Florida is the undisputed "hurricane state." With all that coast-line, part on the ocean, part on the gulf, it is the most geographically vulnerable state in the union.
Over 25 hurricanes from category 3-5, in the last 90 years or so. That's more than one every four years.
Four years.
The same as one term for president.
And hurricane relief is only a part of what FEMA funds. Also tornadoes, earthquakes, floods, wild-fires, ice storms, etc. And while those natural disasters cover pretty much the entire nation of states, Florida is the only one poised to be taken by our President, from Mitt Romney, on Tuesday.
Because through nearly the entire month of October, Mitt Romney held about a 3-point edge in Florida.
Now, Nate Silver has Romney at only a 0.2% projection of winning.
Hurricane Sandy didn't even have to hit Florida, for it's impact to be felt in Florida.
And, obviously, any time you're in the middle of a hurricane, the one quote you DO NOT want plastered across the TV's and newspapers of Florida, is this one:
When the former Massachusetts governor was asked by moderator John King of CNN whether he agreed with those who believe management of emergencies should be returned to the states, Romney agreed.
"Absolutely," Romney said. "Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that's the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that's even better."
The Romney campaign is now in a frenzy to
"clarify"(once again) Mitt's stance on yet another failed policy position.
“”I believe that FEMA plays a key role in working with states and localities to prepare for and respond to natural disasters. As president, I will ensure FEMA has the funding it needs to fulfill its mission, while directing maximum resources to the first responders who work tirelessly to help those in need, because states and localities are in the best position to get aid to the individuals and communities affected by natural disasters.”
"Gov. Romney believes that states should be in charge of emergency management in responding to storms and other natural disasters in their jurisdictions," Romney spokesman Ryan Williams said in a statement to Politico. "As the first responders, states are in the best position to aid affected individuals and communities, and to direct resources and assistance to where they are needed most. This includes help from the federal government and FEMA."
So, to "clarify" his position, Mitt Romney is now taking the other side of the position. We won't kill FEMA. We'll just slowly, imperceptibly, drown it in the bathtub that's floating down that brand new river that used to be a street, in your devastated home town.
How do we know this? Mitt's Vice Presidential running mate, Paul Ryan's budget says so:
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal Washington think tank, found that Romney running mate Paul Ryan's proposed cuts in funding for programs like FEMA would be three times as deep as the widely dreaded 7.3 percent across-the-board cuts scheduled under sequestration, the automatic spending cuts ordered by the Budget Control Act that ended the 2011 debt-ceiling crisis.
And for what?
Really, who benefits from taking funds away from hurricane, fire, earthquake and flood victims?
Why, rich people, of course.
Rich people need more money, you see. Never enough. Never enough.
So, we just can't afford to take care of our fellow citizens, devastated by natural disasters.
It really is that simple.
And even Mitt Romney can't lie his way out of this one.
The entire eastern seaboard was struck by Sandy this week. Northern states are now digging themselves out of what Florida citizens are all too much familiar.
But Floridians also know that the next devastating hurricane will probably happen in the next four years.
Which man do THEY want in the White House when that happens?