Boehner agrees to Sandy aid vote on Friday
WASHINGTON (AP) — Under intense pressure from angry Republicans, House Speaker John Boehner agreed Wednesday to a vote this week on aid for Superstorm Sandy recovery.
The speaker will schedule a vote Friday for $9 billion for the national flood insurance program and another on Jan. 15 for a remaining $51 billion in the package, Republican Rep. Peter King of New York said after emerging from a meeting with Boehner and GOP lawmakers from New York and New Jersey. The votes will be taken by the new Congress that will be sworn in Thursday.
King left the session with Boehner without the anger that led him to rip into the speaker Tuesday night.
"It was a very positive meeting," King said, adding that Boehner, R-Ohio, assured the lawmakers present that the money from the two House votes would roughly equal the $60 billion package of aid that passed the Senate.
Since the votes will be taken in the new Congress, the Senate also will have to approve the legislation. If the House, as expected, approves the $9 billion flood insurance proposal, the Senate plans to move quickly in hopes of approving the aid on a voice vote Friday. The flood insurance money will help pay for claims by home and business owners with coverage.
Sandy was the most costly natural disaster since Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and one of the worst storms ever in the Northeast.
"Getting critical aid to the victims of Hurricane Sandy should be the first priority in the new Congress, and that was reaffirmed today with members of the New York and New Jersey delegations," Boehner said in a joint statement with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va.
Boehner's decision Tuesday night to cancel an expected vote on Sandy aid before Congress ends its current session provoked a firestorm of criticism from New York, New Jersey and adjacent states where the money will go, including many lawmakers in his own party.
According to King, Boehner explained that after the contentious vote to avoid major tax increases and spending cuts called the "fiscal cliff," Boehner didn't think it was the right time to schedule the vote before the current Congress went out of business.
"What's done is done. The end result will be New York, New Jersey and Connecticut will receive the funding they deserve. We made our position clear last night. That's in the past," King said.
Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., added, "We do believe we have an iron clad commitment."
The Senate approved a $60.4 billion measure Friday to help with recovery from the October storm that devastated parts of New York, New Jersey and nearby states. The House Appropriations Committee has drafted a smaller, $27 billion measure for immediate recovery needs and a second amendment for $33 billion to meet longer-term needs.
The $9 billion in flood insurance money to be voted on Friday was originally in the $27 billion measure. The votes on Jan. 15 will be for $18 billion in immediate assistance and $33 billion for longer-term projects, including projects to protect against future storms, King said.
Much of the money in the proposals is for immediate help for victims and other recovery and rebuilding efforts. The aid is intended to help states rebuild public infrastructure such as roads and tunnels and help thousands of people displaced from their homes.
Some $5.4 billion is for the Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief fund, $5.4 billion is to help transit agencies in New York and New Jersey rebuild and another $3.9 billion is for the Housing and Urban Development Department's development fund to repair hospitals, utilities and small businesses.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican, was among those sharply criticizing Boehner before the speaker changed course.
Christie said he was frustrated after Boehner withdrew the bill Tuesday night and tried to call him four times that night, but none of the calls were returned. Christie complained about the "toxic internal politics" of the House majority. Christie said he had worked hard to persuade House members to support Sandy aid, and was given assurances by GOP leaders that the bill would be voted on before Thursday.
"There is no reason for me at the moment to believe anything they tell me," Christie said before Boehner announced there would be votes this month.
King had branded Boehner's initial decision to pull the bill a "cruel knife in the back" to New York and New Jersey.
King was among an angry chorus of New York and New Jersey lawmakers from both parties who blasted Boehner, with some saying his move was a "betrayal."
In considering the Sandy aid package, the speaker was caught between conservative lawmakers who want to offset any increase in spending and Northeast and mid-Atlantic lawmakers determined to help their states recover more than two months after the storm hit.
The criticism of Boehner on the House floor was personal at times, and reflected in part the frustration among the rank-and-file over the decision to press ahead with a vote on the fiscal cliff deal engineered by the White House and Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell. Boehner had been struggling with conservatives who complained that the economic package didn't include enough spending cuts.
Reps. Michael Grimm, a Republican, and Jerrold Nadler, a Democrat, said in angry House floor remarks that while they did not agree on much, Boehner's decision amounted to a "betrayal" and a crushing blow to states battered by the storm.
President Barack Obama also called for an immediate House vote. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., raised the political temperature even more. She said Boehner should come to Staten Island and the Rockaways to explain his decision to families whose homes and businesses were destroyed. "But I doubt he has the dignity nor the guts to do it," Gillibrand said.
