someoneyouknow
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Posts
- 28,274
When hurricane Sandy hit the Northeast in 2012, Ted Cruz led the Texas delegation in Congress to oppose the relief bill which eventually totaled $51 billion. He has defended his opposition saying:
A very admirable and true conservative stance. Spend what you need, when you need it, and no more.
Other Republicans who voted against the relief package said the federal government shouldn't be bailing out local communities (though oddly, these same Republicans had no problem bailing out banks and Wall Street firms a few years prior so they could pay out their bonuses with taxpayer money).
Again, not out of line for people claiming to conservatives. In fact, those principled stands are ones I too embrace (to an extent), for all those who claim I'm a "liberal" or "socialist" or "communist" or whatever nonsense their feebled minds can dredge up.
The problem is, they were wrong claiming there was loads of pork in the relief bill. As the LA Times relates, the Congressional Research Service went over the Sandy relief bill, line by line, and compared it to what then president Obama's original funding request was, the House bill which passed, and the final version.
As the CRS determined, every provision was justified either as relief to the immediate victims of Hurricane Sandy in 2012, as recovery and rehabilitation of buildings and services that had been damaged by the storm, or as preparatory work for the next storm in the same region. In other words, all the whining about pork or offsetting the spending with cuts, was nonsense.
Now with Hurricane Harvey having wreaked its vengeance on a city which has sprawled unchecked for decades, in a state which has vehemently opposed anything to do with climate change, the question becomes, will Ted Cruz, and the other Texas Republicans, vote for a relief bill which will not be offset by spending cuts and which will bail out local communities? Will they stand by their principles, or will hypocrisy win out?
Stay tuned with popcorn bucket in hand.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/29/opinions/harvey-relief-funds-opinion-israel/index.html
http://time.com/4919599/ted-cruz-superstorm-sandy-hurricane-harvey-spending/
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-sandy-pork-20170830-story.html
P.S. This article from 2013 was very prescient when it said:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/house-republicans-kill-hurricane-sandy-relief-bill
"The accurate thing to say is that I and a number of others enthusiastically and emphatically supported hurricane relief for Sandy. Hurricane relief and disaster relief has been a vital federal role for a long, long time and it should continue," he said. "The problem with that particular bill is it became a $50 billion bill that was filled with unrelated pork."
. . .
"What I said then and still believe now is that it’s not right for politicians to exploit a disaster when people are hurting to pay for their own political wish list," Cruz told MSNBC on Monday.
. . .
"What I said then and still believe now is that it’s not right for politicians to exploit a disaster when people are hurting to pay for their own political wish list," Cruz told MSNBC on Monday.
A very admirable and true conservative stance. Spend what you need, when you need it, and no more.
Other Republicans who voted against the relief package said the federal government shouldn't be bailing out local communities (though oddly, these same Republicans had no problem bailing out banks and Wall Street firms a few years prior so they could pay out their bonuses with taxpayer money).
Again, not out of line for people claiming to conservatives. In fact, those principled stands are ones I too embrace (to an extent), for all those who claim I'm a "liberal" or "socialist" or "communist" or whatever nonsense their feebled minds can dredge up.
The problem is, they were wrong claiming there was loads of pork in the relief bill. As the LA Times relates, the Congressional Research Service went over the Sandy relief bill, line by line, and compared it to what then president Obama's original funding request was, the House bill which passed, and the final version.
As the CRS determined, every provision was justified either as relief to the immediate victims of Hurricane Sandy in 2012, as recovery and rehabilitation of buildings and services that had been damaged by the storm, or as preparatory work for the next storm in the same region. In other words, all the whining about pork or offsetting the spending with cuts, was nonsense.
Now with Hurricane Harvey having wreaked its vengeance on a city which has sprawled unchecked for decades, in a state which has vehemently opposed anything to do with climate change, the question becomes, will Ted Cruz, and the other Texas Republicans, vote for a relief bill which will not be offset by spending cuts and which will bail out local communities? Will they stand by their principles, or will hypocrisy win out?
Stay tuned with popcorn bucket in hand.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/29/opinions/harvey-relief-funds-opinion-israel/index.html
http://time.com/4919599/ted-cruz-superstorm-sandy-hurricane-harvey-spending/
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-sandy-pork-20170830-story.html
P.S. This article from 2013 was very prescient when it said:
But while Republicans treat the tristate area like an ATM machine for their campaigns, they don’t have a lot of constituents in the area, hence the callous lack of urgency. If the hurricane had affected Texas, you can be sure of a very different tone.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/house-republicans-kill-hurricane-sandy-relief-bill
