Government Money?

[FGFD43]

I'm not really sure where this thread belongs so I'm posting it in several forums. Sorry for the incovience. I keep hearing about how the fire service is underfunded, particularly compaired to law enforcement, and I agree. However, I worry about the thinking that we can find a new source in the federal government. Any of us that pays taxes knows that money from the federal government is far from free. First, that money comes out of the pockets of the same people that we get money from now, whether your dept. is dependant on donations, or receives local tax money or any other type funding. If the people we protect have to pay higher fed taxes, how much will be left over for donations or when will they be willing to raise thier local tax rate? Secondly, in order to receive any "grant" money from Uncle Sam, you know you will have untold amounts of hoops to jump through, some of which will affect how your dept. will hire new firefighters, retain experienced ones, promote leaders, run your operations, and, more than likely what you can do with the money you do get. If this sounds farfetched, ask anyone in your local law enforcement administration what has to be done to qualify for some of the so-called free money they get , and how much actually ends up be used at the local level. I hope I didn't come off to preachy or political but I tend not to believe the man when he says, "I'm with the federal government, we're here to help."

------------------
Kevin Sink
Fair Grove Fire Dept.
Thomasville, NC USA
[email protected]

[tinner]

Greetings FGFD43 and all,

Being new here on the forum I don't know where your post goes either. Or which icon I should have used but I am sure if I log in once in awhile I will find out a few more things on how it works etc and where to find what I might be looking for.

I am the chief in a small community and also have funding problems and do understand that many others have worse problems and operate on far less $'s than I have to. Please understand that I am not indifferent to it but do have some concerns.

W/ that said I must say I do agree w/ you, and not only that, something else that has been under my skin on this is (I'm sure I will ruffle some feathers here) but:

Just where the heck do these guys, that are pushing this legislation, think that the Congress or the Fed Gov. has any Constitutional authority to pass such stuff.

If this power were granted to them in the Constitution would someone please show me the article and section. Just because they have unlawfully funded the police force and countless other things to numerious to mention. Why would we want to expand the role of the Fed in any of our lives?

Have ya ever seen anything that the Fed gets involved in WORK? Perhaps you can make a case for national defense. But can someone give me an example of anything else that didn't just get all muddled up?

This is a local problem that shoud be handled locally. I say to the Fed thanks for sharing but stay out.

DK

[cla123]

Which article of the Constitution authorizes stop signs? The founding fathers knew that times would change and that they couldn't possibly anticipate every future situation-that's why Congress is empowered to draft bills and the President can sign those blls into law. Do you really think that the FAA's or the Coast Guard's function should be handled and funded locally?
They're not mentioned in the Constitution, either. I'm glad to see you're somewhat satisfied with "the defense thing" (I'll bet folks in Hawaii were glad they did'nt have to locally fund a response to the attack on Pearl Harbor.) It never ceases to amaze me how many people are perfectly willing to endanger the lives of their firefighters and of the taxpayers they serve just to remain the emir of their own little potentate. Refusing to apply for federal money is saying you would rather see your tax dollars spent thousands of miles away than take a chance at any interferance with your absolute rule.

[tinner]

Hi cla123,

Just fyi there is NO srticle in the Constitution that authorizes stop signs.

Why do you ask?

Yes the founding fathers did know that times would change. They also knew that men and their quest for power wouldn't! And that is exactly why they LIMITED the powers of the Federal Gov!

My guess too, is that the folks in PH were glad they didn't have to go it alone. BUT the Constitution DOES provide for the defense of the Union AND it's territories. If I remember right that can be found in Art I Sec 8 Clause 17. Please correct me if this is wrong.

And can you please explain to me 'how' it is endangering 'anyone' if the FED doesn't throw $s at it.

You say: "Refusing to apply for federal money is saying you would rather see you tax dollars spent thousands of miles away...."

First of all the 'federal government' doesn't have any 'money', it is 'our money' and I would prefer they didn't take it in the first place.

"....than to take a chance at any interferance with your absolute rule"

Excuse me, but I was interested in rule of law, and the Constitution is susposed to be the supreme law of the land is it not?

Thank you

[tinner]

PS

Hawaii was annexed Aug 12, 1898. And established as a territory in 1900.

Which if memory serves correctly was sometime BEFORE WW II.