Obama, meanwhile, called for House Republicans to vote on the Sandy aid "without delay for our fellow Americans." The president said in a written statement that many people in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut are trying to recover from the storm and need "immediate support with the bulk of winter still in front of us."
The White House said Obama spoke Wednesday with Christie about the importance of the disaster aid bill, and that the president's staff was in touch with New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's team too as Obama lobbied for House action.
Christie and Cuomo, a Democrat, issued a joint statement, saying, "The fact that days continue to go by while people suffer, families are out of their homes, and men and women remain jobless and struggling during these harsh winter months is a dereliction of duty."
Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-N.J., blamed tea party lawmakers and conservatives who were reluctant to approve new spending soon after the debate over the "fiscal cliff" budget issues for the sudden move by GOP leaders. He said the move was "deplorable."
More than $2 billion in federal funds has been spent so far on relief efforts for 11 states and the District of Columbia struck by the storm, one of the worst ever to hit the Northeast. The Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief fund still has about $4.3 billion, enough to pay for recovery efforts into early spring, according to officials. The unspent FEMA money can only be used for emergency services, said Pallone.
New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, District of Columbia, West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland, New Hampshire, Delaware, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts are receiving federal FEMA aid.
Sandy was blamed for at least 120 deaths and battered coastline areas from North Carolina to Maine. New York, New Jersey and Connecticut were the hardest hit states and suffered high winds, flooding and storm surges. The storm damaged or destroyed more than 72,000 homes and businesses in New Jersey. In New York, 305,000 housing units were damaged or destroyed and more than 265,000 businesses were affected.
___
Associated Press writer Donna Cassata contributed to this report.
The speaker will schedule a vote Friday for $9 billion for the national flood insurance program and another on Jan. 15 for a remaining $51 billion in the package, Republican Rep. Peter King of New York said after emerging from a meeting with Boehner and GOP lawmakers from New York and New Jersey. The votes will be taken by the new Congress that will be sworn in Thursday.
King left the session with Boehner without the anger that led him to rip into the speaker Tuesday night.
"It was a very positive meeting," King said, adding that Boehner, R-Ohio, assured the lawmakers present that the money from the two House votes would roughly equal the $60 billion package of aid that passed the Senate.
Since the votes will be taken in the new Congress, the Senate also will have to approve the legislation. If the House, as expected, approves the $9 billion flood insurance proposal, the Senate plans to move quickly in hopes of approving the aid on a voice vote Friday. The flood insurance money will help pay for claims by home and business owners with coverage.
Sandy was the most costly natural disaster since Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and one of the worst storms ever in the Northeast.
"Getting critical aid to the victims of Hurricane Sandy should be the first priority in the new Congress, and that was reaffirmed today with members of the New York and New Jersey delegations," Boehner said in a joint statement with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va.
Boehner's decision Tuesday night to cancel an expected vote on Sandy aid before Congress ends its current session provoked a firestorm of criticism from New York, New Jersey and adjacent states where the money will go, including many lawmakers in his own party.
According to King, Boehner explained that after the contentious vote to avoid major tax increases and spending cuts called the "fiscal cliff," Boehner didn't think it was the right time to schedule the vote before the current Congress went out of business.
"What's done is done. The end result will be New York, New Jersey and Connecticut will receive the funding they deserve. We made our position clear last night. That's in the past," King said.
Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., added, "We do believe we have an iron clad commitment."
The Senate approved a $60.4 billion measure Friday to help with recovery from the October storm that devastated parts of New York, New Jersey and nearby states. The House Appropriations Committee has drafted a smaller, $27 billion measure for immediate recovery needs and a second amendment for $33 billion to meet longer-term needs.
The $9 billion in flood insurance money to be voted on Friday was originally in the $27 billion measure. The votes on Jan. 15 will be for $18 billion in immediate assistance and $33 billion for longer-term projects, including projects to protect against future storms, King said.
Much of the money in the proposals is for immediate help for victims and other recovery and rebuilding efforts. The aid is intended to help states rebuild public infrastructure such as roads and tunnels and help thousands of people displaced from their homes.
Some $5.4 billion is for the Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief fund, $5.4 billion is to help transit agencies in New York and New Jersey rebuild and another $3.9 billion is for the Housing and Urban Development Department's development fund to repair hospitals, utilities and small businesses.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican, was among those sharply criticizing Boehner before the speaker changed course.
