All that money being spent and guess how much is going to Katrina victims

Wheezer

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 1999
6,731
1
81
Text

WASHINGTON (AP) ? The economic stimulus signed by President Barack Obama will spread billions of dollars across the country to spruce up aging roads and bridges. But there's not a dime specifically dedicated to fixing leftover damage from Hurricane Katrina.

And there's no outrage about it.

Democrats who routinely criticized President George W. Bush for not sending more money to the Gulf Coast appear to be giving Obama the benefit of the doubt in his first major spending initiative. Even the Gulf's fiercest advocates say they're happy with the stimulus package, and their states have enough money for now to address their needs.

"I'm not saying there won't be a need in the future, but right now the focus is not on more money, it's on using what we have," said Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who has criticized Democrats and Republicans alike over Katrina funding.

It's a significant change in tone from the Bush years, when any perceived slight of Katrina victims was met with charges that the Republican president who bungled the initial response to the disaster continued to callously ignore the Gulf's needs years later.

Just last summer, Democrats accused Bush of putting Iraq before New Orleans when he sought to block Gulf Coast reconstruction money from a $162 billion war spending bill. Bush was pilloried for not mentioning the disaster in back-to-back State of the Union addresses.

Former Rep. Jim McCrery, R-La., who helped lead the fight for Gulf aid before retiring last year, said he was surprised over the lack of Katrina money in the bill, but figures lawmakers may be granting Obama leniency due to the magnitude of the country's current economic challenges.

"Any new president is going to have a little honeymoon," said McCrery, who is now a lobbyist. "I'd like to think that the tone would have been the same with any new president."

Thomas Langston, a Tulane University political scientist, said Democrats may be "playing nice" to keep in good favor. But dire needs remain, he said.

"Hopefully they've gotten some promises behind the scenes about longer-term commitments," Langston said. "Like most people down here, I would hate for anybody to get the impression that, 'We're good, thank you.'"

The federal government has devoted more than $175 billion to the region since Katrina ripped through New Orleans in 2005, and billions remain unspent. It's unclear how much more money will be needed, but nearly everyone agrees that the federal government should continue investing heavily in the region's levees and other infrastructure to prevent a repeat of Katrina's devastation.

Under the $787 billion stimulus bill, states will share more than $90 billion in infrastructure money. Gulf states such as Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama can use their funds for Katrina-related projects, but they'll get the same formula-based share that other states receive.

There was hardly a complaint as Obama and other Democratic leaders pieced together the package. Members of the all-Democratic Congressional Black Caucus, who have called Bush's Katrina funding a moral failure, said they were thrilled with the stimulus. Landrieu won several provisions that do not allocate new money but are aimed at cutting through red tape to free up existing funds.

"I think people looked at how generous Congress has been in the past," said Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee. "(The states) have to demonstrate that they can be good custodians of the money."

Thompson and others say new funding wasn't necessary in the stimulus largely because billions of federal dollars remain bogged down in bureaucracy or tied up in planning. As a result, they said, Katrina funding doesn't fit with the quick-spending purpose of the stimulus bill, which is aimed at kick-starting the economy.

Ironically, Bush made similar arguments in recent years as Gulf advocates latched on to nearly any legislation they could find to pursue reconstruction money. For example, he routinely argued that Katrina funding didn't belong in war spending bills and that new funding wasn't urgent because unspent billions were already in the pipeline.

In part, the lack of criticism this year could reflect a stronger trust by fellow Democrats that Obama will follow through with his campaign pledge to rebuild levees and "keep the broken promises" to the Gulf.

Whether the grace period continues could hinge on how Obama addresses the issue in future spending bills.

Without discussing specific funding plans, White House spokeswoman Gannet Tseggai said Obama is "dedicated to rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast and looks forward to working with Congress to ensure they get the help they so desperately need."

so they are not getting shit and all of a sudden that is ok because they have more than they need. And they got more than then need when who was president again? (hint NOT Obama)
 
Dec 26, 2007
11,782
2
76
Seriously?

Fuck that. Katrina was a disaster sure, but you know what? Most of them want to fuckin rebuild right effin there. Hey what about 9/11 families, how come no money for them? Or, what about the soldiers KIA? Where is more money for them? What about FL hurricane victims from this year? What about all the fucking other victims from any other natural disaster/tragedy/etc? Where is the money for them? This is a STIMULUS bill (well claimed to be), not a "help the victims" bill.

