New Orleans
My heart goes out to the people suffering on the Gulf Coast. The scope of this tragedy is absolutely heart-breaking.
Those of us far away can't lose focus that many great acts of volunteerism and heroism are going on. With private relief efforts hitting full-stride, we'll get on top of this situation and start recovering.
There will be time for criticism. We will learn from this and do better in the future. Now, though, each of us must help in some constructive manner.
Here is a link to FEMA's list of approved charities. Locally, KUTV is collecting funds at 1-877/908-0680. Also, Wells Fargo is collecting funds in all of its branches. God bless the victims.
Those of us far away can't lose focus that many great acts of volunteerism and heroism are going on. With private relief efforts hitting full-stride, we'll get on top of this situation and start recovering.
There will be time for criticism. We will learn from this and do better in the future. Now, though, each of us must help in some constructive manner.
Here is a link to FEMA's list of approved charities. Locally, KUTV is collecting funds at 1-877/908-0680. Also, Wells Fargo is collecting funds in all of its branches. God bless the victims.
posted by steve u. at 9/02/2005
Subscribe
7 Comments:
Mr. Urquhart, would you have voted for or against the $10 billion federal aid package for the victims of Katrina?
I am now quite tired of the Mayor of New Orleans. This guy acts as though he had no responsiblity in preparing his city for this very catastrophe.
For crying out loud, the City is BELOW sea level. You would think that he would have an emergency plan in place for this very disaster. When he saw the storm coming in, why didn't he have buses and food and emergency equipment moved to higher ground?
The essence of local government is to be the first responder to public safety emergencies, but instead, this dip stick just goes on the radio and cries about the federal government.
Im sick of it. And I'm sick of liberals exloiting disasters for political gain. (This reminds me of the Wellstone funeral fiasco.)
Anyway, Steve, when you get in the Senate could you please require these major cities to have emergency preparedness plans.
Patrick, yes, I would have voted for the relief package. This is a necessary start to cover costs of emergency medical care, food, shelter, repairing levees and other infrastructure, and pumping water. The federal aid should contain typical FEMA-local-match provisions (allowing the cities and states to shoulder some of the burden), though payment of that local portion might have to be deferred, given the extent of the damage.
Tom C., no doubt, plenty of lessons to be learned, including your point about preparedness. When we get further into the recovery phase, I will share some observations and suggestions based on my community's recent experiences with flooding and emergency response.
Clearly, many individuals and all levels of government could have performed better. The quick demise into lawlessness was shocking. And, recovery will be slow, difficult, and controversial. However, let's not lose focus that one week after catastrophic destruction of a major city, we're moving forward. By no means do I intend to minimize the tragedy and pain that people are feeling. But, as a nation, we will rebuild and go forward.
Thanks, Mr. Urquhart, for being so straightforward. Now I must ask where do you find Constitutional authority to vote for such a relief bill? Thank you in advance.
Patrick, commerce and spending clauses. Good question, though. I appreciate where I think you're coming from and do agree that the federal government is way beyond its bounds in many areas (and, yes, typically based on attenuated interpretations of the commerce and spending clauses); however, to me, infrastructure items of national importance (like interstate highways, regional dams and strategic levees) and disaster relief are permissible uses of federal tax money under the commerce clause. If you disagree, I'd welcome your thinking.
Mr. Urquhart, I am deeply saddened by your response. I highly recommend that you look at George F. Will's column of September 4, 2005. Here is the link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/03/AR2005090301006.html
The only infrastructure items enumerated in the Constitution are "Post Offices and post Roads" and perhaps "the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings." If we accept your apparent interpretation of the Commerce Clause, the Federal Government knows no bounds.
As James Madison reportedly said, "Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government."
Mr. Urquhart, I am looking for a real alternative to Senator Hatch. Regretfully, it does not appear that you have any more respect for the U.S. Constitution than he does.
Patrick, if you and I disagree, that's okay, but it seems you misread the Constitution and George Will. Your interpretation of Article I, section 8, does not square with any accepted jurisprudence I'm aware of. While regulatory powers are severely clipped, spending powers are not so closely clipped. Though you don't need to believe me, you might want to see what Justices Rehnquist and Scalia had to say in South Dakota v. Dole ("the constitutional limitations on Congress when exercising its spending power are less exacting than those on its authority to regulate directly.").
If your interpretation were correct, wouldn't that mean the very first Congress "bastardized" things by funding a lighthouse in Chesapeake Bay?
Now, the area where you and I will agree is found in Justice O'Connor's dissent in the Dole case: Congress should not backdoor regulate through coercive requirements inserted in spending provisions (see No Child Left Behind).
If you are aware of any case law or other interpretations supporting your view of the spending powers, please share.
<< Home