Comments on: Obama to cut Law Enforcement survivors benefit fund http://www.ontherightinva.com/2009/05/11/obama-to-cut-law-enforcement-survivors-benefit-fund/ A conservative view on Virginia, local, and national politics. Sun, 22 Jan 2012 01:50:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Timothy Watsonhttp://www.ontherightinva.com/2009/05/11/obama-to-cut-law-enforcement-survivors-benefit-fund/comment-page-1/#comment-10 Timothy Watson Sat, 16 May 2009 09:20:33 +0000 http://orangeva.reteaparty.com/?p=19#comment-10 Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB) Program "is a partnership effort of the U.S. Department of Justice; local, state, and federal public safety agencies; and national organizations to provide benefits to the spouses, children, and other survivors of public safety officers who have died from a traumatic injury or who have been totally and permanently disabled in the line of duty." (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/grant/psob/psob_heroes.html)I agree that in an ideal situation the federal government should be paying benefits to federal employees and state and local governments should be taking care of their respective employees. It would cut down the bureaucracy involved and save money.However, as the system is now, I also agree that Obama shouldn't be defunding these programs when he has gazillions of dollars to spend on other programs.And unfortunately the mingling of federal and state money and their responsibilities gets worse and worse every day. Virginia decided a couple years ago to provide benefits to United States military personnel that were wounded or killed in the line of duty via the Virginia Wounded Warrior Program since the Veterans Administration does such a poor job of it. Now, a Republican Congressman representing a portion of Virginia has requested an earmark for $3,150,000 for the program. So, this Congressman wants to earmark money to a program that was created because the VA doesn't have enough money.In whose world does it make sense to use federal money to fund a state program that was created because the federal government was going such a poor job in its responsibilities? Public Safety Officers’ Benefits (PSOB) Program “is a partnership effort of the U.S. Department of Justice; local, state, and federal public safety agencies; and national organizations to provide benefits to the spouses, children, and other survivors of public safety officers who have died from a traumatic injury or who have been totally and permanently disabled in the line of duty.” (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/grant/psob/psob_heroes.html)

I agree that in an ideal situation the federal government should be paying benefits to federal employees and state and local governments should be taking care of their respective employees. It would cut down the bureaucracy involved and save money.

However, as the system is now, I also agree that Obama shouldn’t be defunding these programs when he has gazillions of dollars to spend on other programs.

And unfortunately the mingling of federal and state money and their responsibilities gets worse and worse every day. Virginia decided a couple years ago to provide benefits to United States military personnel that were wounded or killed in the line of duty via the Virginia Wounded Warrior Program since the Veterans Administration does such a poor job of it. Now, a Republican Congressman representing a portion of Virginia has requested an earmark for $3,150,000 for the program. So, this Congressman wants to earmark money to a program that was created because the VA doesn’t have enough money.

In whose world does it make sense to use federal money to fund a state program that was created because the federal government was going such a poor job in its responsibilities?

]]> By: Danhttp://www.ontherightinva.com/2009/05/11/obama-to-cut-law-enforcement-survivors-benefit-fund/comment-page-1/#comment-9 Dan Wed, 13 May 2009 11:02:40 +0000 http://orangeva.reteaparty.com/?p=19#comment-9 I disagree in part. Initially, I have no idea why there is a Federal program paying survivor benefits to fallen officers (unless they were federal law enforcement officers). So I am in favor of eliminating the program completely, and a cut is a step in the right direction.However, inasmuch as the cut in the program is not a genuine effort to reduce government (Obama is exploding the size of government in every other area), it is reprehensible that Obama would cut this program. It demonstrates his complete disdain for law enforcement. He should have cut about 10,000 other programs before he got to this one. I disagree in part. Initially, I have no idea why there is a Federal program paying survivor benefits to fallen officers (unless they were federal law enforcement officers). So I am in favor of eliminating the program completely, and a cut is a step in the right direction.

However, inasmuch as the cut in the program is not a genuine effort to reduce government (Obama is exploding the size of government in every other area), it is reprehensible that Obama would cut this program. It demonstrates his complete disdain for law enforcement. He should have cut about 10,000 other programs before he got to this one.

]]>