FOX Poll: Do you think FEMA should be eliminated?

[Bruno]

Shows Ron's views are becoming mainsteam enough to warrant this poll:

hxxp://www.foxnews.com/politics/index.html

Do you think FEMA should be eliminated?

Yes, all it does is allow people to make risky decisions and then bails them out 63.52%



No, we need a federal agency to coordinate responses to major natural disasters 13.81%



It's ok in a truly devastating situation, but goes too far to exert control in less severe circumstances 22.67%

 

[lucky_bg]

voted

 

[The Goat]

voted

 

[VBRonPaulFan]

wow, overwhelmingly yes. i guess what he's saying is starting to really ring true with people

 

[robertwerden]

voted, This is the type of poll that will change the narrative in the media. Instead of talking heads spewing opinions they now have to report the results of the people.

 

[johnald]

voted

Yes, all it does is allow people to make risky decisions and then bails them out 63.3%

No, we need a federal agency to coordinate responses to major natural disasters 14.07%

It's ok in a truly devastating situation, but goes too far to exert control in less severe circumstances 22.62%

 

[Dr.3D]

voted, This is the type of poll that will change the narrative in the media. Instead of talking heads spewing opinions they now have to report the results of the people.

Since when did the media report the results of a poll they disagree with?

 

[Brett85]

I have to say that I don't really have a problem with the 3rd option. I don't think that the federal government should be involved in all these minor natural disasters in general. But if you have a major disaster like we did with Katrina, I think the federal government has to help people out in that, regardless of whether it's FEMA or simply sending our military down there.

 

[civusamericanus]

voted!

 

[Guitarzan]

I have to say that I don't really have a problem with the 3rd option. I don't think that the federal government should be involved in all these minor natural disasters in general. But if you have a major disaster like we did with Katrina, I think the federal government has to help people out in that, regardless of whether it's FEMA or simply sending our military down there.

The problem with this stance is that it overlooks the very nature of the bureaucracy and the tendency of human beings to relish in power. Just as with any bureaucracy, FEMA must continually justify its existence, hence, it's size, cost and power will always grow. There is no such thing as a bureaucracy that only gets involved in "minor" issues.

 

[sratiug]

I have to say that I don't really have a problem with the 3rd option. I don't think that the federal government should be involved in all these minor natural disasters in general. But if you have a major disaster like we did with Katrina, I think the federal government has to help people out in that, regardless of whether it's FEMA or simply sending our military down there.

A federal court ruled the US government responsible for the damage in New Orleans from Katrina. Five thousand people were jailed for months with no charges. Rescuers, supplies and residents were barred from entering the city.

 

[WilliamC]

I have to say that I don't really have a problem with the 3rd option. I don't think that the federal government should be involved in all these minor natural disasters in general. But if you have a major disaster like we did with Katrina, I think the federal government has to help people out in that, regardless of whether it's FEMA or simply sending our military down there.

The States National Guard would be sufficient for any natural disaster if they hadn't been Federalized into the Army.

Under extraordinary circumstances either the President could use executive power and the military to restore order and or Congress could pass legislation specifically to address the issue, but there is no need for a full-time Federal department like FEMA.

 

[pcosmar]

The States National Guard would be sufficient for any natural disaster if they hadn't been Federalized into the Army.

Under extraordinary circumstances either the President could use executive power and the military to restore order and or Congress could pass legislation specifically to address the issue, but there is no need for a full-time Federal department like FEMA.

Agreed mostly. But a step further.
People will handle things if allowed to do so. It requires NO government interference. I have seen it in real life, several times. and have been involved personally.
When Hurricanes hit the Keys, as soon as the storm passed people began clean up, checked on neighbors and helped anyone in need.
Businesses did so as well. Government Bureaucracy (FEMA) got in the way and actually hindered aid from volunteers.

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Did anyone think of how many fatalities hurricane Irene saved?

Since barely anyone was on the road cars, cyclists, joggers, pedestrians, I'm sure fewer vehicle fatalies...
Since barely anyone was working, I'm sure fewer OTJ/Work fatalities...
Joggers, Gyms, Saunas, Sports, Swimming ... fatalities from Heartaches, head injures, drownings, etc...
Socializing in public... movies, malls, bars, parties...


I wonder what the true demographics for say Wednesday-Sunday Y-O-Y over the past 25 years would result.

Maybe Hurricane Irene saved lives> \\

VOTED: Yes, all it does is allow people to make risky decisions and then bails them out: 62.7%

 

[Ronpauljones]

Thank you for voting!
Yes, all it does is allow people to make risky decisions and then bails them out 62.69%

No, we need a federal agency to coordinate responses to major natural disasters 14.36%

It's ok in a truly devastating situation, but goes too far to exert control in less severe circumstances 22.95%

 

[Napoleon's Shadow]

A CNN reporter is asking the same thing on her FB wall.

The responses are epic: https://www.facebook.com/notes/carol-costello-cnn/talk-back-is-fema-necessary/282230115124943

 

[WilliamC]

Agreed mostly. But a step further.
People will handle things if allowed to do so. It requires NO government interference. I have seen it in real life, several times. and have been involved personally.
When Hurricanes hit the Keys, as soon as the storm passed people began clean up, checked on neighbors and helped anyone in need.
Businesses did so as well. Government Bureaucracy (FEMA) got in the way and actually hindered aid from volunteers.

The more free-market the solution the better yes.

 

[eduardo89]

Voted. They'll probably reset or ignore the poll though. As conservative as fox pretends to be, they love big government.

 

[Pericles]

I have to say that I don't really have a problem with the 3rd option. I don't think that the federal government should be involved in all these minor natural disasters in general. But if you have a major disaster like we did with Katrina, I think the federal government has to help people out in that, regardless of whether it's FEMA or simply sending our military down there.

In cases of disaster, the governor should call forth the militias from unaffected areas of the state in order to assist the population in the affected areas.

 

[georgiaboy]

Was FEMA also responsible for violating the 2nd Amendment during Katrina, confiscating private citizens' arms being used for self-protection and defense of property from looters, etc.? Maybe it was just local/federal law enforcement performing this egregious act.