[Hoot Gibson]

I guess Mr. Perfect never mistypes. And, I was just pointing out a politician that didn't want to help the hurting with this thread.

Ron Paul's position on federal disaster aid has been consistent and well known for years. The fact that he is a libertarian and does not believe that it is the federal government's role to provide disaster relief does not mean he does not care about the victims of natural disasters. Even if one believes that government has a role to play in providing relief to victims of natural disaster, why does it need to be dispensed at the federal level?

Every state governor commands thousands of national guard troops who can be activated to help with the relief effort and states, which are generally required to balance their budgets, should certainly be able to deliver assistance more efficiently than a bloated federal agency of a federal government that is flat broke. This country survived for 200 years without FEMA and Ron Paul's message is that it would do just fine without FEMA.

I personally believe that the federal government should be directly involved in providing relief from man made disasters, especially when the disasters are caused through the negligence of federal employees or contractors. For example, interstate bridge collapses and failures of dams designed and maintained by the Corps of Engineers. Another area where I believe in federal disaster relief is when the government fails to protects American citizens from terrorist attacks. But people should insure their own property against fire and natural disasters. if they gamble and lose, then they can join tens of millions of other Americans who rent their homes.