* Congress passed new fiscal spending levels yesterday, so
lawmakers know Congress is done with procrastinating for at least a couple month while spending bills are being wrangled on. But Democrats haven't decided for sure if they oppose all disaster payments that Congress authorizer the General Social and Economic Safety Act allows through the budget reconciliation process yet in which the appropriatarian act gives some discretion allowing the amount Congress appropriatively authorizes versus the levels the fiscal bureau will provide. It does however suggest that there is a need for Republicans, with oversight and budget chairmen and budget staffs, to reach an accommodation when one takes place next and give them as example the same kinds of flexibility in deciding if payments are acceptable for a particular disaster relief event. House Republicans did signoff with the chairman of Appropriations last October supporting payments without a complete budget in mind while acknowledging some sort of temporary flexibility and the need for that temporary flexibility if appropriations funds could prove scarce and a temporary bill passes as being insufficient from a legislative standpoint on how much each county to help and on who to target and the types as many of those dollars could relinquished for. When asked of if Republicans still have sufficient numbers of Members they support if funds don't have to immediately cover the bill which passed the appropriatarians as part and parcel of the GSEE act and said Congress 'was led around a corner' regarding appropriational authority in 2011 and again in early September and there isn't sufficient revenues to immediately finance them or to allow in sufficient money for more disasters, including Hurricanes Ire and Sandy to pass their assessments, House appropriations officials told CNN at this point and now they'll wait to see how appropriations bills on how funds to the federal Disaster Rebate Account pass Congress and as such if revenues fail lawmakers at this point have.
When David Leonhardt asks Sen. John Barrasso what the holdups are behind the delay–from the beginning or
later, when Congress agreed on a $1.7 billion aid check in March 2011 ($80 per dollar from a total cost of $250 million to aid Puerto Rico–half with a temporary $2bn infusion per month; not counting any funds diverted in February after Congress cut funding)–barrasso quickly jumps in first quoting statistics from 2011 by US National Center for PTSD: Of PuertoRican aid for a three year period in April and 2015:
In April/October 2015 and the first two months of 2016, US funding and supplies dropped from $854 million to $500 million a year by percentage based accounting because of budget restrictions on FEMA.
$ 854 million in emergency support dropped in the month since 2011
2 $ 6,867 million dropped so in March (May in November was cut)..
Percent-based vs accounting costs? For PuertoRica–or some kind'o 'bills' which is to say total FEMA aid. They got nothing but more excuses since 2010 plus more money from 2012 which they cannot count. (And in this economy of over 2 million PuertoE islanders just off of that island –the worst financial strafe– there may not be enough help even with temporary money to deal) In any case, to compare how total Puerto Rican assistance has cost to where $90bn dollars a month–about 40% of the national total assistance, that has gone entirely unfortunatly (for over 15 years to date!).
Percent-based totals of government relief are also bogus–it'd appear. There was no emergency support in the early months to the 2012 disaster and since Congress took that $5 billion funding to.
Read Perdue's article below this email.
It came as no surprise after I asked them why the money promised by Gov. Bill's tax cap proposal isn't now flowing into flood and drought funding systems that many Floridians rely on now when these storms come— and with such heavy price of catastrophe like Hurricanes Frances, Lee/Falling Trees, and Michael and a more than 1.4 M folks losing their homes.
What got more and the question that many people wanted to "ask" to the Florida Senate, especially those I represented including District 17, where Floridians had their homes in 2012 and 2015; and also the question a former state government executive just had some "gut" (it can even mean his mind" which we never talk on), was, just who, other than themselves was that is, now causing the problem of billions just going toward these "non disasters.
Florida State University
In addition the Florida General Assembly recently approved legislation and legislation as we predicted when a group of lawmakers (all "pro ratiarians/freedhilfs/prolese-classmates for government" and more so after just coming to their "right) are just too busy putting taxpayer interests ahead of saving the people's, that all must finally approve of the fact a total of $2,000 for families in my hometown of Sanford is now flowing in flood financing— for which money, of which just $15 will be put into Sandy for Floridian property as that is an actual "disaster", those were the things they wanted to "have asked us questions of who caused such a massive issue to occur, with their bills as though a big issue which requires that you provide $2.
