• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Subscribe
  • RSS

Eric Cantor: No Federal Relief For Earthquake Or Hurricane Damage Unless It’s Offset By Spending Cuts

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s district was the epicenter of the earthquake the rattled the East Coast on Tuesday, and Mineral , Virginia has suffered serious damage to many of its buildings. Notwithstanding this fact, Cantor made it clear that he would not back Federal emergency relief for earthquake damage unless it was offset by spending cuts:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor assured his constituents on Wednesday that Congress “will find the monies” to assist earthquake victims in Mineral, Virginia – but the Republican lawmaker noted that “those monies will be offset with appropriate savings or cost-cutting elsewhere.”

Cantor and Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, speaking together in a news conference, had previously toured Mineral to assess the amount of damage the city sustained in the wake of Tuesday’s 5.8 magnitude earthquake. Mineral, which was at the epicenter of the quake, falls in Virginia’s 7th district, which Cantor represents.

Cantor was in Israel when he heard news of the quake, but said he “quickly decided that I had to get home to ensure I could do anything I could.”

When asked if the district would be receiving federal assistance from the government, McDonnell noted that the state had yet to do a thorough analysis determining “our own capacity through state and local resources and private and benevolent resources to be able to handle it,” and had not yet determined whether it was “prudent” to request federal aid.

But, Cantor added, “the federal government does have a role in situations like this. When there’s a disaster there’s an appropriate federal role and we will find the monies. But we’ve had discussions about these things before and those monies will be offset with appropriate savings or cost-cutting elsewhere in order to meet the priority of the federal government’s role in a situation like this.”

Now, with one of the most serious hurricanes to threaten the region in decades bearing down on the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast, Cantor is also saying that any funds for hurricane damage relief must be offset, before we even know how big that bill might end up being:

Looks like House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) will extend his requirement that federal disaster relief be paid for by cutting spending elsewhere in the budget to Hurricane Irene.

“We aren’t going to speculate on damage before it happens, period,” his spokesperson Laena Fallon emails. “But, as you know, Eric has consistently said that additional funds for federal disaster relief ought to be offset with spending cuts.”

The thing about hurricanes that makes them different from a minor earthquake that has only caused, thankfully, minor structural damages even at the epicenter, is that they can cause damage in the billions of dollars from wind damage, coastal erosion, and flooding. Depending on the track it takes, one of which takes it very close to the heart of lower Manhattan, Irene could end up leaving a damage toll in the hundreds of billions of dollars in its wake. I’d love to see how Cantor is going to offset emergency spending that high.

I’m not unsympathetic to the point that Cantor is making here. As I said back in May when he made similar comments in the wake of the tornadoes that swept across the Mid-west and South, the idea that we should be forced to go into debt every time there’s a natural disaster makes no sense whatsoever. In fact, there seems to me to be a rather sensible solution:

If we are going to continue making payments like this, wouldn’t it make sense to have it be a budgeted item instead of having these requests added as supplements to a budgets that’s already been passed? Congress could approve the funding of a disaster relief fund every year and, to the extent it isn’t used, it would roll over to the next year to be added to the next year’s amount. Obviously, a large scale disaster like Katrina or 9/11 could require more funding, but most of the money that is paid out if Federal Disaster Relief goes for incidents that are far smaller in scale than those events. Perhaps this wouldn’t work given current budgeting rules, but it makes sense to me.

We already do something similar with the Highway Trust Fund, and even I’ll concede that there’s a role for the Federal Government in the case of a large scale disaster that is far beyond the ability of an individual community or state to handle. Setting up some kind of a fund like this, however, would make it far easier for Congress to allocate money for emergency relief without having to fight the partisan battles that inevitably result when you try to find offseting budget cuts.  I am probably being atypically optimistic about the ability of Congress to agree to something like this, and to resist the temptation not to tap into it to fund other programs, but it seems to me like a better way of handling emergency relief than what we’re doing now.