Christie said he was frustrated after Boehner withdrew the bill Tuesday night and tried to call him four times that night, but none of the calls were returned. Christie complained about the "toxic internal politics" of the House majority. Christie said he had worked hard to persuade House members to support Sandy aid, and was given assurances by GOP leaders that the bill would be voted on before Thursday.
"There is no reason for me at the moment to believe anything they tell me," Christie said before Boehner announced there would be votes this month.
King had branded Boehner's initial decision to pull the bill a "cruel knife in the back" to New York and New Jersey.
King was among an angry chorus of New York and New Jersey lawmakers from both parties who blasted Boehner, with some saying his move was a "betrayal."
In considering the Sandy aid package, the speaker was caught between conservative lawmakers who want to offset any increase in spending and Northeast and mid-Atlantic lawmakers determined to help their states recover more than two months after the storm hit.
The criticism of Boehner on the House floor was personal at times, and reflected in part the frustration among the rank-and-file over the decision to press ahead with a vote on the fiscal cliff deal engineered by the White House and Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell. Boehner had been struggling with conservatives who complained that the economic package didn't include enough spending cuts.
Reps. Michael Grimm, a Republican, and Jerrold Nadler, a Democrat, said in angry House floor remarks that while they did not agree on much, Boehner's decision amounted to a "betrayal" and a crushing blow to states battered by the storm.
President Barack Obama also called for an immediate House vote. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., raised the political temperature even more. She said Boehner should come to Staten Island and the Rockaways to explain his decision to families whose homes and businesses were destroyed. "But I doubt he has the dignity nor the guts to do it," Gillibrand said.
Obama, meanwhile, called for House Republicans to vote on the Sandy aid "without delay for our fellow Americans." The president said in a written statement that many people in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut are trying to recover from the storm and need "immediate support with the bulk of winter still in front of us."
The White House said Obama spoke Wednesday with Christie about the importance of the disaster aid bill, and that the president's staff was in touch with New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's team too as Obama lobbied for House action.
Christie and Cuomo, a Democrat, issued a joint statement, saying, "The fact that days continue to go by while people suffer, families are out of their homes, and men and women remain jobless and struggling during these harsh winter months is a dereliction of duty."
Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-N.J., blamed tea party lawmakers and conservatives who were reluctant to approve new spending soon after the debate over the "fiscal cliff" budget issues for the sudden move by GOP leaders. He said the move was "deplorable."
More than $2 billion in federal funds has been spent so far on relief efforts for 11 states and the District of Columbia struck by the storm, one of the worst ever to hit the Northeast. The Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief fund still has about $4.3 billion, enough to pay for recovery efforts into early spring, according to officials. The unspent FEMA money can only be used for emergency services, said Pallone.
New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, District of Columbia, West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland, New Hampshire, Delaware, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts are receiving federal FEMA aid.
Sandy was blamed for at least 120 deaths and battered coastline areas from North Carolina to Maine. New York, New Jersey and Connecticut were the hardest hit states and suffered high winds, flooding and storm surges. The storm damaged or destroyed more than 72,000 homes and businesses in New Jersey. In New York, 305,000 housing units were damaged or destroyed and more than 265,000 businesses were affected.
___
Associated Press writer Donna Cassata contributed to this report.
government bullies in all forms. give me the money or else? ok. got it. sandy left so many people with little or nothing and so many of us opened our heart and wallets.  we should all pull together and help them to the extent that we can; and yes, the federal gov't should provide assistance.  but for politicians to be demanding money from the taxpayers??  Â
Why is it the Feds responsibility to rebuild these peoples homes? The cheapskates couldn't pony up some GOVERNMENT FUNDED flood insurance? Infrastructure and the like is different.  Of course, most of the money is going to be siphoned off by the local elected mobsters and the Unions and not much will make its way to actually fixing anything. Sort of like a "Concert For Bangladesh" only on a much grander scale.
Â
More importantly, that woman on the phone looks suspiciously like the Obamaphone Lady. Just sayin'.
 @Getov Mylon I guess I am not understanding your comment. Do I assume that you have read every homeowners insurance policy on the Jersey and New York flood plain or are you just flapping your gums about something you want to believe is the truth?
Â
In Washington State I am required to purchase flood insurance; it is a requirement of my homeowner policy and I live on one of the highest points in West Seattle. Puget Sound would have to rise some 300 to 400 feet before I would even be able to submit a claim.
Â
Had the House of Representatives done what it was elected to do and voted to fund FEMA and the associated flood damage claims this argument would not be necessary. Please note (and this goes for "the unvarnished truth" as well) President Obama can not write a funding bill, even if he wanted to; that is the job of the two houses of Congress. The President can only sign a bill into law after Congressional approval.
Â
Note: had more people paid closer attention to the lessons in their 8th grade civics class most of the debates we have in this blog would be focused on the issues and not the minutia.
 @left-center Flood insurance covers water damage as well. Neighbors burst pipes. Your burst pipes. A runaway swimming pool.
Â
if Obama can change (circumvent) existing bankruptcy and immigration law, he can do most anything he pleases. Although... I have no idea where I said that Obama could write a funding bill.
 @Getov Mylon Man, you really need to stop making assumptions. Facts may be a little harder to deal with because you can not manipulate them into your opinionated reasoning, but after you have used facts in a few debates you'll find that you will be accepted, even admired for your knowledge of the subject.
I have mixed feelings about the aid package, but it sure is interesting watching the Republicans decide that government spending and bailouts are good when it affects them. Â
That's what I am saying....this Republican Party is NOTHING but pain in the deep rear !
The Founder of the Republican Party President Lincoln just mad as hell......if he
were still around and seen this crappy people in there.
You know, if Christie ran for president in the next election, I might consider voting for a Republican. This man has gone all out in representing everyone in is state and has the big brass grapefruits to speak his mind to the media instead of sugar coating it. He supports his constituants first. He also (despite being conservative) doesn't seem to give a damn about partisian politics on the IMPORTANT issues.
Â
I have not seen such a character on either the Democrats or the Republicans in a long time. However, I'm sure the Tea Party see him now as a worse threat to them than any other liberal out there come election time. <SIGH!>
 @path_tech The TP hacks have already started labeling Christie as a RINO, mainly for his praise of the president's response to Sandy. God forbid he should express gratitude to the president for helping the people he represents.
This comment has been deleted
 @Getov Mylon  @OrcasThunder  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth I beg to differ, but clarifying language in a contract is state regulation. It may be that it is readable at a certain school grade level, they may set a minimum size of type, etc. It's up to the individual states.Â
 @OrcasThunder  @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth Clarifying language is hardly MORE regulation. And yes, Lousiana is Red. Good catch.
 @Getov Mylon  @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth
You want more government regulation?
Oh, and Louisiana is a red State...
http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/politics/red-blue-states-summary.htm
 @OrcasThunder  @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truthÂ
Â
If an insurer violates a policy-holder's contract, they should be taken to court. Folks getting the shaft should shout it from the rooftops so those companies get punished in the marketplace.
Â
By the way, maybe New Jersey and New York (Blue States, by the way) could update their insurance laws forcing the insurance companies to disclose in plain English what policies cover. I have no problem with that. Free markets require as much full disclosure as possible.
Â
Â
 @Getov Mylon  @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth "if you don't insure your property. Not my problem."
But many - most - insurance companies refuse to write those for most home owners.
And the ones that DO write them have a poor record of actually paying for damages. Following Katrina many home owners whose homes were flooded were told the damage was "wind damage" - because the flood waters were driven into the area by the winds.
There were cases where the companies denied claims for wind damage to the upper portions of the structures because the wind tore off the roof and let the rain in - saying it was flooding, and yet the flood coverage listed it as wind damage, so no one paid for the damage.
Â
"McDonald believed that his private insurer, the Hanover Insurance Group, was supposed to pay for damage above the flood line. Hurricane Katrina's winds had torn a ventilator off the roof, leaving a big hole for rainwater to pour through, and the water had damaged hardwood floors upstairs and kitchen cabinets. He said he had $200,000 worth of wind damage.
But Hanover's response was very different from the federal flood program's. The company charged him a $5,000 deductible and has paid him $900, he said.
Hanover, he said, did pay him $1,500 for temporary living expenses, but then demanded it back when it decided that his losses had come from flooding. He said he had spent $53,000, mostly to rent places to live in other parts of the state. Dealing with his insurance company, he said, "is like talking to a wall.""
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/business/worldbusiness/02iht-orleans.4.7353442.html?_r=0
Â
"At one point, they say State Farm brought in a special shredding truck they believe was used to destroy key documents. State Farm says shredding is standard to protect policyholdersâ privacy. The sisters say they saw supervisors go to great lengths to pressure outside engineers to prepare reports concluding that damage was caused by water, not covered under State Farm policies, rather than by wind. They say reports that concluded that damage was caused by wind, for which State Farm would have to pay, were hidden in a special file and new reports were ordered. Cori Rigsby says she recalls a senior coordinator ordering that an engineering company be told to alter the findings in its report so that State Farm would not have to pay. "Tell them if they donât change their report, weâre not paying their invoice," she remembers the supervisor saying."