Don't start bitching about victims of Katrina, when they were living in a place that is overall BELOW sea level ON THE GULF COAST.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Wheezer
Text

WASHINGTON (AP) ? The economic stimulus signed by President Barack Obama will spread billions of dollars across the country to spruce up aging roads and bridges. But there's not a dime specifically dedicated to fixing leftover damage from Hurricane Katrina.

And there's no outrage about it.

Democrats who routinely criticized President George W. Bush for not sending more money to the Gulf Coast appear to be giving Obama the benefit of the doubt in his first major spending initiative. Even the Gulf's fiercest advocates say they're happy with the stimulus package, and their states have enough money for now to address their needs.

"I'm not saying there won't be a need in the future, but right now the focus is not on more money, it's on using what we have," said Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who has criticized Democrats and Republicans alike over Katrina funding.

It's a significant change in tone from the Bush years, when any perceived slight of Katrina victims was met with charges that the Republican president who bungled the initial response to the disaster continued to callously ignore the Gulf's needs years later.

Just last summer, Democrats accused Bush of putting Iraq before New Orleans when he sought to block Gulf Coast reconstruction money from a $162 billion war spending bill. Bush was pilloried for not mentioning the disaster in back-to-back State of the Union addresses.

Former Rep. Jim McCrery, R-La., who helped lead the fight for Gulf aid before retiring last year, said he was surprised over the lack of Katrina money in the bill, but figures lawmakers may be granting Obama leniency due to the magnitude of the country's current economic challenges.

"Any new president is going to have a little honeymoon," said McCrery, who is now a lobbyist. "I'd like to think that the tone would have been the same with any new president."

Thomas Langston, a Tulane University political scientist, said Democrats may be "playing nice" to keep in good favor. But dire needs remain, he said.

"Hopefully they've gotten some promises behind the scenes about longer-term commitments," Langston said. "Like most people down here, I would hate for anybody to get the impression that, 'We're good, thank you.'"

The federal government has devoted more than $175 billion to the region since Katrina ripped through New Orleans in 2005, and billions remain unspent. It's unclear how much more money will be needed, but nearly everyone agrees that the federal government should continue investing heavily in the region's levees and other infrastructure to prevent a repeat of Katrina's devastation.

Under the $787 billion stimulus bill, states will share more than $90 billion in infrastructure money. Gulf states such as Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama can use their funds for Katrina-related projects, but they'll get the same formula-based share that other states receive.

There was hardly a complaint as Obama and other Democratic leaders pieced together the package. Members of the all-Democratic Congressional Black Caucus, who have called Bush's Katrina funding a moral failure, said they were thrilled with the stimulus. Landrieu won several provisions that do not allocate new money but are aimed at cutting through red tape to free up existing funds.

"I think people looked at how generous Congress has been in the past," said Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee. "(The states) have to demonstrate that they can be good custodians of the money."

Thompson and others say new funding wasn't necessary in the stimulus largely because billions of federal dollars remain bogged down in bureaucracy or tied up in planning. As a result, they said, Katrina funding doesn't fit with the quick-spending purpose of the stimulus bill, which is aimed at kick-starting the economy.

Ironically, Bush made similar arguments in recent years as Gulf advocates latched on to nearly any legislation they could find to pursue reconstruction money. For example, he routinely argued that Katrina funding didn't belong in war spending bills and that new funding wasn't urgent because unspent billions were already in the pipeline.

In part, the lack of criticism this year could reflect a stronger trust by fellow Democrats that Obama will follow through with his campaign pledge to rebuild levees and "keep the broken promises" to the Gulf.

Whether the grace period continues could hinge on how Obama addresses the issue in future spending bills.

Without discussing specific funding plans, White House spokeswoman Gannet Tseggai said Obama is "dedicated to rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast and looks forward to working with Congress to ensure they get the help they so desperately need."

so they are not getting shit and all of a sudden that is ok because they have more than they need. And they got more than then need when who was president again? (hint NOT Obama)
So Wingnuts make up your mind, did Obama write the Bill or did Congress and the Senate?
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
7,639
2,909
136
I'm not sure what to take away from this. Is the point:

a) that governors, media, civil leaders, and the public are giving Obama a pass on issues they trashed Bush over?

-or-

b) that Katrina states aren't getting funding in this huge 'stimulus' to repair hurricane damage?


If it's a), are you surprised? Regardless of what I think of Bush II, I'm not so myopic that I don't realize people LOVED giving him crap about everything.

