Elections 16/16 members of the house in Florida vote against aid

They have ZERO interest in helping average Americans. Their very ideology is dead set against it actually. They'd rather punish woke corporations by giving them tax breaks and cutting as many regulations as possible on their business practices. That'll teach them. All y'all right-wing populists need to wake up, man. I say this with genuine concern. You are getting FUCKED.
Take from the poor, give to the rich, thats the MO.
 
I didn't say there was. The point I was making was that they'll name a bill they everyone will get behind such as "End childhood cancer" and then the bill has little to nothing to do with the title.

You didn't catch that the first time around? With the tears in your eyes, you thought I was citing a specific bill?

<Dany07>

So since you didn't understand I was talking about a general political manipulation strategy, it's safe to assume your reply post was just some emotional rambling in a "see!!! I can make stuff up too!!!" way as you miss the entire point

<{Heymansnicker}>
Typical right-wing projection.

<Y2JSmirk>
 
From the outside looking in and not knowing any details, it almost feels like it has to be true.

I mean, why would anyone vote against support for their own state? It feels like they MUST have good reasons.
Republican governors turn down federal money ALL the time that's intended to help the poorest and most vulnerable people in their state, single mothers with children and the elderly. They have an ideological opposition to helping poor people. Libertarian extremists like the Koch brothers and related donors are their most influential donors. They're heavily influenced by Ayn Rand who thought helping the weak was immoral. American "conservatives" and Canadian Conservatives are a mile (or 1.38 km) apart...
 
Republican governors turn down federal money ALL the time that's intended to help the poorest and most vulnerable people in their state, single mothers with children and the elderly. They have an ideological opposition to helping poor people. Libertarian extremists like the Koch brothers and related donors are their most influential donors. They're heavily influenced by Ayn Rand who thought helping the weak was immoral. American "conservatives" and Canadian Conservatives are a mile (or 1.38 km) apart...

Sigh.
 
He should bow out and take the L
But I guess he’s going down fighting
He's not even going down fighting. He just ran away from the simple question I asked.

Now he's lurking the thread, waiting for some other poster to respond to my post, so he can run he and go "uhhh, uhhh he's a dummy pants!" (while continuing to avoid the initial arguments) which begs for a like from that poster.

Not only is he dumb, but he's cowardly and is desperately looking for friends.

<Dany07>

I never expect anything remotely smart from Jackie Blue and he confirms that by his usual backpedaling with some weird, corny joke/reference.
 
Why not indeed? So damned simple yet nobody wants to implement it. Odd, right?
They tried to pass a bill for that but it had too much other stuff in it to get passed
 
Why not indeed? So damned simple yet nobody wants to implement it. Odd, right?
Time.

Laws begin as ideas. First, a representative sponsors a bill. The bill is then assigned to a committee for study. If released by the committee, the bill is put on a calendar to be voted on, debated or amended. If the bill passes by simple majority (218 of 435), the bill moves to the Senate. In the Senate, the bill is assigned to another committee and, if released, debated and voted on. Again, a simple majority (51 of 100) passes the bill. Finally, a conference committee made of House and Senate members works out any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval. The Government Printing Office prints the revised bill in a process called enrolling. The President has 10 days to sign or veto the enrolled bill.

The big pieces are calendaring the bill and then getting the House and Senate committees to work out any differences. People would propose amendments, argue over dollar amounts, etc. It is faster to attach it to a bill that's further along the process.

That's why this proposal was wrapped up in the adding money to FEMA component. It's a lot faster to just give FEMA the money to use whenever there is a disaster, instead of having to vote to allocate money every time a disaster happens. And it's wrapped into the larger spending package because that was already scheduled for a vote.
 
I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion but, This shit happens almost every year. At what point do you say, "Live there at your own risk" why should tax payers in other states pay to rebuild FL?


Insurance exists. They need to use it.
 
Honestly wouldn’t surprise if they just didn’t want the Biden administration looking good in the media aiding Florida.
 
Insurance exists. They need to use it.
My same thoughts.When i bought my previous house the bank required additional flood insurance because i lived 100 feet from a creek. Cost us an additional $1000/yr on top of the 800/yr for the regular homeowners insurance. Now that said, I hated having to pay for flood insurance so i can see FL residents not wanting that extra bill, but in my situation, that creek would have had to raise up 20 feet just to be at my house ground level. The highest it has ever got in the last 30 years was less then 10 feet. Bottom line that house has never flooded since it was built 70 years ago. Now, back to my point, FL gets hurricanes almost every year and homes flooded or destroyed, If you can't afford flood insurance maybe FL isn't the state you should live in.
 
My same thoughts.When i bought my previous house the bank required additional flood insurance because i lived 100 feet from a creek. Cost us an additional $1000/yr on top of the 800/yr for the regular homeowners insurance. Now that said, I hated having to pay for flood insurance so i can see FL residents not wanting that extra bill, but in my situation, that creek would have had to raise up 20 feet just to be at my house ground level. The highest it has ever got in the last 30 years was less then 10 feet. Bottom line that house has never flooded since it was built 70 years ago. Now, back to my point, FL gets hurricanes almost every year and homes flooded or destroyed, If you can't afford flood insurance maybe FL isn't the state you should live in.

Where does the money even go? Like the relief money or charity money? Tens of millions were raised after the Camp Fire. But you would find it impossible to get help. Oh well
 


Can someone explain this?

Please hold your party to a higher standard



FEMA comes in and controls everything. Period.

Residents have no say. FEMA is the occupier. Truth!

For example, they put a tarp on a house that had a roof, in error, instead of the one missing it's roof. FEMA acknowledge it's mistake but said it would take weeks before they could move it. The homeowner volunteer, but was told it he moved it, it could result in him being fined and jailed.

You have a mayor, city council, state representatives, and a governor for a reason.

The most important right you have is the right to your property and you shouldn't have to ask if you can go into a "disaster area."
 
FEMA comes in and controls everything. Period.

Residents have no say. FEMA is the occupier. Truth!

For example, they put a tarp on a house that had a roof, in error, instead of the one missing it's roof. FEMA acknowledge it's mistake but said it would take weeks before they could move it. The homeowner volunteer, but was told it he moved it, it could result in him being fined and jailed.

You have a mayor, city council, state representatives, and a governor for a reason.

The most important right you have is the right to your property and you shouldn't have to ask if you can go into a "disaster area."
Yes I'm sure everyone working for FEMA is in it for the "control the masses" stuff
 
It's gonna rule so hard when Florida is underwater in like 3 years
 
Back
Top