Ron Paul and Eric Cantor's Views on Hurricane and Disaster Relief Are Immoral, Selfish, Wrong

• Arguments on whether federal disaster relief evolves from the Constitution, the General Welfare Clause or an Executive Order should not supersede the humane discussion of the suffering of others and the unselfish willingness to assist and to encourage those who are hurting and needy.
• Where’s All That Personal Responsibility?
• Will the Commons Become Tragic?
• The Myopic Selfishness of Libertarians

Anthony Jerrod, Huffington Post

Federal disaster relief is "bad economics, bad morality and bad constitutional law."

When I heard those words uttered by now-GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX), I was perplexed and taken aback by his marked apathy. In essence, Rep. Paul and certain libertarians believe that there should be no federal funds for disaster relief. Hence, if a tornado, earthquake, hurricane, flood, wildfire or other act of God ravages a city like Joplin or New Orleans, then the residents of those respective communities should be responsible for their own rebuilding efforts. Proponents who agree with this notion often adhere to the personal responsibility principle as the backdrop for their conviction that disaster victims should help themselves instead of reaching into the wallets and bank accounts of their fellow taxpayers.*

Rep. Paul's sentiments were recently echoed -- though less extreme -- by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor as he discussed his position relative to earthquake aid for areas in his own district in Virginia. According to Cantor, "There is an appropriate federal role in incidents like this [...] all of us know that the federal government is busy spending money it doesn't have."

More...

Related:

*Minnesota 2020 | Where’s All That Personal Responsibility? John Van Hecke, Executive Director & Fellow, Minnesota 2020
The suggestion is clear. As government’s role in providing for the community good declines, expanded personal responsibility will replace government. It’s a seductive notion. It’s also flat out wrong.

Will the Commons Become Tragic? Sen. Gary Hart, Reader Supported News

• Every man for himself would be a (more or less) rational approach to life ... if men and women were merely economic creatures. But there is also such a thing as moral man. And it is moral man (and woman) who confront the necessity of protecting the commons and preventing a tragedy brought on by greed.
• The Myopic Selfishness of Libertarians