There’s a final point to be made, however, and it’s directed solely to Majority Leader Cantor. Picking political fights over disaster relief immediately after the emergency has occurred, or while people are still preparing for what looks like a pretty terrifying storm, isn’t exactly the way to win friends and influence people. You might want to work on your public relations skills just a bit, starting with the idea that nickel-and-dime accounting in the midst of a disaster makes you look like a bit of a jerk.

Related Posts:

About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May, 2010 and also writes at Below The Beltway. Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Doug — allocating disaester relief funding was never a major partisan battle at least to the extent that both parties agreed in principal that when “Acts of God” happened, the Feds would help out. There were fights on the size and constraints on such allocations, but not on the principal. Or at least this was the case until the Republican Party has decided to engage in systemic hostage taking where previously uncontroversial policies are being used to leverage concessions on unrelated and usually unpopular measures that tickle the GOP’s base.

    Anyways, FEMA does have an emergency fund for the small-scale disaesters, and there is a good case for increasing that budget, but all of a sudden that is an increase in “discretionary spending” and an “Obama Slush Fund…” and shit, we don’t have the political will or capacity to actually increase public spending on public goods.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  2. racehorse says:

    If we can send money overseas to tinhorn dictators and hostile countries, we can and must help our own citizens. America first!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

  3. john personna says:

    Someone explain to the guy the concept of a “moving average” and how it might be useful to spending projection.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  4. gVOR08 says:

    As you say, Doug, Cantor is making himself look like a jerk. This also makes him look obsessed with ideology. It looks like he’s pandering to a very narrow base and to contributors who care about nothing but their own taxes. In doing so, he makes it look like he places his own career ahead of the welfare of the country. In fact, he’s making himself look like a heartless weasel. Refreshing honesty.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

  5. OzarkHillbilly says:

    Someone explain to the guy the concept of a “moving average” and how it might be useful to spending projection.

    John… this is Eric Cantor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Hey Norm says:

    Let’s keep in mind that this guy voted for the wars that Bush 43 started but could not finish and didn’t pay for, the Medicare Part D entitlement expansion that was not paid for, and the Bush Tax Cuts which benefited primarily the rich and were not offset with spending cuts.
    It’s really hard to take these born-again fiscal conservatives seriously. It’s like when reformed drunks preach about the evils of drinking. You always know they are just that close to taking another drink themselves.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

  7. just me says:

    Can’t see how this position is a win for him.

    I can see, if/when damage is assessed debating about how much and where, but this just seems like a dumb move.

    Disasters are disasters and hurricanes can leave huge swathes of damage across a region.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  8. Tsar Nicholas II says:

    Slightly off topic but if George Allen next year can win Webb’s vacated seat and if Eric Cantor were to have the cojones eventually to take on Mark Warner, and to prevail, Virginia once again would have a pretty good slate of U.S. Senators.

    Cantor always will be a lightning rod in certain circles — anti-Semitism is deeply ingrained in the fabric of the left wing — but despite all that the man does have upwards political mobility.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

  9. john personna says:

    Let’s also remember that we know nothing about future climate or weather, and that there is no storm. It is a plot by self-interested “hurricane researchers.” Of course they’d say there are these “hurricanes.” That’s the way they get our money!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

  10. Rob in CT says:

    @Tsar Nicholas II:

    And now, ladies and jellyspoons, your message from an alternate reality.

    A reality in which Cantor is a good senator and in which criticism of his most crazy ideological positions are evidence of anti-semitism.

    Awesome. Really. I am in awe of the reality distortion field that could produce such thought.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

  11. LC says:


    even I’ll concede that there’s a role for the Federal Government in the case of a large scale disaster that is far beyond the ability of an individual community or state to handle

    How magnanimous you are!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

  12. Rob in CT says:

    And yes, Doug, the government should clearly set aside money for disaster relief such that a “normal” level of disasters in a given year won’t automatically lead to over-budget spending. That said, I think it’s obvious that if you budget for “normal” and you get abnormal, you have to be able to adjust (if abnormally low, obviously, you carry over some money).