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2006/08/state_farm_insi/
 @OrcasThunder  @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth Let me repeat it, old man. Boo-ephen-hoo if you don't insure your property. Not my problem.Â
Â
Flood insurance should not be subsidized by the federal taxpayer.
 @Getov Mylon  @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth "Boo Freakin' hoo."
And you wonder why no-one takes you seriously...
 @the unvarnished truth It is shameful to get congressmen to do the right thing they mus be bribed?
 @Getov Mylon  @justmyopinion "Tsunamis are considered water damage and you would need Flood Insurance."
And yet you say that flood insurance should be dropped...
 @the unvarnished truth "And, why is 1/3 of the "Sandy" bill, not Sandy-related? It's pork for every leftwing program ever thought of."
You can express your own thoughts but you can't make up your own facts.
Â
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/senate-dems-caught-expanding-sandy-bill-provide-kickbacks-republican-senators_690798.html
 @the unvarnished truth  @Mikeftm  @path_tech I wish I could click a button on these forums and have your posts be blacklisted so I don't have to waste eyeball time on your nonsensical drivel.Â
 @OrcasThunder  @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth I am sure you want some citations so I went to Fox News (#1 in Cable) and found this little nugget at their Propaganda Partner, The New York Times, a well-known Right Wing Koch Bought Mouthpiece For The Right's Stormtroopers.
Â
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/business/economy/21pension.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
 @OrcasThunder  @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth "The people who lost their homes to that large fire.."
Â
Firemen should know better than not to have fire insurance.Â
 @OrcasThunder  @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth Did you miss my comment at the top where I said infrastructure is different? And you mean those retired cops and firemen that spiked their pensions so they get six figures? Those guys?
They could afford insurance but they chose to buy an expensive boat or a house in the Cats instead. Boo Freakin' hoo.
 @OrcasThunder  @justmyopinion Tsunamis are considered water damage and you would need Flood Insurance. Volcanoes? It would depend I suppose on HOW the volcano damaged your property. Could be wind damage (shock wave), lava flow or lahar. I think with a lahar you would need flood insurance.
Â
Â
 @Getov Mylon  @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth "It subsidizes rich coast dwellers"
You really have no understanding of the people who were impacted by the storm are, do you? The people who lost their homes to that large fire were by and large generations of retired cops and firefighters. The people who were blocks inshore and still got their homes destroyed by the waves were working people, many who lost everything.
A large segment of the people who commuted to work in NYC still have no subway service...your "rich" people wouldn't know how to exist in that world.
Â
 @justmyopinion Uh, buy earthquake insurance. It's available in the private insurance sector.
 @justmyopinion  @Getov Mylon
And volcanoes...and tsunamis...
 @Getov Mylon We have earthquakes here, maybe we shouldn't build houses here.
 @Darn it!  @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth The flood insurance program should be dropped. It subsidizes rich coast dwellers (Rich People, Booo!) at the expense of the rest of us. If they couldn't get or had to pay market rates for flood/storm insurance, maybe they wouldn't build their houses there.
 @path_tech  @the unvarnished truth It is my understanding that there was some pork in the bill. The bill is now going to be split into two parts. The first part will be enough to keep the flood insurance program going. The second part will be done by the 15th. Since this will be done by the new congress it will be a new bill and the pork will likely be taken out and then it will go to the senate for signing.Â
@sunnysandiego
Awesome non-use of comma in the following sentence. Thanks, 'diego. I spurted my Diet Rite Cola over the keyboard!
Â
"his response to sandy and Moronies... got him elected retard"
Â
Would it be wrong to agree with you for once?Â
Â
 @the unvarnished truth Interesting that you call yourself "the unvarnished truth" and then nothing you spew has any truth to it...
 @the unvarnished truthÂ
I'm sorry, I thought we've already have had this talk. Everytime you say "Odumbo", you lose ALL credibility in your posts.  Now as for the "pork", I'll have to research that. However, I do seem to recall a certain U.S. senator from our state some 13 years ago put some "pork" into a Kosovo package to include mining Buckhorn Mountain for gold.... using cyanide to extract the gold...... bypassing state EPA regulations.Â
Â
Yeah, Slade Gorton had egg over his face in that event. The bottom line (before I research what you just posted) is that EVERY party since the beginning of time has included "PORK" into every bill submitted to the House & Senate.
Â
Â
@the unvarnished truth @Mikeftm @path_tech his response to sandy and Moronies (47 percent foot in his mouth comment) got him elected retard.