Tornadoes

Parent Cafe
121

<p>I’m not going to argue. There are 2 posters on this page alone who believe that Oklahomans shouldn’t be helped. I didn’t vote for Oklahoma’s current senators, neither did those children and many other people. I’m not the only democrat in this state. Shocking, I know. I am all for helping others when in need. People come first, regardless of political affiliation. That’s how it should be.</p>

122

<p>The posters don’t believe that Oklahomans shouldn’t be helped. Rather they argued in the abstract, that because Oklahomans (remember a senator is supposed to act on behalf of what his state wants) didn’t want to allocate more funds to FEMA, perhaps FEMA shouldn’t be able to fund Moore’s relief effort. No one is seriously arguing that the federal government shouldn’t assist Moore’s recovery.</p>

<p>Also as a side note, a number of OU students, myself included, will be cleaning up debris tomorrow. Given what people in my chem class who live in Moore stated about the destruction, it looks like it will be a long Saturday.</p>

123

<p>I know a lot of people who are tired of the hypocrisy of some politicians. I don’t know a single person in NJ who isn’t moved by the plight of Oklahomans and doesn’t think we shouldn’t do everything possible to help out. That’s just how we roll here. We are still digging out of a hundred miles of devastation, but we still care about what happens elsewhere.</p>

124

<p>As an East Coaster I’m infuriated that Oklahoma politicians didn’t think that New Jersey deserved disaster aid. I’m also pretty infuriated that according to an engineer who was looking at how houses were constructed, that there is apparently either no reasonable building code or no enforcment of it. He was talking about houses where sill plates had no anchor bolts attaching them to the foundation, or sheathing that was not correctly nailed to studs. We may pay higher taxes here, but at least our building inspectors do their jobs. "Moore, Okla., Homes Lacked Improvements After 1999 Tornadoes
"<a href=“http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=186503461&m=186503438”>http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=186503461&m=186503438&lt;/a&gt; This isn’t rocket science.</p>

125

<p>As someone who comes from a state that just flat-out doesn’t have a need for federal funding almost ever, I think it’s absolutely infuriating that we deny aid to those who need it. No, Oklahomans don’t deserve to be punished for their elected representatives’ vote, but I sure as heck hope they vote their a**es out of office once they realize what it’s like to go weeks (months) without assistance.</p>

<p>I sincerely wish there were more reps like Christie who call out their party for hypocrisy (I sincerely hate hypocrisy no matter which side it’s from). You won’t find me agreeing with him often, but he was dead right on that one. It bothers me that we’re all “Americans” until funding is on the line. Then it’s every state for itself.</p>

126

<p>The State of Oklahoma, through the unanimous voices of its Congressional representatives, made clear they oppose federal aid to help people and areas damaged by storm … unless that money is offset by taking money from poor people. One senator from Oklahoma bluntly said that money should be appropriated for Oklahoma - and fast, unlike for New Jersey - and should be paid for by cutting programs … in other states. This is hideous. My feeling is this:</p>

<ol>
<li>Cut money going to Oklahoma. Take it out of whatever non-poverty programs get funded in Oklahoma. </li>
<li>Require that Oklahoma put in place actual building codes that mandate safer construction. Receipt of funds comes with strings attached. This should be a string.</li>
</ol>

<p>If not, then let Oklahoma find the money in its own budget. Oklahoma is free to raise taxes on its own citizens and to borrow funds in the market to pay for reconstruction. Go ahead and do that. Stop trying to take money from poor people in my state to pay for your own gross negligence.</p>

<p>If Oklahoma can’t hold to the principles it wants others to be held to, then I have to conclude the people who represent Oklahoma are simply worse human beings than the people who are willing to vote for money to help in disasters. And that speaks volumes about the people in Oklahoma who elect such people.</p>

127

<p>“The State of Oklahoma, through the unanimous voices of its Congressional representatives, made clear they oppose federal aid to help people and areas damaged by storm … unless that money is offset by taking money from poor people.”</p>

<p>Only Rep. Tom Cole - who is from Moore, voted for Sandy relief. </p>

<p>I know not everyone in OK voted for those Senators but the overwhelming majority of the people of that state did. The elections are not even close. </p>

<p>I saw the same report that Mathmom did about the lack of change in building codes after the 1999 tornado. I found it shocking since after every earthquake in CA building codes are changed and after Hurricane Andrew, what was required in Florida was also changed. Yet in OK they rebuilt the houses destroyed as shabbily as before. </p>

<p>If they are going to keep voting for representatives who hate government - the rest of us shouldn’t have to bail them out by taking money from social programs we believe need to be protected.</p>

128

<p>My husband is retired federal employee and has worked with Oklahoma congressional representatives for years. Funny how they are all opposed to federal government assistance yet their congressional delegation historically has been masters at bringing home the pork for their districts.</p>

129

<p>Completely agree about the building codes. I was terrified to find out that my apartment complex, which has hundreds of people living in it, lacks a single basement or storm shelter. When the May 19 tornado struck, my apartment mates and I had to drive 2 miles to the National Weather Center. My lab partner’s mother had to run outside before the tornado to get to another business which had a basement. Why? Because the first business she went to restricted access to the basement for customers and employees only! If California were prone to tornadoes, I guarantee every apartment complex would have a storm shelter, and that it would be completely illegal for any business which has a storm shelter to turn down people when there’s a tornado warning.</p>

<p>I think FEMA funding should come with some stipulations. In order for FEMA to come to your state after a disaster you must pass stronger building codes, or do a few other things to prevent such a disaster from happening again. Don’t like that stipulation? Then you don’t get help.</p>

130

<p>I haven’t been following this thread and am not here to take a big stand on anything, but has anyone posted a link to a child poverty map in the U.S.? Here are a few.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.nccp.org/publications/images/wpc10-fig2.jpg[/url]”>http://www.nccp.org/publications/images/wpc10-fig2.jpg&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://www.prb.org/Articles/2009/ruralchildpoverty.aspx[/url]”>http://www.prb.org/Articles/2009/ruralchildpoverty.aspx&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>[Child</a> Poverty Rates](<a href=“http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/child-poverty-rates.aspx]Child”>http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/child-poverty-rates.aspx)</p>

131

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, preventing such a disaster is impossible. We can’t control the weather.</p>

<p>As to building codes, I think we may see some legislation regarding storm shelters in schools and such (I don’t live in Oklahoma, so just conjecture). It would be hard and expensive to retrofit existing schools with storm shelters large enough for the entire school population, but I guess it could happen if people are willing and able to pay for it. But there is no feasible way to require building codes which will protect private homes in the event of an EF-4 or EF-5 tornado.</p>

132

<p>Sorry that was a typo on my part. I meant to write preventing the damage from a disaster. </p>

<p>And of course you can’t require building codes that would withstand an EF 4 or 5 tornado. But look at California. It acknowledges the impracticality of requiring buildings to still stand after a magnitude 8 earthquake. However, the state realizes that the vast majority of earthquakes are not magnitude 8, they’re magnitude 6 or lower. Thus it requires buildings to be able to withstand, with only minor damage, “normal” earthquakes. Oklahoma should do the same for all new buildings. Mandate building codes that allow a home to still stand after a regular level tornado, while acknowledging that it’s impossible to protect homes against tornadoes like the one on May 20.</p>

133

<p>^^^^^Yeah, when we built our house, they used some kind of “clips” to prevent the roof from coming off easily. Sorry if I don’t have that exactly right, but we did do something above and beyond code to give our roof extra protection. I don’t recall it being all that expensive. I know there are things like that which can be done to make houses at least a little more sturdy and able to withstand the more common weather issues.</p>

134

<p>We get occasional tornadoes in our area. I just realized that our brand new schools (middle and elementary) do not have a basement. The old middle school that is soon to be torned down, has a bomb shelter. Too bad there isn’t some way to transport it over to one of the other schools.</p>

135

<p>I’ve got to agree with Lergnom here. I feel very strongly that the people of OK deserve federal aid. But they also elect these clowns with their faux fiscal conservatism year after year. And I believe that no matter what stance Imhofe/Coburn and the rest of them take on tornado relief, they will get reelected should they chose to run again. They will appeal to the base on issues like abortion and same-sex marriage and gun rights and immigration and nothing will ever change. They will never be held accountable for their response to this tornado, because people will decide “on the whole” that they are doing a good enough job–especially if other states end up bailing them out through their contributions to federal disaster relief funds.</p>

136

<p>This thread is getting really political about a natural disaster in which children died.</p>

<p>My sympathy to any who lost loved ones.</p>

137

<p>I don’t think anyone here is saying Oklahoma should not be given assistance. As a matter of fact, NJ’s Hurricane Sandy relief workers are sending a truck with supplies tomorrow to Oklahoma. However, many here are required to alter their homes, and raise them above the FEMA designated flood plains in order to get relief money. I think people are saying that maybe Oklahoma needs to look at requiring stricter building codes and storm shelters. I don’t see anything wrong with that. And you have to see the irony in the behavior and comments of Oklahoma’s elected officials. Hypocritical at best.</p>

138

<p>I spent much of Saturday helping haul debris from another town devastated by the tornado. I want these families’ lives to return back to normal, to have some semblance of stability.</p>

<p>What I don’t want is another incident like May 20, where children died because no one bothered to mandate a storm shelter in a public school. That’s what gets me so angry about Oklahoma’s building codes. These kids could be alive today had the state taken basic precautionary measures. If that doesn’t disgust you, I don’t know what will. </p>

<p>I keep thinking back to what happened on May 20, where people from all over Norman had to drive for miles, find a place to park, and then run to the OU library basement to seek shelter from the tornado. Had the tornado happened during the school year, when there would have been far more students (and thus fewer parking spaces) on campus, I’m not sure if they would have gotten to safety in time.</p>

139

<p>whenhen, it totally disgusts me. But sadly, I don’t see Oklahoma or any other state mandating something that would require a huge investment of public resources. Our entire public infrastructure in this country is crumbling–not just schools but bridges, roads, dams, and so on. I wish I had an answer for what to do.</p>

140

<p>I agree with all of you. While I cannot imagine building codes to withstand this level tornado, every year there are tornadoes of lesser intensity that destroy homes and people lose their lives. It is hard to imagine the laxity of the building codes or people who choose to not create shelters living in Tornado Alley… but then in a different scenario entirely, look at the fertilizer plant explosion in Texas. Not only were there residences but also a nursing home and a middle school adjacent. I cannot imagine who thought that was a good idea… </p>

<p>As for Hurricane Sandy, I live in an affected area- 3 miles from the great south bay to the barrier beach islands. So much of the destruction and the loss of homes were not caused by the storm hitting the oceanfront directly but from the storm surge caused by high tide and the water rising in the creeks and channels from the great south bay. Just down the road from my house, there are many people who are not back in their homes. We had no damage other than a tree down in our driveway that was quickly cut up and taken away by our local village but we were just notified by our insurer, State Farm that they will no longer “be there” for anyone living within a certain radius of the Great South Bay. We were quickly able to secure different insurance with a competitor and added flood coverage even though not a requirement.</p>