Ron Paul wants to eliminate FEMA. What do you think?

What timing! I'm sitting here with the window partially open for the first time in 12 hours while the last of hurricane Ireme zips through the surburban Philadelphia area. They were really prepared for this one and they did an excellent job of preparing us. I've been listening to news reports all night (actually for several days) with the guys in the FEMA caps standing behind the governors and mayors in the area. I'm darn glad they've been there. FEMA had an excellent reputation under Clinton when it was headed by James Lee Witt. It only fell from grace with the shenanigans of Michael Brown and the handling of the Katrina flood. I think it has done a pretty decent job of rehabilitating itself, esepcially this last week.

Ron Paul is making a big mistake thinking that we need to get rid of FEMA. Fema has been there for so many people. In fact the first attack on the World Trade Center years ago FEMA supplied me with a blanket so I could go home warm. My coat was upstairs and I couldn't get it. So FEMA gave me a blanket, it was the end of February, it was cold and dark outside. They saved me and my friends from going home freezing. They have helped millions around the world when diasters have happened. The fall of FEMA would be a crisis for the United States, in my opinon.

"on the verge of one of the worse hurricanes the area has seen." Meh. We get worse nor' easters every year.

Well really FEMA does already what most states have. The National Guard and Identifying Body parts the Police and other state ran organizations could of easily done the Job FEMA does. Also did FEMA warn people of the Hurricane or did the National Weather Service and similar organizations actually did the warning? FEMA like all big organizations will have there issues. I am for getting rid of them because they are a redundant department I mean the states National Guard could and often does take up some form of response when a natural disaster takes place within that state or even in surrounding states. FEMA wasn't the lone house on 9/12 and not to mention people where already looking for bodies on 9/11. So yes FEMA should be eliminated as the president could just as easily and cheaply deploy the military to the effected area if the states National Guard also if it is a big enough disaster many of the surrounding states that are unaffected will send help. Oregon the State I live in sent over people to help on 9/11 I think they got there on the 15th. So since states are more than willing to send help to other states and I am sure in the states that where hit by this Hurricane also got warnings of what do to from a state ran organizations that FEMA repeated. FEMA is just the Federal Government taking on a State Power so that the Federal Government can feel special.

People tend to go to extremes on either side when speaking about everything government. For instance, wanting to cut spending and shrink government doesn't mean one wants to eliminate spending and government completely. But that's how it's played. And then there's the fact that some people, like Ron Paul, believe that if you do get rid of certain agencies, "helping" people will actually become more streamlined and efficient. I won't bust FEMA's chops nor anyone's chops who assist in disasters. But I do not buy the argument that without FEMA's help, it would take longer to get something done. I just don't buy that. That's assuming that, without FEMA, no one else will do anything, when the reality is probably more along the lines of, because of FEMA, it's harder to get anyone else in to do anything. They're the big boy on the block, and their presence supersedes everyone else's. 9/11, for just about everything in America, is the exception and not the rule. We all know that. There is a downside to get rid of FEMA and then not having anything to take its place. But that's assuming nothing will be there to take its place. And, again, that goes back to more extremes of political arguments, like, for instance, government not providing healthcare for poor people means they have zero options. These are things we know aren't true, but they make for good rants. I personally don't think FEMA should be outright eliminated. But they're not immune to downsizing and running a cleaner, smaller operation. We're speaking of federal here. Federal blankets suck. They just do. A FEMA-like agency can be far more efficient than it is.

FEMA is almost equal to the national gaurd I don't see much of a point in FEMA for Christ sake they gave hurrican victims temporary homes with millions of problems

While I don't think FEMA needs to be eliminated it does need to be reformed so that it is solvent and does not end up bankrupt. I did agree with Ron Paul based on his website and written info, but the more I hear him talk the less I like what he has to say. Heaven help us, we are going to need it this go round!

I can understand his issue with the redundancy, but I wouldn't disband FEMA. I think their best value is that they can help facilitate communication between emergency responders when a natural disaster stretches across state lines. Katrina was largely a disaster because the state on Louisiana failed miserably at emergency preparations. That, and a lot of people are just morons who insist on ignoring disaster warnings and then complaining that they weren't protected from their own idiocy. I don't question the value of, or work by people on FEMA's response team during 9-11. If the weren't involved though, the state's emergency responders still would have handled things well. I feel that with the current hurricane the governors of New York and New Jersey have done an excellent job coordinating the evacuations of certain areas and worked hard to ensure the safety of people in these states. State workers are capable of doing what needs to be done, they just need intelligent people giving the orders. Either way, I disagree with Ron Paul on this one, but I do understand where he's coming from. As you said, the timing of his statement was poorly chosen.

The Red Cross used to do what FEMA is doing now...I do not know just when FEMA took over. There really are too many layers doing the same type of work. The states should always respond first. I do not like the idea of the Feds always sticking their noses in where it does not belong and I certainly do not want the military in there. The Guard is OK because that is what they are for. FEMA does not have the right to keep citizens out of their homes after a disaster. As soon as it is safe, they should be allowed back to assess the damage and retrieve what they can. After Katrina, folks were not allowed back into the poor sections mostly because the Gov. did not want them to rebuild...and they have not. This area will be taken over by the rich and made into a fancy area. As far as 9/11, yes, they did a good job, but it would have gotten done by the red cross and other agencies just as fast and probably a lot cheaper and with a lot more transparency.

For me if it is good idea why not to do it just do your work to have no waste of time.

His speech was misguided but hits on a critical point of Federal mismanagement: multiplicity. Not only is FEMA huge with random likelihood of payoff in need, it is often linked with organizations competing for control and need in an emergency. Homeland Security, the FBI, CDC, FEMA, the National Guard of a given state and local law enforcement can really create a mess during an emergency, and I'm sure any given situation can bring even more agencies into the mix. A simplification and budgetary re-evaluation is needed in terms of chain of command and duplication of function. If eliminating FEMA by merging it into something new is Paul's message then there is something there of value. Today's Federal agencies look nothing like their counterparts even 20 years ago, it's not like we need to hold to some tradition like a debate over the designated hitter in baseball, we can update and change the agencies in any way we like. It is overdue to change the landscape of Federal agencies to a point of greater communication, efficiency and accountabilty.