Well crap!

[bullwinkle]

Senate Dems upend government funding over Flint

 

[Anathema]

Already far too much pork in that bill without anything more for Flint, MI.... which is a State/Local issue NOT a Federal one.

 

[Moonglow]

The real reason is the bill carries a reveal the corporate political funding sources law..

 

[bullwinkle]

Already far too much pork in that bill without anything more for Flint, MI.... which is a State/Local issue NOT a Federal one.

Pork? Did you read it? The article states that the money would be a trade, that another program would be deleted to cover so that the money would not have to be added to the budget. So Louisiana gets flood relief funds added on, yet Flint gets nothing even when the funds wouldn't have to be added, AND when the approval passed the Senate almost unanimously.

 

[TooTall]

Already far too much pork in that bill without anything more for Flint, MI.... which is a State/Local issue NOT a Federal one.

Pork? Did you read it? The article states that the money would be a trade, that another program would be deleted to cover so that the money would not have to be added to the budget. So Louisiana gets flood relief funds added on, yet Flint gets nothing even when the funds wouldn't have to be added, AND when the approval passed the Senate almost unanimously.

The Flint problem is a man made problem and should be dealt with by the state. The Louisiana flooding is a natural disaster and they are dealt with by emergency funds. If the feds pay for the lead pipe replacement in Flint, there are thousand of cities in the other 49 states that will have there hands out.

 

[Anathema]

Pork? Did you read it? The article states that the money would be a trade, that another program would be deleted to cover so that the money would not have to be added to the budget. So Louisiana gets flood relief funds added on, yet Flint gets nothing even when the funds wouldn't have to be added, AND when the approval passed the Senate almost unanimously.

The flood relief funds are pork too. It's a State/Local issue, not a Federal one.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Pork? Did you read it? The article states that the money would be a trade, that another program would be deleted to cover so that the money would not have to be added to the budget. So Louisiana gets flood relief funds added on, yet Flint gets nothing even when the funds wouldn't have to be added, AND when the approval passed the Senate almost unanimously.

The flood relief funds are pork too. It's a State/Local issue, not a Federal one.

Pretty sure natural disasters are a fed problem.
I suppose we could just let the ports in Louisiana die as they dont mean shit to the economy right?
That goes for California and all their wildfires,earth quakes and drought as well I'm assuming.
And I suppose the port of Houston should be abandoned after a hurricane since we know it has no impact on the economy.

 

[Anathema]

Pretty sure natural disasters are a fed problem.

I can't find them anywhere in Article I, Section 8.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Pretty sure natural disasters are a fed problem.

I can't find them anywhere in Article I, Section 8.

So FEMA is just a figment of my imagination.....

 

[Anathema]

So FEMA is just a figment of my imagination.....

No. It's a figment of our Nightmares. Just like the Departments of Education, Energy, HUD, Transportation and many other unconstitutional groups, departments, and programs.

 

[bullwinkle]

Already far too much pork in that bill without anything more for Flint, MI.... which is a State/Local issue NOT a Federal one.

Pork? Did you read it? The article states that the money would be a trade, that another program would be deleted to cover so that the money would not have to be added to the budget. So Louisiana gets flood relief funds added on, yet Flint gets nothing even when the funds wouldn't have to be added, AND when the approval passed the Senate almost unanimously.

The Flint problem is a man made problem and should be dealt with by the state. The Louisiana flooding is a natural disaster and they are dealt with by emergency funds. If the feds pay for the lead pipe replacement in Flint, there are thousand of cities in the other 49 states that will have there hands out.

from the article: ""It’s fully paid for," U.S. Sen. Gary Peters, also of Michigan, said of the federal Flint funding, noting that unlike the $500 million for Louisiana, the Flint money is offset by a reduction in spending on a grant program for advanced technology vehicles. "This should be something that is very easy. And if we can’t do something that is this easy, it’s why people have such scorn for this body."

 

[TooTall]

Already far too much pork in that bill without anything more for Flint, MI.... which is a State/Local issue NOT a Federal one.

Pork? Did you read it? The article states that the money would be a trade, that another program would be deleted to cover so that the money would not have to be added to the budget. So Louisiana gets flood relief funds added on, yet Flint gets nothing even when the funds wouldn't have to be added, AND when the approval passed the Senate almost unanimously.

The Flint problem is a man made problem and should be dealt with by the state. The Louisiana flooding is a natural disaster and they are dealt with by emergency funds. If the feds pay for the lead pipe replacement in Flint, there are thousand of cities in the other 49 states that will have there hands out.

from the article: ""It’s fully paid for," U.S. Sen. Gary Peters, also of Michigan, said of the federal Flint funding, noting that unlike the $500 million for Louisiana, the Flint money is offset by a reduction in spending on a grant program for advanced technology vehicles. "This should be something that is very easy. And if we can’t do something that is this easy, it’s why people have such scorn for this body."

Will the Democrats shut down the government over this? They can't blame Bush this time.

 

[12icer]

What about the EQUAL PROTECTION? If you give funds for one NATURAL DISASTER, you have to give it for all. As for Flint like all cities before 1967 used the technology of the day to deliver water which was pipes containing LEAD. The difference being the waters ability to introduce the lead into the stream of water. Some water wont dissolve a harmful amount of lead, while others will. The city should always test of their water, in FACT it is required of them. If there was a problem it was known BY THE CITY water department LONG before it was brought to light. It is NOT the responsibility of the State. The CITY is supposed to make PUBLIC the records and contaminate tables for each area it serves.

 

[playtime]

human beings living within our borders (overwhelmingly American citizens) were being poisoned. it's far more than a 'local or state' problem.

 

[12icer]

Guess what, so are you, mentally and physically. The problem is the liberal bullshit attempt to place the blame on their opponent when it is mostly THEIR responsibility instead of doing their jobs, AND that goes for either side. The city government either didn't test, OR didn't report the contamination as required by LAW !!!! If they had It would have been investigated to find the ACTUAL SOURCE, and the problem would have been handled by the proper authority. Funding one cities lead pipe replacement means you have to fund them all. Taking them out of the loop is as simple as disconnecting them and rerouting the water IF all of your pipes are not lead. next best thing is to go to a water source that does not dissolve the lead, or distribute filters that remove it.