal

Emergency Management Agency for carrying out

the National Flood Insurance Program.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2

tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

2

•HR 41 IH

1 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN BORROWING AU2

THORITY FOR NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE

3 PROGRAM.

4 (a) Section 1309(a) of the National Flood Insurance

5 Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by striking

6 ‘‘$20,725,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$30,425,000,000’’.

7 (The amount provided by this section is designated

8 by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant

9 to section 403(a) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress),

10 the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year

11 2010, and as an emergency pursuant to section 4(g) of

12 the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 U.S.C.

13 933(g)).

Æ

Here is the link from www.GPO.Gov http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-113hr41ih/pdf/BILLS-113hr41ih.pdf. As you can see there is no "pork" attached to this bill, it is cut and dry that this is only to temporarily increase the borrowing limit of the National Flood Insurance program.

Why some of the 67 Republicans voted against this bill disgusts me, but here is the comments of a North Carolina Representative http://foxx.house.gov/press-releases/foxx-statement-on-hr-41/.

If you haven't heard the comments of Gov. Christie and Rep. Peter King regarding the not scheduling of a Sandy Aid vote before the end of the last legislative session view them on this video from The Daily Show http://tv.yahoo.com/shows/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/videos/mon-jan-7-2013-000000178.html (scroll to 8:40 of the video).

Edited January 9, 2013 by SteveOFD

[jack10562 414]

I'd really like to know what happened, just what Uncle Sam is doing with all the flood insurance policy premiums that "insured" are paying every month/year for their flood insurance, that now needs a bill passed by (a totally inept and polarized) congress in order to borrow money to pay legitimate claims?????

[INIT915 1,119]

Looks like some movement on this...

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/house-gop-opens-path-for-sandy-bill-86195.html?hp=f3

[AFS1970 504]

I read one report that mentioned 1.4 million attached to this bill for the Headstart pre-school program, which is interesting as a report came out just before Christmas saying that that program was a failure. Most of this pork gets added on as riders to the original bill, kind of like amendments, so I am not sure if it appears in the text of the actual bill or if you have to look elsewhere.

[SteveOFD 176]

I read one report that mentioned 1.4 million attached to this bill for the Headstart pre-school program, which is interesting as a report came out just before Christmas saying that that program was a failure. Most of this pork gets added on as riders to the original bill, kind of like amendments, so I am not sure if it appears in the text of the actual bill or if you have to look elsewhere.

The original bill I cited above was to provide funding for the National Flood Insurance Program. The entire text of the bill is what is in the post. No amendments, no riders, etc. Sixty seven Republicans voted against this. The bills that are pending (Speaker of the House Boehner has split the proposed remaining fifty one billion dollars for Sandy relief) into multiple bills to be voted on separately. These bills, from what I have heard do have amendments (i.e. pork) attached to them.