    That would be sane. It would also be like Dave Anderson suggests: oh this is a slush fund for the big spending librul (or, conversly: how dare you carry over funds for next year when people are suffering! Spend that money you heartless bastards!).

    So what in theory is a fairly straightforward thing becomes a bloody mess. Sigh.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. OzarkHillbilly says:

    A reality in which Cantor is a good senator and in which criticism of his most crazy ideological positions are evidence of anti-semitism.

    I was going to say something Rob, but you said it better than I would have.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  14. Hey Norm says:

    This is pure conjecture on my part but judging by the latest path out of NOAA this is going to do a tremendous amount of damage – not because of the size of the storm but because it is going to skirt right up the Atlantic seaboard along the most populous coast and barrel right up Broadway. As Doug mentioned this is going to be crazy expensive. On the plus side there is going to be plenty of work available on Monday.
    Interesting that Cantor was in Isreal when he heard the news. I’m thinking we can do a one-for-one swap…for every dollar we spend on emergency relief we can subtract it from Aid to Isreal. That’s about $114B to get us started.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  15. WR says:

    @Tsar Nicholas II: It’s time for you to go away, creep. It’s one thing to debate political ideas, but to declare that those of us who find Cantor’s hypocrisy and stupidity repulsive do it because we hate Jews crosses the line into full on troll territory.

    Especially since so many of us liberals actually are Jews, scumbag.

    James, I have never asked for anyone to be banned, not even obvious trolls like “John Malkovich.” But this thug has no place here.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  16. michael reynolds says:

    @Rob in CT:

    Not only that, but it’s an imputation coming from a man who has taken his screen name from a raging anti-semite.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. anjin-san says:

    starting with the idea that nickel-and-dime accounting in the midst of a disaster makes you look like a bit of a jerk.

    Actually, it makes you look like someone who is prepared to mug for the cameras while Americans die in the street…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  18. Rob in CT says:

    That should be “would be a good senator” of course. Cantor’s a rep presently.

    Anyway, the claim that opposition to Eric Cantor is evidence of anti-semitism is but another variant on the ever popular: if you don’t offer unquestioning, unlimited support to all Israeli government policy, you are an anti-semite. Cantor is a super pro-Israeli-Right hawk, not just a guy who supports Israel in general and wants the USA to back up its ally.

    There are lots of non-Jewish members of Congress who take similar positions. There are others who are supportive of Israel but not of all Israeli policy (the Obama Administration, a bit like the Bush I administration, attempted to reign in Israeli settlement policy. Sadly, just like the Bush I administration, the Obama Admin has thus far utterly failed). Disagreeing with a given Israeli policy, or rather US support of that policy, does not an anti-semite make. Disagreeing with Eric Cantor’s position on US policy toward Israel does not an anti-semite make.

    And disagreeing with Eric Cantor’s positions regarding domestic US policy really really does not make you anti-semite.

    All of which is not to say that there are no anti-semites. They’re there, unfortunately, on the fringes of both the Right and Left. And they likely hate Eric Cantor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  19. anjin-san says:

    even I’ll concede that there’s a role for the Federal Government in the case of a large scale disaster that is far beyond the ability of an individual community or state to handle

    Really? I distinctly remember you telling us people should not expect the government to bail them out “every time someone’s house falls down”. Can you tell us a bit more about this change is your viewpoint?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  20. Rob in CT says:

    @Hey Norm:

    And the timing is poor: its projected to hit us at high tide, so there may be more of a storm surge problem than there was w/Gloria.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. Hey Norm says:

    @ Rob…
    Agreed…at least it’s a New Moon and not Full.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. @gVOR08:

    It looks like he’s pandering to a very narrow base and to contributors who care about nothing but their own taxes.

    Not true! He’s also pandering to the sizeable portion of the tea party that considers everyone in the northeast to be borderline traitors and is actively looking forward to the possiblity of their suffering in the wake of a natural disaster.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  23. Jay Tea says:

    @Hey Norm: Let’s see… you advocate punishing Israel (note the spelling; it’s not “Isreal”) for the actions of Cantor… who just happens to be Jewish…

    Nope, dunno how that could be seen as anti-Semitic. Not in the least.

