Hurricane Sandy a case for smaller Government
By bobmnu
@bobmnu (8157)
United States
November 2, 2012 2:24pm CST
It seems that President Obama and Homeland Security Chief both have the same idea on how to best help the people effected by Hurricane Sandy. Reduce government regulations and open up the free market. Why is it that during a disaster the first thing the government does to help is to remove the regulations?
During the BP oil spill in the gulf Louisiana Governor wanted to put up barriers to prevent oil from coming into the marsh areas. He couldn't because to do so would require a lengthy Environmental Impact study and then get approval from the government. There were oil skimmers that could have been used further out at sea but they were crewed by foreign crews, the Jones Act (The Merchant Marine Act of 1920) prevented the use of these ships until the requirement was waved. BP had to stop burning the oil far out at sea because it might cause air problems if the winds were strong from a certain direction.
It seems that when there is a problem and needs fast action the quickest is to suspend Federal Regulations. Maybe we should be looking at all the government regulations and see which ones are still necessary and which are out dated.
2 people like this
3 responses
@subhojit10 (7375)
• India
2 Nov 12
Thanks a ton for posting this discussion. Well yes you are right, i think we can say that whenever there is any disaster, Govt realizes the need to work for the people while during the normal times, it does take several years to pass laws and then work for the public. Whatever may be the case, the best part is that Obama is taking all measures to ensure that he is able to reach out to each and every individual who were affected due to Sandy.
What say?
1 person likes this
@ladybugmagic (3978)
• United States
3 Nov 12
Chris Christie had dug up a very old law to ensure power companies would be fined something insane, like a million dollars a day if they didn't get the power up quickly enough. That, to me, sounds like a very meaningful regulation.
@laglen (19759)
• United States
2 Nov 12
Bob, you are so right. As a conservative leaning person, when I say less government regulation, this is exactly what I mean. When you have out dated and or idiotic regulations for the sake of regulation, well only government would do this. Anytime help is hindered due to regs, or business can not be done, maybe then it is time to look over the regulations. Are they relevant? are they achievable? who does this help/hurt? There should be a constant review of regulations. What applied in 1920 may not apply today.
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
2 Nov 12
I have read somewhere that FEMA was originally started to respond to a nuclear attack. We are now using it for natural disasters but are they training people for that and has their structure changed so that they can meet the new demand.
Maybe FEMA should be more of a planning for a disaster and help communities plan. Hurricane Sandy was predicted in a TV documentary on what would happen with super disasters. One of the disasters highlighted was a late season Hurricane heading up the east coast and hitting NYC. This was a foreseeable disaster and they should have planned for it.
@laglen (19759)
• United States
3 Nov 12
As I stated before some regs are necessary. I am not arguing that. I think we are agreeing here to an extent. I also agree that big business has a hand in this. for instance, heirloom seeds. They are banning these. This way you can't get seeds from your plants but would have to buy them every year. Who does this "help"? seed companies and only seed companies.
1 person likes this
@ladybugmagic (3978)
• United States
3 Nov 12
laglen - it's not like the government is going out to find things regulate, just for the sake of regulation. That seriously sounds like a fox news parroting.
Clearly, we can not stop now and say, "let's make more electric cars", because this is a matter of an emergency, with some states under water.
BUT, to prevent more things like that, we can require car manufacturers agree to better fuel efficiency, thus lowering carbon emissions, and reducing its impact on rising sea levels, which was a key player in this monstrous storm that looked like something straight out of the movie, "The Day After Tomorrow".
Regulations are there to prevent major catastrophes and to reduce negligence.
bobmnu - http://www.fema.gov/
It's fun to learn.
@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
5 Nov 12
Ab-so-lutely!
Liberty=abundance+innovation(4-green energy!)
everGrowing government=stagnation+shortage
--------------------------------
search History; search World
