Well, they didn’t use those words exactly, but the Trump Administration says Minnesota must pay from its own coffers; federal taxpayers are not responsible for the mess politicians instigated and the riots they failed to control in Minneapolis.
Federal government denies Minnesota’s request for aid to clean up, rebuild in Twin Cities
The federal government has denied a request from the state of Minnesota for a disaster declaration and accompanying financial support, to help clean up and repair fire damage from unrest following the police killing of George Floyd.
Governor Tim Walz (boo hoo!)
Gov. Tim Walz’s office said it received the denial on Friday, eight days after Walz had submitted the request. A Federal Emergency Management Agency spokesperson said the agency had determined the damage was something local and state governments could handle on their own.
In a letter to President Trump on July 2, Walz had noted more than $15 million in damage and cleanup costs that could be eligible for federal reimbursement.
The state has estimated total damages at more than $500 million.
Hundreds of buildings were looted, damaged or destroyed by fires in the Twin Cities, primarily in Minneapolis and St. Paul, after Floyd was killed on May 25.
“The governor is disappointed that the federal government declined his request for financial support from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to help Minnesota rebuild after civil unrest damaged public infrastructure and caused extensive fire damage in the wake of George Floyd’s death,” Walz’s spokesperson Teddy Tschann said in a statement. “As we navigate one of the most difficult periods in our state’s history, we look for support from our federal government to help us through.”
In making the request for help, Walz had noted that the financial challenge had been made even harder by the impacts on the state budget from the cononavirus pandemic. A projected $1.5 billion budget surplus in February was soon wiped out by a projected $2.4 billion revenue shortfall, he wrote to in the request to President Trump via FEMA.
In a statement provided to MPR News on Saturday, a FEMA spokesperson said:
“After a thorough review of Minnesota’s request for a major disaster declaration from extensive fire damage as a result of civil unrest in late May and early June, it was determined that the impact to public infrastructure is within the capabilities of the local and state governments to recover from. The governor has 30 days to appeal that decision.”
Rep. Emmer to Trump: Do not give Minnesota any money without a full investigation of how this level of destruction was allowed to occur.
The federal government’s denial of the request from Walz, a Democrat, came a day after Republican U.S. Rep Tom Emmer of Minnesota sent a letter to Trump and other federal officials raising questions about the request.
While not stating opposition to Minnesota receiving federal money, Emmer asked that — in the wake of Walz’s request — the Trump administration “undertake a thorough and concurrent review of my state’s response to the violence.”
Emmer wrote that if federal money helps pay for cleanup and rebuilding, the government “has an obligation to every American — prior to the release of funding — to fully understand the events which allowed for this level of destruction to occur and ensure it never happens again.”
Slightly changing the subject, there is a new book publishedon how immigrants turned Minneapolis, a dying WHITE city of the 1970s, into the wonderfully diverse and vibrant city it is today.
Catholic and Lutheran refugee resettlement agencies come in for praise for helping to save the city from a “death spiral.”
If you are like me and saw this story yesterday, you probably said, well heck I knew that, and moved on to more interesting reading.
However, reader Cathy sent me the newly unemployed editor’s letter to AG Sulzberger and I found it a very worthwhile read, so I’m posting a bit of it here with a link to the whole stinging rebuke, of not just the NYT, but of most of the legacy media today.
If you don’t know about the controversy here is a story by Howard Kurtz of Fox Newstoday.
Message to you (and to me!), if they are calling you a “Nazi” and a “racist” wear the label with pride because it means you have gotten under their skin.
It is with sadness that I write to tell you that I am resigning from The New York Times.
[….]
But the lessons that ought to have followed the election—lessons about the importance of understanding other Americans, the necessity of resisting tribalism, and the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society—have not been learned. Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else.
Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions. I was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history. Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative.
[….]
My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist…
[….]
I do not understand how you have allowed this kind of behavior to go on inside your company in full view of the paper’s entire staff and the public. And I certainly can’t square how you and other Times leaders have stood by while simultaneously praising me in private for my courage. Showing up for work as a centrist at an American newspaper should not require bravery.
Part of me wishes I could say that my experience was unique. But the truth is that intellectual curiosity—let alone risk-taking—is now a liability at The Times. Why edit something challenging to our readers, or write something bold only to go through the numbing process of making it ideologically kosher, when we can assure ourselves of job security (and clicks) by publishing our 4000th op-ed arguing that Donald Trump is a unique danger to the country and the world? And so self-censorship has become the norm.
It is with sadness that I write to tell you that I am resigning from The New York Times.
Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions. I was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history. Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative.