Dayton to fight FEMA decision to deny more flood aid for north

  • Article by: JENNIFER BROOKS , Star Tribune
  • Updated: July 25, 2012 - 11:18 PM

The agency ruled there wasn't enough damage to warrant individual assistance, a decision that the governor called wrong.

  • 8
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 8 of 8
zekefaxJul. 26, 12 4:03 AM

Perhaps the Koch brothers will offer to pay to help these people, might cost less than buying politicians!

2
8
govt4peopleJul. 26, 12 6:16 AM

The old addage "save that money for a rainy day" really applies here. Perhaps the federal government ought to reign in its wild spending so that when emergencies such as this take place, there is money to help those in need.

9
2
mred58Jul. 26, 12 7:09 AM

mark you got the money for ziggy now nothing for the people of minnesota.lets say if the state didnt have a 6 billion dollar debt,you could help them.

8
3
govt4peopleJul. 26, 12 8:27 AM

zekefx...................so the Koch brothers "buy politicians." That is interesting. They contribute to elections indeed as do many other "special interest" groups. In your opinion, with the utopia that would become reality if conservatives would just get out of your way, what would our state look like in Minnesota and how would these people be helped in this time of crisis?

2
1
gyinglingJul. 26, 12 9:10 AM

How many times has FEMA come to the rescue of uninsured people in the Red River Valley and along the Mississippi - even providing assistance to people after they insisted they wouldn't help anyone without flood insurance. And how many times have we watched as many of those people "rebuild" on exactly the same location and get flooded out a few years later? Year after year, the taxpayers (via FEMA) bailed out those regions, but when unpredictable disaster strikes in Minneapolis or the northeast, for which I would be glad to see my tax dollars providing relief, they say "NO". Unbelieveable!

2
1
mmediaJul. 26, 1211:02 AM

Why should money be spent on furnaces for retirees ? Besides, we need that money to pay for farmer's crop insurance in this drought. Like Colbert said, "Obamacare for Corn" [and no one else].

1
2
comment229Jul. 26, 12 4:53 PM

We bought flood insurance through a private insurance company until the feds got involved. We had 100% cost coverage at that time. Now, we pay and get just less than 50% coverage and pay more. Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job here.

0
0
janelle3Jul. 26, 12 4:55 PM

The FEMA formula is unfair to MN and other more sparsly populated midwestern and western states. If a disaster hits the east coast,it's easy to get 500 homes damaged because the homes are closer together. Here, you need a larger storm to get to that number. Maybe it should be changed to a certain percentage of homes destroyed in a certain area. Or maybe it could be changed that you can only get FEMA money once in so many years on the same address, to stop the repeat bailouts.

0
0
  • 1 - 8 of 8

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

question of the day

Poll: Can the Wild rally to win its playoff series against Colorado?

Weekly Question

ADVERTISEMENT