[KYHAM] RE: National Disaster Response Plan Needed?

[Ron Dodson]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/26/bush.military/index.html has a
great story on just this very issue.  It will be interesting to see how
they play this out.  

If I recall correctly there is an old saying, "War is far to important
to be left to Generals". Or something of the sort.  I always cringe
whenever people who have NO disaster experience (read that as "Desk
Jockeys") start changing policy FOR disaster response. 

73, 
Ron, KA4MAP


-----Original Message-----
From: kyham-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:kyham-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Fred Flowers
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 10:38 PM
To: N4AOF; Ky Ham Mail List at QTH.net; KyARES at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [KyARES] RE: [KYHAM] National Disaster Response Plan
Needed?

You are right, however we all know what the reaction would be, if the
two 
ton Federal gorilla came stomping in every time the wind got up.

What piece of equipment are you going to fuel up?  Who know what is
needed 
until it is needed?

Disaster plans (assuming they are read) are like war plans, great until
the 
first shot is fired.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "N4AOF" <n4aof at arrl.net>
To: "Ky Ham Mail List at QTH.net" <kyham at mailman.qth.net>; 
<KyARES at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 9:20 PM
Subject: Re: [KyARES] RE: [KYHAM] National Disaster Response Plan
Needed?


>> The locals still have to ask for it.  It looks like in this case
disaster
>> relief & law enforcement are one and the same.
>
> That is a matter of which law you are looking at for different
purposes.
>
> The Posse Comitatus Act PROHIBITS the use of the military for domestic
law
> enforcement.  It says nothing about other federal resources and
nothing
> about other uses of the military.
>
> The problem with other uses of federal resources isn't that they are
> prohibited but rather that they are generally not authorized (and
> specifically that they are not funded).  There is a vast difference 
> between
> prohibited, unauthorized, and unfunded.
>
> The Stafford Act specifically authorizes the use of federal resources
(and
> provides a funding mechanism, but not direct funding) for disaster
relief
> operations when requested by the state and personally approved by the
> President.
>
> There are a number of other general and specific authorities, plus a 
> number
> of ways for federal action within existing laws that do not require
state
> action -- short of invoking the Insurrection Act.
>
> Nothing in current law prevents positioning of any federal resources
in
> anticipation of use in a disaster -- but the costs incurred come out
of 
> the
> respective agency existing budget (nearly non-existent in late August
and
> September).
>
> So, yes, the process (under the Stafford Act) requires a state request
and
> the way that process is implemented requires the state request to be
for
> specific resourses that exceed the capabilities of the state; but that
> doesn't mean that federal authorities HAVE TO sit on their hands
waiting 
> for
> the state to remember to ask for a 48-foot MilVan with a tractor, a 
> driver,
> an assistant driver, and 350 gallons of diesel fuel before they can
assign 
> a
> driver and assistant to go perform before operations maintenance, fuel
up
> the tractor, and hook up the trailer (from a legal standpoint it just 
> means
> that the Army is paying for the driver, the vehicle, and the fuel out
of 
> its
> regular operations budget until someone gets around to dotting all the
i's
> and crossing all the t's.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kenwood TM-G707A Giveaway
> http://www.kyham.net/support.html 

_______________________________________________
Kenwood TM-G707A Giveaway
http://www.kyham.net/support.html



-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.3/107 - Release Date:
9/20/2005