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. john personna says:

    LOL, reducing Israel’s funding is “punishing” them. I wonder if the same is true of food stamp recipients?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  25. @Jay Tea:

    Let’s see… you advocate punishing Israel (note the spelling; it’s not “Isreal”) for the actions of Cantor… who just happens to be Jewish…

    So advocating cuts in the subsidies to something is the same as advocating they be punished?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. Jay Tea says:

    @john personna: If you have a better description for singling out Israel’s foreign aid for cuts — and no other nation — in direct response to a Jewish Congressman’s words, john, let’s hear it.

    “Random, wild coincidence?” Well, we are talking about Norm here, and “logic” isn’t exactly a strong point of his.

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. mantis says:

    @Jay Tea:

    you advocate punishing Israel

    See, spending cuts are the greatest thing ever, unless they are cuts to aid to Israel, then it’s anti-semitism. I for one think the fact that we don’t send our entire GDP to Israel is anti-semitism. They deserve everything, or you hate Jews.

    You know who else is just a bunch of anti-semites? Ha’aretz:

    With more than 10,000 millionaires, why is Israel still a charity case?

    The past few years have seen a whole new generation of wealth being created within Israel. The collective worth of Israeli’s 16 billionaires stands at just over 45 billion dollars and Israel now hosts 10,153 millionaires, a 20-percent increase from the previous fiscal year.

    With all this money sloshing around at the top of the system, it’s more than a little disappointing that Israeli soup kitchens still feel the need to come around to the global Jewish diaspora, cap in hand, looking for vital donations to help those on the bread line in Israel.

    They focus on charity from the diaspora, but the same could be said about US aid to Israel. Why do they need $3 billion a year from us when they have more than 10,000 millionaires?

    for the actions of Cantor… who just happens to be Jewish…

    Cantor is the one who demanded spending cuts to cover disaster aid. Hey Norm just suggested we cut aid to Israel, noting that Cantor was in Israel when he heard about the earthquake. According to Cantor, we have to cut somewhere. Why is suggesting aid to Israel anti-semitic?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  28. WR says:

    @Jay Tea: Funny how the guy who constantly whines that “racist” is a toothless charge against him is so fast to hurl accusations of anti-semitism.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  29. Hey Norm says:

    JTea…
    You just make sh** up all the time.
    I’m not advocating “punishing” Israel for the actions of Cantor. I’m advocating punishing Israel for the actions of Israel, which consistently run counter to the interests of the US.
    It’s just a very happy coincedence that Uber-Israel-Hawk Cantor is calling for offsets to fund Emergency Relief and Aid to Israel is an absolutely perfect place to look for those offsets. I’m all for cutting wasteful spending and $114B in yearly Aid to Israel is the definition of wasteful spending.
    It’s f’ing hilarious that you would accuse me of being an anti-semite.
    You should get a dog, name it Clue, and then you would have one.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  30. mantis says:

    If you have a better description for singling out Israel’s foreign aid for cuts — and no other nation — in direct response to a Jewish Congressman’s words, john, let’s hear it.

    Most other nation’s we send aid to can’t come up with the funds themselves. Israel can. That’s why they are different. Of course, you could just claim it’s anti-semitism.

    Oh wait, aren’t you the one who constantly, and with very little provocation, derides any and all claims of racism in this country as bullshit? Yes, yes you are. Funny how quick you are to play the anti-semitism card, isn’t it?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  31. anjin-san says:

    food stamp recipients?

    @JP – I am pretty sure food stamp recipients are commies anyway…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  32. john personna says:

    @Jay Tea:

    I think it’s funny Jay that the numbers are similar:

    Food subsidies will cost taxpayers $79 billion in fiscal 2009 and account for about two-thirds of USDA’s budget. The largest food subsidy programs are food stamps; the school breakfast and lunch programs; and the women, infants, and children (WIC) program. The federal government as a whole has about 26 food and nutrition programs operated by six different agencies.

