Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Another Step in the Right Direction
Some of the money has gone to municipal and business loans than will have to be repaid. And a substantial portion of the overall sum — about $17 billion — has gone to pay flood insurance claims that were at least partly backed by premiums paid over the years by homeowners.
Critics also say the administration shouldn’t be counting in its overall total the $18.5 billion in additional borrowing authority that Congress has granted the National Flood Insurance Program. After all, they say, home and business owners pay premiums for their coverage.
That was on the T/P website tonight, didn't see it in today's print edition. I'll be curious to see if there's more detail in tomorrow's print edition. Especially on this:
According to the Senate Budget Committee, the $67 billion Congress passed in three hurricane-related supplemental appropriations bills last year is more than was committed to the 1994 Los Angeles earthquake ($15.5 billion), Hurricane Andrew in 1992 ($17.7 billion) or the 2001 terrorist attacks ($43.9 billion).
Mainly, what were the comparable damage estimates for those disasters. I'd watch for the damage estimates being adjusted for inflation, but not the apprpriations, so that the need will look greater relative to the relief that was given.
I have to ask, can this administration make any claims about Katrina aid without engaging in deliberate hyperbole:
“The president has taken action to direct as many resources as possible to the Gulf Coast within his authority under the Stafford Act and above that, has committed billions of federal dollars to the long-term rebuilding efforts in the region,” said Nicol Andrews, a spokeswoman for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. “Those commitments dwarf federal funding for any other natural disaster, including 9/11, many times over.”
Maybe it's just a subtle pitch for increased funding for math education. Uh, Ms. Andrews, $67B is not many times $43.9B.
Critics also say the administration shouldn’t be counting in its overall total the $18.5 billion in additional borrowing authority that Congress has granted the National Flood Insurance Program. After all, they say, home and business owners pay premiums for their coverage.
That was on the T/P website tonight, didn't see it in today's print edition. I'll be curious to see if there's more detail in tomorrow's print edition. Especially on this:
According to the Senate Budget Committee, the $67 billion Congress passed in three hurricane-related supplemental appropriations bills last year is more than was committed to the 1994 Los Angeles earthquake ($15.5 billion), Hurricane Andrew in 1992 ($17.7 billion) or the 2001 terrorist attacks ($43.9 billion).
Mainly, what were the comparable damage estimates for those disasters. I'd watch for the damage estimates being adjusted for inflation, but not the apprpriations, so that the need will look greater relative to the relief that was given.
I have to ask, can this administration make any claims about Katrina aid without engaging in deliberate hyperbole:
“The president has taken action to direct as many resources as possible to the Gulf Coast within his authority under the Stafford Act and above that, has committed billions of federal dollars to the long-term rebuilding efforts in the region,” said Nicol Andrews, a spokeswoman for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. “Those commitments dwarf federal funding for any other natural disaster, including 9/11, many times over.”
Maybe it's just a subtle pitch for increased funding for math education. Uh, Ms. Andrews, $67B is not many times $43.9B.
