[Moderator T]

Trump tells FEMA not to send more money to California for forest fires

BRETT SAMUELS AND TIMOTHY CAMA
The Hill
1/10/19

EXCERPT:

President Trump said Wednesday that he has ordered the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to withhold funding for California unless the state improves its forest management to prevent wildfires.

"Billions of dollars are sent to the State of California for Forrest (sic) fires that, with proper Forrest (sic) Management, would never happen," Trump tweeted.

"Unless they get their act together, which is unlikely, I have ordered FEMA to send no more money," he added, calling it a "disgraceful situation in lives & money."

Trump later retweeted the statement with "forest" correctly spelled.

FEMA did not immediately respond to a request for comment, nor did the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), of which FEMA is a part.

FEMA and DHS are currently without funding amid a partial government shutdown that has lasted 19 days and counting.

Trump has at least twice before threatened to withhold disaster funding from California for its wildfires and pressed the state to fix what he sees as major flaws with its forest management practices that cause or exacerbate fires.

Local officials and fire experts, meanwhile, have criticized Trump for ignoring the impact that climate change is having on the length and severity of fires — and denying climate change science — while giving too much credit to forest management.


(Full Story)

[grimreefer]

Quote

Local officials and fire experts, meanwhile, have criticized Trump for ignoring the impact that climate change is having on the length and severity of fires — and denying climate change science

OFFS... :rolleyes:

[Ticked@TinselTown]

Good. Brown and Newsome think they can run this state as they see fit without following Federal law and ripping apart the state constitution day by day, so let them live with the consequences.

And I am sure they will come up with more ways to tax us to pay for it all, like their eyeing the TEXT TAX and wanting to make it RETROACTIVE FOR 5 YEARS.

[Rock N' Roll Right Winger]

Good.

Force them to manage maintain and prevent their fire hazards. They won't ever unless forced to.

[RedSoloCup]

:clap:

[Howsithangin]

Well done sir!

Wow, prudent management of the public coffers, what a concept?!

[That_Guy]

[zurg]

Hey That_Guy. All these great things that Trump is leading, your side could have chosen to do when you held all three branches of government, and briefly with a supermajority. Obama could have then made America great again, and there would have been no need for Trump. Obama could have gone with known successful methods of capitalism rather than looking for solutions in high tax, government rule, socialist policies.

Coulda. Shoulda. But just wouldn’t have. There’s a cool true story. Sort of like from “Guns, Germs and Steel”. Why did the Spaniards conqueri the Incas? Why didn’t the Incas conquer Spain?

[JerryL]

This may have already been answered somewhere before, but I am going to ask because I am curious. If it has, sorry.

Isn't a lot of the land that he is talking about Federal land, i.e. National Forests? If yes, is the Federal government giving California money to manage the forests and they just aren't doing it? Where is that money going now? If it is national land then the dialog needs to be demanding an accounting of what is given that would avoid the need for emergency funds rather doing this...or at least in addition to doing this.

If it is primarily State land, then "duhhh." If you don't want to clear out the underbrush, dead wood, etc., so that new growth can thrive...all in the name of some gaia worshipping PC enviro-naturalism...then mother nature will do it for you. Her way is pretty harsh. Reap what you sow.

[oki]

It's called accountability and results, something that has been lacking for many years.
Something these cretins don't like because it means things can't just be about politics and B.S. (the only things they know).

Oki

[Italian Biker]

personally, I believed that all federal funding and resources should have been pulled from CA a long time ago over their willingness to harbor fugitives and pass state laws to do so. Though I agree that CA has had terrible forest management practices, cutting FEMA funding to CA is a big mistake from a political and public relations standpoint. Especially when still dealing with the aftermath of the fires they had this year. Cut all other funding, yes. But have FEMA finish what they're doing, then leave.

[RedSoloCup]

That_Guy, on 10 January 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:

:rolleyes:

[grimreefer]

That_Guy, on 10 January 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:

*snip fail*

:rolleyes: You really must be a dependent class city dweller. Again... for the mentally impaired:


http://www.rightnation.us/forums/uploads/1540273186/gallery_6133_220_82753.jpg


There are many different types of rakes involved with forestry and land management. There are manual rakes for forestry and heavy equipment rakes like the one pictured above or a Root Rake for example. Not all rakes are used to corral leaves on your manicured lawn. Let me know if you need me to define what a lawn is next.

[oki]

That_Guy, on 10 January 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:

Would you continue giving money to someone who isn't doing the job you are paying them to?
IE if your mechanic at best fixed your car half way would you go back to them? Would you pay a roofer full price for an incomplete or crappy job?
Who would you pay full price if they didn't meet the terms of the agreement?

Oki

[SARGE]

JerryL, on 10 January 2019 - 08:49 AM, said:

This may have already been answered somewhere before, but I am going to ask because I am curious. If it has, sorry.

Isn't a lot of the land that he is talking about Federal land, i.e. National Forests? If yes, is the Federal government giving California money to manage the forests and they just aren't doing it? Where is that money going now? If it is national land then the dialog needs to be demanding an accounting of what is given that would avoid the need for emergency funds rather doing this...or at least in addition to doing this.

If it is primarily State land, then "duhhh." If you don't want to clear out the underbrush, dead wood, etc., so that new growth can thrive...all in the name of some gaia worshipping PC enviro-naturalism...then mother nature will do it for you. Her way is pretty harsh. Reap what you sow.

California:

45,864,800 acres of federal land

100,206,720 total acres of California

45.8% of California is federally owned.

[stick]

That_Guy, on 10 January 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:

If you have a point, why don't you go ahead and make it?

[Ben Cranklin]

SARGE, on 10 January 2019 - 05:52 PM, said:

California:

45,864,800 acres of federal land

100,206,720 total acres of California

45.8% of California is federally owned.

Interesting. Sounds like a lot, but I wonder how other states compare.

[SARGE]

Ben Cranklin, on 10 January 2019 - 09:40 PM, said:

Interesting. Sounds like a lot, but I wonder how other states compare.

Alaska -- 61.2%

Arizona -- 38.6%

Idaho -- 61.6%

Nevada -- 84.9%

Oregon -- 52.9%

Utah -- 64.9%

https://ballotpedia....ership_by_state

[Ben Cranklin]

Ben Cranklin, on 10 January 2019 - 09:40 PM, said:

Interesting. Sounds like a lot, but I wonder how other states compare.

Do, if this is accurate, the federal government owns 28% of the U.S., mostly in the western states. They only own .69% of NY, but 61% of Alaska.

https://ballotpedia....icy_in_New_York

SARGE, on 10 January 2019 - 10:07 PM, said:

Alaska -- 61.2%

Arizona -- 38.6%

Idaho -- 61.6%

Nevada -- 84.9%

Oregon -- 52.9%

Utah -- 64.9%

https://ballotpedia....ership_by_state

Thanks, our posts must have crossed.

[Ben Cranklin]

Wow, Nevada!