    That’s from Cato, not one to shrink government largess.

    So as much as conservatives would like to shrink food stamps, we actually spend more much of the time (again, moving average) on Israel. They are usually at the top of the list, but finally got bumped by aid to Iraq. Geez, think about that.

    So, as someone who puts “America first,” I’ll use this opportunity to lampoon conservatives, who would rather fund Israel than poor people. Yeah.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  33. john personna says:

    @mantis:

    It’s deeper than that. In the American Theocracy, aid to Israel is a pillar. They are part of the Axis of God.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  34. Jay Tea says:

    You’re right, folks, I dunno what I was thinking. The thread started out with “did you hear what Mickey Cantor said,” and in that context Norm’s knee-jerk “let’s stop giving money to Israel!” response makes perfect sense.

    And defending Norm by pointing out that “let’s stop giving money to Israel” is his default position to most everything… yeah, that makes sense, too.

    Sarcasm aside… I’m not challenging the position; I’m pointing out the causal relationship Norm draws here. A discussion of foreign aid to Israel is one thing; to piggyback that as a direct reaction to the words of a Jewish congressman is quite another.

    Norm, it seems, sees Cantor as an agent of Israel, and therefore they should be held responsible for his actions. I realize it’s impolite to openly state that here, among his butt-buddies who attack anyone who points things like that out, but frankly, my dears, I don’t give a damn.

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  35. john personna says:

    Heh, thread drift.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  36. Hey Norm says:

    Thread drift driven by someone with scant reading comprehension skills.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  37. Jay Tea says:

    @Hey Norm: Thread drift driven by someone with scant reading comprehension skills.

    Don’t be so hard on yourself, Norm. You do the best you can with what you have. It’s just that you don’t have much.

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  38. mantis says:

    @Jay Tea:

    among his butt-buddies

    Butt-buddies? Why don’t you go back to your swamp and come back when your maturity level has been elevated beyond the 8th grade schoolyard.

    Oh, and using your own impeccable logic, I guess we can just call you a homophobe now, right?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  39. Jay Tea says:

    @Hey Norm: Oh, and thanks for putting the lie to john personna’s statement that you didn’t intend the Israel aid cut as punishment. john won’t say anthing about it, because it would mean admitting I was right and you are using Cantor’s statement as an excuse to punish Israel, but someone ought to bring it up.

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  40. Jay Tea says:

    @john personna: Just checked up thread, and I didn’t say a damned thing about food stamps — just calling out Norm’s anti-Semitism, which you really did try to defend, but he done cut that branch out from under you.

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  41. mantis says:

    Hey Norm says:

    I’m not advocating “punishing” Israel for the actions of Cantor. I’m advocating punishing Israel for the actions of Israel, which consistently run counter to the interests of the US.

    Jay Tea responds:

    I was right and you are using Cantor’s statement as an excuse to punish Israel

    You’re right, Hey Norm. He does have severe reading comprehension deficiencies.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  42. Wayne says:

    No one said that there shouldn’t be emergency spending only that it needs to be offset with spending cuts when it happens. Pretty much like what most of us would do in our everyday lives. If it is a large disaster, it doesn’t even have to be paid for in that particular year or the next. It could be spread out the next three years or so with spending cuts.

    Part of the problem with emergency spending is they are budget busters. Also all sort of pork are inserted in them that would never pass the typical budget process. War supplementals are required by congress to be submitted as emergency funding and they bust the budget. Many non war spending gets inserted in them as well.

    Many here think it is outrageous to act responsible and to pay for emergency spending. IMO they are the ones being outrageous.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  43. Jay Tea says:

    @mantis: sheesh, mantis. I expect better from you.

    The topic of this thread is Cantor’s statement. The only mention of Israel is that is where Cantor was at the moment. And yet, Norm’s first response is “punish Israel.”

    Two possible explanations:

    1) Norm thinks of Cantor as an agent of Israel, and his response to Cantor’s statement is to punish Israel.

    2) Norm is so obsessed with punishing Israel that it is his knee-jerk, almost Pavlovian response to pretty much everything.