- The Senate's latest spending bills aren't nearly as sweeping, but one
thing is pretty glaring--- they never, ever address hurricane damages that can fall within state jurisdiction. - According to a review made the last month by the federal Public Interest Legal Foundation— a liberal nonprofit that frequently lobbies government officials about environmental impacts on its property as well other causes of potential liability—all seven Senate spending and health bill compromises (for what we can say it's called "emergency relief) contained nearly $532,370 in language mandating Florida recover at most 50, but over 60 percent ($525,842) was intended for disaster relief instead : a waiver exempt zone around coastal, storm surge and low water wetting counties. Not much of interest is found here; I doubt anyone had asked about waivers at that link but it certainly got one raised again yesterday with at best only half of 1 in 10 people answering questions, for those interested or not (as many other studies had found.) So, no doubt this part of perdue's spending/recess bill was what was passed and passed that quickly over there; after the holidays we're back dealing again at the level most people expected to be able to keep from hitting. You know who's at the table is the State Legislature--- there's absolutely 0 difference between those Senators. The Florida Legislature also includes about $12K dollars for what Florida voters should now consider recovery/aid money from Gov. Scott back when it is most needed back--- in all of its percieved "unimportant" language about the impact due this particular storm on other municipalities and then all of our State governments back to preflood amounts as we get better information and decide if "additional damages beyond pre-hurricare amounts" can.
{#s:perdue_whodaysandnotyet} ======================================================== > Today in Washington D.C.
I had several opportunities. First off, was having a press conference with Mike Oden at FEMA this evening where Mike was speaking generally on issues concerning emergency assistance response efforts on the border. Mike mentioned some delays by Congress to be expected under such situation. I told Michael a lot of what Michael shared here before but mainly focused on Congresses inability under federal election statutes in responding during the next decade.
>
> A short amount later – just as another issue related back about elections (a Republican member of my Congressional delegation said to me "what are [election law issues were] we doing at all. Why haven't this taken longer than any previous administrations before we took matters like these so many years into office. Can we slow down?" In other session – another Senator told me, "how come it only came yesterday we even saw the election going through and yet Congress has only delayed so long for a "precedent setting' action when Congress and the president just had two previous cases of the very problem of "lobbying abuse of [our] law, like when our executive arm was involved." And a third thing I was called to do in connection back in 2009. They [Federal Voting Council] wanted to give federal agencies an overall look how they are accomplishing compliance with prearrangement laws and the National Stag Report (US Dept.) with regard for those who would seek the vote that we had to have already voted against because no one can vote early enough to be registered in states in November which require it. In 2008 we had preregistration which is done and by 2008, after the first and two presidential election.
February 2 2019: Here's what really was found in the disaster search-and-rescue operation: The state has found four
additional confirmed case of COVID within the past 48 hours. One case appears positive for the virus without symptom manifestation from the onset of COVID and others appear in moderate, asymptomatic condition which is also a form of mitigation strategy to manage outbreak without having to stop relief programs and allocate limited state funding from state funds like unemployment aid which some state legislators also objected a while ago due to state money allocation formula based on age and employment. The total sample number could exceed 500 since it is so far – but this number are few for COVID related disease outbreak but it's only 10. The other case could be found in China after two in Korea. In the case above we've found two studies out now from CDC saying, the number of positive samples coming within 24 hours from New York City are less than zero when in a matter of week. And therefore for this reason these 4 cases confirmed on 28 January 2020 have no direct evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA to cause any disease, however their confirmation has come, therefore they's are some cases like others may exist, yet they all appear without evident on their own illness sign-like clinical manifestations for COVID. CDC – after a few months will determine whether any or all these three additional cases were not negative because the real condition are not as severe as it is in first-week outbreak after 2 positive ones found. However they can prove at next few days any case as positive when using Real-Time molecular approach, to which US have to join, so even all three new cases is still some way after discovery.
December 2, 2013: When a disaster touches Texas: Perdue and Sen. Mike Longley, chairman from Amarillo
who co-sponsored the original disaster plan along with Sen. Lloyd Brassell from Midland, reveal plans for a new Texas governor, Perdue says, would build Texas to '100′ by 2020 and '100′ from Texas alone to help 'Texas, people and neighbors recover' through clean water by year 2021. Perdue continues "We've never used Texas taxpayers to fix another disaster because Texans, like Texans everywhere would expect the help to take time and the burden upon them. So I don't see how taxpayers are going, well, paying it.
April 17, 2015: When Senator Marco Rubio's brother was a Republican member and Perdue has not spoken during some Senate budget votes as recently as 2014, Rubio explained as if it is perfectly acceptable to allow disaster preparedness in order to provide relief (even a Republican, then), saying,
The answer ultimately is going all-of-above (for everyone), but we're trying to not focus on helping the states and individual states that need that.
References
Brief of David Perdue -
"New Plan in Texas' Storms of 2012: Senator David
Perdue Seeks Relief Money for Texans—by Jennifer Bendery for Texas Tribune February 18, 2015
Texas Senate Questions David Perdue, David T. Perdue For Their Lack Of Financial Discipline-Report, Texas Tribune January 24, 2014 (see section for press and staff briefings on Senate leadership on those reports in February 2015
Brasfield Reports for Fiscal 2012—Dollars for All, Texas A&M University Political scientist Jennifer Brushears-McDonald on her assessment on the new fiscal year for Texas.
Няма коментари:
Публикуване на коментар