Remember When

[Pirata]

but they cut the clip off so perfectly right before he does.

I saw the same thing. he replied that the supported and voted for a lesser bill but they cut that off.

The roof at the Smithsonian got a bunch of press. It had been leaking way before Sandy. Sandy caused some new leaks and so there you go, new roof on Sandy dollars. Does the Smithsonian not have insurance?

"Private insurers must fulfill their commitment to the region; public assistance must be targeted for public benefit; resources must be directed to those in greatest need; and impacted States and localities must contribute, as appropriate, to the costs of rebuilding," OMB director Jeff Zients wrote to Congress as part of the request.

I used to have property in Florida. When Charlie hit, a bunch of people in the community trundled down to FEMA to get their free generator. None of them had any damage. The power was out for 12 hours or so. Just one example of the BS that goes on with funding after a storm.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

He is a politician and they prepare for how they will spin something probably more than anything they do while in office. He's had 10 years to realize that there was damage to the roof caused by Sandy. Of course he knows it was.

He just wants you to buy his spin.

The results are in here. Almost all of the Sandy funding was used for issues related to Sandy. Some additional funding for other declared disasters in 2012 which were not yet funded were also added in.

Yes I agree with your first sentence. They all do, both democrats and republicans. Which politician doesn't want you to buy their spin? As I've mentioned on this thread, we might be hearing Chuck spinning why the filibuster is much needed in a few months after the spin on how it must go. That's what all politicians do. According to the report Pirata posted from ABC, the damage was there before the storm. I will give the benefit of the doubt to Dana it's probably #FakeNews.

 

[Merge]

Sandy caused some new leaks and so there you go, new roof on Sandy dollars.

Correct. Sandy caused new damage. Federal government helped pay for sandy related damage.

Does the Smithsonian not have insurance?

Probably. Though different rules apply when there is a disaster declared.

I used to have property in Florida. When Charlie hit, a bunch of people in the community trundled down to FEMA to get their free generator. None of them had any damage. The power was out for 12 hours or so. Just one example of the BS that goes on with funding after a storm.

Yes. Some people are assholes and will look to take advantage of anything they can.
That is not why politicians were voting no though.

 

[Merge]

Yes I agree with your first sentence. They all do, both democrats and republicans. Which politician doesn't want you to buy their spin? As I've mentioned on this thread, we might be hearing Chuck spinning why the filibuster is much needed in a few months after the spin on how it must go. That's what all politicians do.

Yes, exactly. They all do it.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

Correct. Sandy caused new damage. Federal government helped pay for sandy related damage.

I would hope that's true. I think any organization, even the most honest ones, push look for that gray area

 

[Pirata]

Correct. Sandy caused new damage. Federal government helped pay for sandy related damage.

You don't get it.

The roof was compromised and should have been repaired prior to the storm and not part of the relief. Sandy was a gift from God to pay for something that should have been fixed previously.

"Sandy related" damage casts too wide a net.

I am all for immediate health and safety relief. The founding fathers never intended the government to be an no fee insurance agency.

 

[Merge]

I would hope that's true. I think any organization, even the most honest ones, push look for that gray area

Sure, and there is no way for any of us know really know.

Just like Smithsonian claimed damage was from the storm, there will be plenty of claims coming from Ian related damage and none of us are going to know the validity of all of those claims.

 

[Merge]

The roof was compromised and should have been repaired prior to the storm and not part of the relief. Sandy was a gift from God to pay for something that should have been fixed previously.

You're just making stuff up. You have no idea what the damage was, what was there previously and how much worse Sandy made it.

 

[cernjSHU]

Moreover, DeSantis voted against all Sandy funding, even the initial $9 billion.

 

[ed odowd]

Sandy was a good example of bipartisan effort to clean up after a disaster.I know some republicans criticized Christie for hugging Obama ,but they were wrong.My son snd Chris went to the Oval Office to discuss federal aid for Sandy and he told me Obama was very gracious and supportive of New Jersey needs with no politics.This is way governor and president should act after a disaster.

 

[SHUSA]

You don't get it.

The roof was compromised and should have been repaired prior to the storm and not part of the relief. Sandy was a gift from God to pay for something that should have been fixed previously.

"Sandy related" damage casts too wide a net.

I am all for immediate health and safety relief. The founding fathers never intended the government to be an no fee insurance agency.

if sandy didnt activate FEMA they probably would have had the insurance company pynfor it. your insurance doesnt pay out unless its damage from an event.

 

[Pirata]

One day prior to that vote he vote FOR

H.R.219 - Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013​

"To improve and streamline disaster assistance for Hurricane Sandy, and for other purposes."

The bill you speak of is:

H.R.41 - To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program.​

 

[Merge]

One day prior to that vote he vote FOR

H.R.219 - Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013​

"To improve and streamline disaster assistance for Hurricane Sandy, and for other purposes."

The bill you speak of is:

H.R.41 - To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program.​

Right. He voted against the funding.
He voted for a bill to streamline the process for spending money, just didn't actually vote for the funding parts.

 

[Pirata]

He voted against a permanent increase in the borrowing limit.

HR 41 was a scare tactic stop gap measure while the $60B vs $24B measures was debated. The increased borrowing was not needed once the funding was approved but would have been a permanent increase to the borrowing limit. That is what they opposed.

You are clinging to the narrative that they did not support relief which is just not true. The voting record never tells the whole story.

 

[Merge]

It voted not on increase borrowing. Funds were still available.

Keep going. Ian death toll is over 100 and you are Lord Cern are arguing about the minutia of funding sources. The money was there and he voted to release it.

Now you're making up what H.R. 219 did. It did not release funding.

Also, over 100 are dead and you're here making up excuses related to votes from 10 years ago because those politicians play for your team.

It was just politicians being politicians. Democrats do it and republicans do it.
They had the votes to pass the bills so Desantis and Rubio got to take their stance to pretend they were being principled fiscal conservatives.

 

[Pirata]

I amended my post. You replied while I was editing.

 

[Pirata]

Long term we have to get the federal government out of the insurance business.

There's a reason people can't get insurance on these homes. Another example of the insanity of government doing anything. Insurance company knows that it's ridiculous to ensure a home in the hurricanes zone but the government is more than willing to do so with your dollars.

 

[Pirata]

It was just politicians being politicians. Democrats do it and republicans do it.
They had the votes to pass the bills so Desantis and Rubio got to take their stance to pretend they were being principled fiscal conservatives.

I completely agree with you on that. I was going to post something similar but you worded it fine. I see this thing on a local level all the time with my business. Several times I've gone into a vote knowing we had the votes but we had to listen to a half hour of speeches that were pointless just so somebody could say they were this or that.

That's what I meant when I said the voting record never tells the whole story. You would need to go back to the congressional record and read the speeches they made. I tried doing it but the damn congressional record is ridiculously large and searching it is too time-consuming.

 

[NYShoreGuy]

 

[Pirata]

Please return to K-Pax

 

[HALL85]

Stan Van Gundy? lol. Do random people become experts on a topic because they have a Twitter account? Go dribble the ball Stan…

 

[SHUSA]

Stan Van Gundy? lol. Do random people become experts on a topic because they have a Twitter account? Go dribble the ball Stan…

no they become experts because they have a piratecrew account...