If it's b), then I'm glad. I don't think sending more money to a region that was devastated by their own stupidity just so they can rebuild and have it destroyed again in a few years is fiscally responsible.
 

Socio

Golden Member
May 19, 2002
1,732
2
81
I don?t feel too bad about this as 31,400 families from the Katrina disaster continue to have their rent paid for by tax payers 4 years later.

Rental aid for Katrina victims extended

NEW ORLEANS -- The federal government is providing six more months of rental assistance to give thousands of families affected by the 2005 hurricanes extra time to reach self-sufficiency or to get into other housing aid programs.

About 31,400 families have continued receiving federal help paying rent as part of a disaster housing program that was set to expire March 1.

This was on the news and for the most part it seems there is no incentive for them to get jobs and move into other housing that they would have to pay for. Why would they when they can stay where they are at and get rent for free?
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
It happened like more than three years ago, it's time for them to pick themselves the hell up already, I mean come ON.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Originally posted by: sactoking
I'm not sure what to take away from this. Is the point:

a) that governors, media, civil leaders, and the public are giving Obama a pass on issues they trashed Bush over?

-or-

b) that Katrina states aren't getting funding in this huge 'stimulus' to repair hurricane damage?


If it's a), are you surprised? Regardless of what I think of Bush II, I'm not so myopic that I don't realize people LOVED giving him crap about everything.

If it's b), then I'm glad. I don't think sending more money to a region that was devastated by their own stupidity just so they can rebuild and have it destroyed again in a few years is fiscally responsible.

Seems to me it's both a) and b), plus c)

C) being that there are billions of unspent money laying around. No need to add more.

Fern
 

TheoPetro

Banned
Nov 30, 2004
3,499
1
0
They shouldnt have gotten the $ (to rebuild) in the first place. "Here ive got a GREAT fucking idea! Lets build a city on a cost where there are a shitton of hurricanes every year. The kicker is we will build it, get ready for this, BELOW SEA LEVEL!" Pay for some of the cost for the people to relocate and be done with it. This bullshit about rebuilding that place is absolutely re-fucking-tarded.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,002
115
106
Wow, there is a massive hate-on for New Orleans here. Why continue to rebuild every time the San Andreas gets a little jittery, OK gets a little windy, or NY just plane has a bad day? C'mon. Get real. New Orleans exists where it does because it is the perfect, logical location for a massive port on the Gulf of Mexico with access to most of the nations navagable river systems and the world's oceans. Some of the land is above sea level, where it was originally built upon, but the usefulness of the port has grown way beyond the amount of high ground available. Besides, this was a man-made disaster. Katrina didn't even hit New Orleans. Don't blame them.

Should we be paying for individual citizens 4 years later? I think not, but we are crazy not to invest in rebuilding its infrastructure to protect itself from future storms and improve living conditions. New Orleans is simply too useful to this nation. If you cannot see that, then you are either extremely short-sighted or ignorant of its history.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: Socio
I don?t feel too bad about this as 31,400 families from the Katrina disaster continue to have their rent paid for by tax payers 4 years later.

Rental aid for Katrina victims extended

NEW ORLEANS -- The federal government is providing six more months of rental assistance to give thousands of families affected by the 2005 hurricanes extra time to reach self-sufficiency or to get into other housing aid programs.

About 31,400 families have continued receiving federal help paying rent as part of a disaster housing program that was set to expire March 1.

This was on the news and for the most part it seems there is no incentive for them to get jobs and move into other housing that they would have to pay for. Why would they when they can stay where they are at and get rent for free?

This poster said it perfectly

"Unfortunately, Matthew, a lot of these scum-sucking entitlement types are getting much more than $500.00 a month. We know a family that has done absoulutely NOTHING to try and get back on their feet since Katrina. (Of course they were like this BEFORE the storm as well). They lived in a FEMA trailer until St. Tammany forced them out of it, and now have their $1600.00 a month rent paid by FEMA. Factor that figure into your calculations!! It's absolutely disgusting! When are those of us who do it right, who worked extra jobs to rebuild, who pay our taxes and contribute to society, going to catch a break?"

This culture can not survive like this. Productive people will simply quit and join. I have no problem helping people but work should be mandatory for assistance.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Wheezer there does not need to be a dime in stimulus - they are on payroll already.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
Why build up the lower bottoms in Louisiana, when another hurricane could come through this year and wipe it out! Just fill it in about 20 feet and build on top of it.

