Streams

Sandy Recovery Bill in Congress

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

(R-L) U.S. Rep. Peter King (R-NY), Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ), Rep. Michael Grimm (R-NY) and Rep. Leonard Lance (R-NJ) speak to the media about the Sandy aid bill. (Alex Wong/Getty)

Bob Hennelly, WNYC's contributing editor for Politics and Investigations, and Andrew Grossman, reporter for the Wall Street Journal, discuss the Sandy recovery aid moving through Congress.

Guests:

Andrew Grossman and Bob Hennelly

Comments [17]

Jon stewart would not dare skewer new yorkers.The whiners would have him fired. He knows which side his bread gets buttered.I'm in favor of disaster aid but 60 billions is more then aid;it's corruption. And perhaps other states would not be so poor if new york wasn't siphoning off money that by fairness should go to poorer states to meet their needs.Even 6 years after katrina.

Jan. 15 2013 03:35 PM
Noa(c)h from Brooklyn

@superf88:

Thanks for the compliment and interesting addition.

I'm glad you appreciated my comment.

Jan. 15 2013 03:14 PM

Noa(c)h Rothstein from Brooklyn
Apropos to the above, many other countries provide free, quality higher education for all of their citizens. Why don't we? Isn't this is an obvious investment in a nation's future, considering that many of the students will go on to be assets to their country?

you're a wise man, i might add that the third tunnel would also increase nj folks' property values by reducing commute time in the most populated areas by about a third, ie a 50 minute commute becomes a 30 minute one (as it had been in the 1830s -- when the train lines were built!)

Jan. 15 2013 11:57 AM
BK from Hoboken

Of course the best was te skewering that Jon Stewart did of te honorable Steven Palazzo of Mississippi, who went begging fr FEMA funds a full 7 years after Katrina hit the gulf coast. These guys are a bunch of hypocrites. FEMA aid and rebuilding after natural disasters is a social pact that we have as Americans. So if you live in CA on a fault line, in the Rockies or other areas out west subject to massive wildfires, the tornado prone Midwest, the hurricane prone southeast, the flood prone Ohio valley, you are part of this pact.

Jan. 15 2013 11:51 AM

the White House will be on firm legal ground...you've been a great audience make sure you tip your waitress.

Jan. 15 2013 11:29 AM
mck from Manhattan

Rosellen and Martin here is a list of the real Welfare Queens
Mississippi: 2007-2009 Amount received per tax dollar paid, avg.: $2.83
West Virginia: 2007-2009 Amount received per tax dollar paid, avg.: $2.82
Alaska 2007-2009 Amount received per tax dollar paid, avg.: $2.24
Alabama 2007-2009 Amount received per tax dollar paid, avg.: $2.21
South Carolina 2007-2009 Amount received per tax dollar paid, avg.: $2.13
Montana 2007-2009 Amount received per tax dollar paid, avg.: $2.13
Maine 2007-2009 Amount received per tax dollar paid, avg.: $2.00
Kentucky 2007-2009 Amount received per tax dollar paid, avg.: $1.96
North Dakota 2007-2009 Amount received per tax dollar paid, avg.: $1.93
Virginia 2007-2009 Amount received per tax dollar paid, avg.: $1.90

New York, New Jersey and Connecticut taxes go to support these states and a number of others that vote in people who are your idiot-oops-ideologically fellow travelers.

Jan. 15 2013 11:22 AM
Noa(c)h Rothstein from Brooklyn

superf88 wrote,

"i would love universal health care but apparently "there is no money for it." same with a third tunnel under the hudson. same with better school lunches, non-cancerous tap water, etc. etc."

Yet, somehow the money never seems to dry-up for the countless instances of _corporate_ welfare (all kinds of subsidies, windfalls, loopholes, and, of course, the continual flow of profits from the interminable wars of aggression and empire that are waged for their benefit).

Some comments on specifics you mentioned:

-Universal Health Care
Single-payer could actually _reduce_ costs in the long-term, in a number of ways. (While improving care for the majority of Americans)

Removing the burden of having to provide healthcare for their employees could also allow U.S. businesses to be more competitive; every other modern, industrialized nation has some form of (actually) universal health care. ("Obamacare" is little more than a massive subsidy to the insurance and pharma predators. See what Marcia Angell, among many others, have written on it.)

- "a third tunnel under the hudson"
Public investment in infrastructure could create many desperately-needed jobs, and help the economy in other ways as well

- "better school lunches"
Investment in this could also create jobs. Should and could be done in a way that boosts the public sector and the public good, not _private_ corporate interests.
Providing healthful, nutritious food that would at the same time be palatable to children and students would be an investment in their future that, again, could pay-off for the public good. (Think healthier children who grow into healthier adults, incurring less medical costs, enabling greater productivity, passing practices and preferences of smart eating on to _their_ children...)

Apropos to the above, many other countries provide free, quality higher education for all of their citizens. Why don't we? Isn't this is an obvious investment in a nation's future, considering that many of the students will go on to be assets to their country?

Jan. 15 2013 11:22 AM
Bob from Pelham, NY

To Roseellen, Martin C, et al.: Not for nothin', but New York, New Jersey and Connecticut pay much more into the Federal government than they get back -- it's the rural southern and western states who get much more back from the Feds than they pay in. Fair enough, they tend to be poorer and less able to pay, but why do these "takers" get to object when the northeastern "makers" (i.e., payers) need some help to recover from a proverbial act of God?