    You take his denial of #1 at face value. I don’t.

    That just leaves #2 as a possibility — unless he would like to offer one, or you’d like to continue your defense of the indefensible by coming up with another…

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  44. MM says:

    @just me:

    Can’t see how this position is a win for him.

    I can see, if/when damage is assessed debating about how much and where, but this just seems like a dumb move.

    Disasters are disasters and hurricanes can leave huge swathes of damage across a region.

    It depends on the optics. Right now, before anything happens, he looks like a jerk. But he dis fklat out say “We’ll get you the money you need”, there’s just a “however” at the end of that. If he can hang the “however” around the neck of Obama and the Democrats, he could win this one.

    Something along the lines of: “I’d LOVE to help rebuild these devastated communities, but Obama and the liberals in congress are more interested in studying bull semen motility in Illinois. Think about that while you try to salvage your hovel.”

    @anjin-san:

    Really? I distinctly remember you telling us people should not expect the government to bail them out “every time someone’s house falls down”. Can you tell us a bit more about this change is your viewpoint?

    Proximity has miraculous effects.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  45. mantis says:

    @Jay Tea:

    And yet, Norm’s first response is “punish Israel.”

    No, his first response is here, and doesn’t mention Israel. It notes that Cantor never cared about offsetting spending before Obama became president, just like most Republicans in Congress.

    2) Norm is so obsessed with punishing Israel that it is his knee-jerk, almost Pavlovian response to pretty much everything.

    I’ve been commenting here for a while, and I’ve not noticed that “punishing Israel that it is his knee-jerk, almost Pavlovian response to pretty much everything.” Perhaps you would like to back that up? If not, I’m inclined to think he brought it up for the reason he said he did. He noticed the detail that Cantor was in Israel, and suggested aid to Israel as a possible cut to offset the disaster spending. There are many people who think Israel does not need monetary aid from the US, including quite a few Israelis. Are they all knee-jerk anti-semites as well?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  46. Argon says:

    A trouble with an emergency fund is that such funds quickly get raided for other purposes. That’s not to say that they’re not good ideas but that they need constant protection and serious oversight.

    How about covering disaster spending with specific taxes? Set aside a buffer of $x billion and refill with taxes specifically allocated for the fund. Average the expenses over half a decade and it won’t be too much of a burden. Taxes or discretionary reallocation: Six of one, half a dozen of annother — In the end the money must be raised to cover the disaster relief.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  47. Lit3Bolt says:

    With idiotic speeches from idiotic politicians leading to idiotic articles such as this, I believe I’ll let The Onion do the talking about how messed up our political discourse is these days.

    Republicans Vote to Repeal Obama-Backed Bill That Would Destroy Asteroid Heading Towards Earth

    The next time something is destroyed, let’s refuse to rebuild it and let the free market of hurricanes take their course. Sociopaths.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  48. anjin-san says:

    It’s always entertaining to watch a worm like jay tea work up a dose of moral indignation

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  49. john personna says:

    @Jay Tea:

    I know I was the one who introduced food stamps. It was because your phrasing struck my funny bone. Israel [correction, has received ~100B] and you say it would be “punishing them” to reduce that.

    Is a smaller gift not a gift?

    I guess it depends on whether they are starving …

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  50. Wayne says:

    @Argon
    Only problem with that is it would end up like Social Security and the highway tax. The Government would take it and spend it on other stuff. When it is needed, there won’t be anything there except “maybe” an IOU. Then they will once again ask for even more money because it is needed for the emergency.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  51. Wayne says:

    @Argon
    Only problem with that is it would end up like Social Security. The Government would take it and spend it on other stuff. When it is needed, there won’t be anything there except “maybe” an IOU. Then they will once again ask for even more money because it is needed for the emergency.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  52. Ben Wolf says:

    How about covering disaster spending with specific taxes? Set aside a buffer of $x billion and refill with taxes specifically allocated for the fund. Average the expenses over half a decade and it won’t be too much of a burden.