Here in Illinois along the Mississippi River we get floods and people just keep rebuilding. What I say is if they are not smart enough to go to higher ground the Federal Government should just tell them that they are on their own.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Don't worry, this won't be the last "stimulus package"... trust me.

Someone needs to put up a counter on the web that shows Bush's total spending, and a timer to see just how long it takes Obama to blow past him! At this rate, even with Bush's out-of-control spending habits, that shouldn't take long at all... :(
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,644
9,948
136
Originally posted by: Wheezer
so they are not getting shit and all of a sudden that is ok because they have more than they need. And they got more than then need when who was president again? (hint NOT Obama)

I find this a legitimate issue, when our government spends $10 trillion to ?save? the economy, and people still go to bed hungry at night in this country.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Originally posted by: palehorse
Don't worry, this won't be the last "stimulus package"... trust me.

Someone needs to put up a counter on the web that shows Bush's total spending, and a timer to see just how long it takes Obama to blow past him! At this rate, even with Bush's out-of-control spending habits, that shouldn't take long at all... :(
I can't wait to hear the excuses from the Democrats on why Obama is not a tax and spend liberal.

A lot of us on the right were insistent that no matter how much Bush was spending he would never spend as much as a Democrat and Obama has already proved us right.
 

Newbian

Lifer
Aug 24, 2008
24,779
882
126
Originally posted by: Skoorb
It happened like more than three years ago, it's time for them to pick themselves the hell up already, I mean come ON.

Didn't most of them get a check and end up wasting it on crap and still cry about it?

Seriously lets just forget the majority of these scumbags and move on.
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
Soylent green is the (final) solution. Eliminate hunger and perpetual grifters in one fell and tasty swoop.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
We must have a lot of $200k/year earners on this board.

Otherwise why are you complaining? Your taxes are going down under Obama.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Wow, there is a massive hate-on for New Orleans here. Why continue to rebuild every time the San Andreas gets a little jittery, OK gets a little windy, or NY just plane has a bad day? C'mon. Get real. New Orleans exists where it does because it is the perfect, logical location for a massive port on the Gulf of Mexico with access to most of the nations navagable river systems and the world's oceans. Some of the land is above sea level, where it was originally built upon, but the usefulness of the port has grown way beyond the amount of high ground available. Besides, this was a man-made disaster. Katrina didn't even hit New Orleans. Don't blame them.

Should we be paying for individual citizens 4 years later? I think not, but we are crazy not to invest in rebuilding its infrastructure to protect itself from future storms and improve living conditions. New Orleans is simply too useful to this nation. If you cannot see that, then you are either extremely short-sighted or ignorant of its history.
My points are about state-leeches, not the efficacy of New Orleans as a city. I don't know how many years these useless tits need to get up off their ass. It's been several so far.
We must have a lot of $200k/year earners on this board.

Otherwise why are you complaining? Your taxes are going down under Obama.
Damn, you really are short-sighted.

 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
BS dishonestly posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: palehorse
Don't worry, this won't be the last "stimulus package"... trust me.

Someone needs to put up a counter on the web that shows Bush's total spending, and a timer to see just how long it takes Obama to blow past him! At this rate, even with Bush's out-of-control spending habits, that shouldn't take long at all... :(
I can't wait to hear the excuses from the Democrats on why Obama is not a tax and spend liberal.

A lot of us on the right were insistent that no matter how much Bush was spending he would never spend as much as a Democrat and Obama has already proved us right.
He cut my taxes.

Do you honestly believe (well asking you to be honest is a stretch) that if McCain had been elected or if Bush was still in office we wouldn't be spending this kind of money? The only Candidate that would have not spent this kind of money trying to kick start this economy is Ron Paul and I didn't see you support him

 

Fingolfin269

Lifer
Feb 28, 2003
17,948
34
91
Originally posted by: jpeyton
We must have a lot of $200k/year earners on this board.

Otherwise why are you complaining? Your taxes are going down under Obama.

One of these days I'd love to. And btw... your sig... seriously? These guys have impressed you enough already that you want to vote for them in '12?
 

Mean MrMustard

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2001
3,144
10
81
Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
This is a STIMULUS bill (well claimed to be), not a "help the victims" bill.

That is exactly what a stimulus bill is. But I am glad Katrina "victims" aren't getting anything for rebuilding in the same damn place.