No announcement yet.


This topic is closed.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    The President had FEMA put the Fire Act $100,000,000. back in the budget yesterday. See news accounts.


    • #62

      >Isn't it more appropriate to look to 225 years of jurisprudence to see what's constitutional and what's not? <

      Perhaps one should look at the Constitution to see what is constitutional and what is not. Are we so illierate that we can't read it for ourselves?

      >And three different SCs since have questioned the ruling - thinking it might be flawed, but guess what! Courts have to go by PRECEDENT. So once one judge (or set of judges, in this case) screws up a decision - the rest of history is stuck with it. <

      I respectfully disagree, by 'law' when the SC rules on a case it ONLY effects THAT case. Lower courts can use it as a guide but it is NOT law.

      >Just because a court rules one way doesn't make it right. Might make it law, but it's still may not be right. <

      I am sure you recognize the operative in your statement, hopefully others do.

      >As for the nation being under a 'energy crisis', maybe some of the yahoos in California should shut off their damn billboards, quit driving gas hog SUVs, and turn off the air conditioners now and then.
      The human race was around for a long @$$ time before air conditioners and SUVs. We
      can live without them now. <

      or build power plants would make more reasonable, no?

      >You go first. When you give up your home air conditioner, your car air conditioner, hell, ALL of your electrical devices, then the rest of us will follow suit. I think we'll be waiting a long time.<

      I wish you would have left the 'us' out of that I may go kicking and screaming but not a vollie on that one.


      • #63
        What this action shows, for me at least, is two things - that the President is a politician, and can see the writing on the wall when large constituencies complain (congrats to the FIRE Act supporters - though we disagree, I've always supported your right and even responsibility to express your views to your elected representatives). And secondly, that the government is responsive to the kinds of campaigns that FIRE Act supporters have mounted. Whether you support the Act or not (and anyone reading these boards knows that I vehemently oppose it), I think we all have to realize that it's a good thing when the government listens and acts on the expressed will of the people. In fact, this really puts the lie to all of those who talked about the President as if he were some kind of willfully ignorant buffoon who gets pleasure from placing firefighters in danger (hey - I'm just paraphrasing what some of the more strident Act supporters have said; don't believe me? Go back and read some of the forums that had to do with the Act).

        That said, I have to say that I'm quite disappointed with the President's decision on this one. The FIRE Act was and still is a thinly-veiled "feel good" measure that will wind up hurting more than it helps, for two reasons. First, it represents a widening of the federal government's responsibilities - the feds have already trespassed into other areas better left to local jurisdictions, such as law enforcement and education. This is never a good thing, contrary to what some Act supporters would have you believe. Whenever you accept funding from the feds, you are by definition giving up a bit of your autonomy; giving up a bit of your local control; and giving up the ability to define your funding priorities based on your own local challenges and experience. Second, all of the time taken up in just the application process will take time away from necessary and urgent actions to secure better and more reliable funding on the local level. - I have to digress here a bit - have you ever dealt with the federal bureacracy on such a level before? Be prepared to have your application rejected because your total was off by $3.00, or you didn't dot the "i" on page 4. Have fun! - Anyway, the fire companies that have the people, time, and resources to shepherd the application along, and deal with all of the bureacratic bullsh*t bound to come pouring out of FEMA will get some money. The others, not for lack of trying, will not. And meantime, the resources that could have been directed toward securing that all-important local funding will have been squandered.

        Think this is a good thing? Yep, it is in the sense that it shows that our government is still responsive (as it should be, and in fact is REQUIRED to be). But is it good for the fire service? I think it's a mixed blessing at best.

        Again, though - nice job to those of you Act supporters who took the time to express your opinions to your elected representatives. You did the right thing by standing by your beliefs, and you were able to see the thing through to victory.

        Stay safe, everyone.

        J. Black

        The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated.


        300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)


        Upper 300x250