Quote:

---

After a short talk with Oklahoma governor Mary Fallin who is overseeing the cleanup and rebuilding of the tornado ravaged state, host Bob Schieffer asked Sen. Coburn his opinion on the use of federal aid and how it is delivered to the states. Coburn took the core conservative concept of “personal responsibility” to a whole new level:

"It disproportionately hurts the more populous states, the way we do it. The economic damage indicator, the way it’s calculated. So a large state like NJ or NY is disadvantaged under the system we have today."

One of the things that people affected by Superstorm Sandy (myself among them) found most galling about the GOP holding up the aid package in the days and weeks after the storm, is that we don’t think twice about sending aid to (primarily) red states when the yearly tornado season levels this town or that city. We know we have more money than sparsely populated Oklahoma. New York City alone has more than twice the population of the entire state and we are well aware that rebuilding thousands of houses after a spate of tornadoes is not a small task on a limited budget. So we give and we do not begrudge it. That is the social contract of America: We help you when you need it and you help us when we do. And yet, Coburn and his cohort of “fiscally conservative” Republicans balked at lending a hand when Sandy flattened an unimaginable amount of the New York and New Jersey coastline.

Coburn finishes this “on your own” sentiment a few minutes later:

“We’ve created a kind of a predicate, that you don’t have to be responsible for what goes on in your state”

The idea that “personal responsibility” extends to the state level is ridiculous from every angle. This is the UNITED States of America. We are a single, unified country. If a state falls down, the rest are there to pick it up. That, too, is the social contract. The selfishness inherent in this view of society is hard to overstate. Where does it end? Will the small towns be expected to stand on their own instead of relying on the big cities in Oklahoma? Actually, in the Republican States of America, the answer is “Yes.” This is why schools in poor urban areas are left to rot while schools in affluent areas are flush with money. Of course, later on when the poorly educated urban (read as: minority”) children do not succeed in life, it’s often because “they just didn’t try hard enough.”

See how “personal responsibility” works? It codifies the conservative mantra of “I’ve got mine, screw you.”

This mantra was made even more clear by Coburn’s complaint about federal aid for disasters:

"…then ought to make sure the money is actually for the emergency at hand, not for four or five years later. And not allow bills to be actually loaded up with things that have nothing to do with the emergency at hand."

The “four or five years later” Coburn is referring to is things like building tornado proof storm shelters and reinforcing existing infrastructure to withstand future storms. This investment in the future is a terrible idea for a number of Republican reasons; first, there’s just the idea of preparing for the future. That’s like admitting bad things will happen and that’s only allowed when terrorism is involved.

Second, if we actually use government money to prepare for disasters and it saves lives, that would bolster the idea that government can do something good and worthwhile. Obviously a heretical idea to conservative orthodoxy.

Third, just the act of improving infrastructure has a stimulating effect on the local economy. There’s a reason so many of our roads and bridges are falling apart: the GOP refuses to spend the money necessary across the country because that will prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that government spending can and does improve the economy on a large-scale.

Sen. Coburn is at the forefront of a movement to erode and eventually erase the national unity that allowed America to thrive and to leave the poor, the weak, the hungry and the injured to fend for themselves. But that’s not who we are and the sooner heartless Republicans are voted out in favor of those who actually give damn about our nation, the better off we’ll all be. http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/05/26/gops-tom-coburn-stunning-call-
for-less-federal-aid-for-disaster-victims/#ixzz2UWCghoyG]
Amen. Coburn's logic is also amusing, given that so-called 'blue states' and regions generally give more money to the Federal government, while 'red states' and regions usually take more government money. There's a lovely interactive map showing this beautifully at

Quote:

---

Most politically “red” states are financially in the red when it comes to how much money they receive from Washington compared with what their residents pay in taxes. The states that contributed more in taxes than they got back in spending were more likely to have voted for Obama in 2008 and were more likely to be largely urban. (There are some clear exceptions: For instance, New Mexico, a rural, Democratic state, gets more federal money per tax dollar than any other state.) http://underthemountainbunker.com/2013/02/28/24-hour-warning-by-the-wa
y-red-states-take-in-more-federal-money-than-they-pay-in-taxes/

---