    This is a bad idea because the tax will remove net financial assets from the private sector, while the whole point of disaster relief is to add them in a manner which accelerates the recovery. Deficit spending in thise case is both good and proper.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  53. Hey Norm says:

    @ Wayne…
    I have a bunch of IOU’s in my pocket now. Some have Washington’s picture on them. Some have Andrew Jackson’s. One has Franklin’s. What’s your point?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  54. Wayne says:

    @Hey Norm
    Those are not IOUs. It is called money. Your claim is similar to saying having $22,000 worth of shares in IBM is the same as having $22,000 bill from IBM. Nowhere the same thing.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  55. Steve says:

    Plain and simple, they should take this guy out back and shoot him, actually let the Tea Party do it, they want smaller, or even NO government

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  56. Ben Wolf says:

    Only problem with that is it would end up like Social Security. The Government would take it and spend it on other stuff. When it is needed, there won’t be anything there except “maybe” an IOU. Then they will once again ask for even more money because it is needed for the emergency.

    The federal government is a sovereign currency issuer. It doesn’t need anyone’s money. Thinking that it does is a serious misunderstanding of how government and the private sector interact. But don’t feel bad; Ben Bernanke doesn’t get it either.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  57. An Interested Party says:

    Cantor always will be a lightning rod in certain circles — anti-Semitism is deeply ingrained in the fabric of the left wing — but despite all that the man does have upwards political mobility.

    Oh please…is this really the best you could come up with? We need to make an addition to Godwin’s Law…just as it incredibly foolish and lame to compare so many people/movements/etc. to the Nazis, it is equally pathetic to call criticisms of people who happen to be Jewish “antisemitism”…

    Considering the damage that this hurricane might cause, statements like these by Cantor will go a long way to ensuring that he is never elected to the Senate…oh well, some people actually want a fool like George Allen to return to the Senate…hope springs eternal, I guess…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  58. anjin-san says:

    It would seem that the “Thank America Last” party has rapidly morphed into the more streamlined “America Last” party…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  59. Tim H. says:

    @gVOR08: Cantor is a jerk!!! Cantor is the one who nixed the debt default “Grand Bargain” plan Obama and Boehner were discussing. A plan that would have been good for the country. Cantor is not shy about being disrespectful to President Obama either. I don’t care if you like the President or not. He is the President whatever party he is from. Sure you can bad mouth him. But don’t be disrepectful in person. Cantor reportedly was in the budget talks.

    Cantor has come out before about disaster spending right after disasters. It’s just an attempt to undermine the Federal gov’t. Natural disaters don’t have to be used to push your politico agenda. At very least wait until the cleanup get’s under way to bring up spending costs.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  60. Tim H. says:

    @Tsar Nicholas II: UH don’t alot of Jews vote Democrat? What the heck does Cantor being Jewish have to do with him being a Jerk?

    I dislike Cantor because as someone else pointed out. Cantor is a hypocrite on his past voting record regarding being a fiscal conservative. Cantor is a politico panderer who does come off as putting his ideoogy first versus country first. Ala no tax increases of any kind in the debt default negotiations. Cantor panders to the tea party crowd and yeah I don’t freaking like the guy one bit. It has nothing to do with him being Jewish. I actually respect John Boehner. I don’t Eric Cantor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  61. Tim H. says:

    @Hey Norm: That was awesome Norm because based on the aid we give Israel. Yeah I do think Israel should listen to this country a lil bit more when it comes to it’s politico manuevering. All the money we give Israel and Bibby come’s over here and basically tells USA to butt out and mind it’s own business. Okay FINE and we should cut aid to Israel to help cut our national debt. Sounds good to me.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  62. AEW says:

    I wonder how long will dangerous idiots like Cantor be allowed to administer our country?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  63. eric cantor says:

    Let’s start cutting federal and stop giving to states where Cantor, Perry, Bachmann are from, since these clowns keeping crying about govt spend but they state have there hands out for more money every time there a problem and the idiots in these states voted for them let them suffer too without all the federal aid

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0