Jan. 15 2013 11:17 AM
Sheldon from Brooklyn

"Another legacy of 9/11; greedy,arrogant new yorkers and their satellites as pertetual victims demanding more and more money from the rest of the country.?

Roseellen, you're probably a troll but as a New Yorker, I can't remember getting a "9/11" check from the Feds. Did you? What are you talking about?

I do remember paying more in taxes to other states via the fed that I get back. I do remember paying:

Egypt = 2 billion

Israel = 3 billion

Pakistan = 2 billion

Rest of the world = $$$$$$$$$$$

What a load of nonsense you speak, not surprised on who agrees with you.

Jan. 15 2013 11:07 AM
MK from Manhattan

What would LBJ do? He'd call in each South East and Gulf State delegation in one by one and tell them that it is very likely that they would have a hurricane again a lot sooner than New York, New Jersey or Connecticut, and if they expected to get any disaster aid for their next storm, they better pony up to help those folks up north. Then he'd call in the delegations from Kansas, Oklahoma and the other tornado alley states and tell them the same thing. Then he'd call in the So. Cal. Republicans and tell them that the country cant afford the next earthquake, so if they expect any aid from the feds, they had better sign on to the Sandy aid bill.

Jan. 15 2013 11:07 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

@ roseellen

BRAVO !!

Jan. 15 2013 10:52 AM
Sheldon from Brooklyn

"Super f88". What logic or legal basis did the tax payers on NY/NJ, who by the way - pay some of the highest proportion of federal taxes in the entire country, should have paid for Katrina (10 days), all the the tornadoes and fires in the Mid West, oil spills on the gulf coast and hurricanes in Florida (2016,we will not forget your "no" vote Mr. Rubio)?

Is it 61 billion? Probably it's really 50 billion. However - if the feds can't help its most loyal tax states when they need it, then what's the point of us paying for a federal govt?

The resident victims of Coastal NJ, the Western Rockaways, and Long Beach tend to vote republican, and I'm sure they felt the same way you and "martin" feel, up until the day before sandy.

If it were your house. I am 1000% sure you would have felt differently.

Jan. 15 2013 10:45 AM

Another legacy of 9/11; greedy,arrogant new yorkers and their satellites as pertetual victims demanding more and more money from the rest of the country. 60 BILLION with a B?If congress agrees with this -they're either gulls or spineless.

Jan. 15 2013 10:42 AM
Noach in Brooklyn

Funny how the same individuals who continually proclaim their opposition to "big government", "big spending", etc. and their dedication to principles of "limited government", "cutting spending", "self-reliance", etc., now seem to be a singing a very different tune.

This is hardly anything new.

Such simplistic mantras are nothing more than effective tools of propaganda and demogoguery that the masses are quick to glom onto-- until _they_ feel affected; the minute there is talking of cutting anything _they_ rely-on or cherish (or, in the case of politicians, that would anger the ones whose votes they depend-upon), it becomes a whole 'nother story.

I am hardly the first to note this.

On January 2nd, Brian Lehrer played a soundbyte of Congressman Peter King excoriating his Republican colleagues in the House, esp., Speaker John Boehner, for not allowing a vote to take place on the Sandy relief bill. Lehrer then spoke with Republican Congressman Michael Grimm, who overwhelmingly echoed King's sentiments.

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/2013/jan/02/budget-congressman-nadler-reacts/

Looking through the comments page for that segment now, I find the following:

"Please make this man explain the naked irony of wanting to cut spending, but needs $60 billion first."

"grimm says the problem is spending yet he is whining the GOP won't spending money in sandy aid?"

Did Mr. Lehrer make even the most cursory, weak effort to challenge the congressman on this obvious hypocrisy?

Take a guess...

Jan. 15 2013 10:41 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

I agree with first post. This kneejerk “social justice” compassion is unwarranted and unfair in its proportions and limited target.

Many people don't appreciate how large this 61 billion number is and how much everyone else will be on the hook-

- $194 for each person in the United States (315 million)
or
-$530 for each U.S. household (115 million)
or
-10.5 hours of work for each employed worker in the United States (244 million at the average private nonfarm hourly wage of $23.73)”

(Wall Street Journal: “President Obama asked Congress for $61 billion for Hurricane Sandy.”)
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324081704578232192273419174.html)

Jan. 15 2013 09:39 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

HERE IS MORE THAT 61 BILLION WOULD PAY FOR -

• $792 for each child attending primary or secondary school in the U.S. (77 million children);

• the annual work of 1.1 million public-school teachers (average salary $55,350);

• 3.6 million university scholarships for full tuition, fees, room and board at public universities ($17,136 per scholarship);

(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324081704578232192273419174.html)

Jan. 15 2013 09:38 AM

has there been an articulate argument by those fighting for "sandy aid" as to what the logic or legal basis is for providing it?

i would love universal health care but apparently "there is no money for it." same with a third tunnel under the hudson. same with better school lunches, non-cancerous tap water, etc. etc.

how is sandy aid at all different?

Jan. 15 2013 09:21 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

The Morning Brief

Enter your email address and we’ll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.