When speaking about the extent to which government should be responsible for rebuilding after natural disasters, most people tend to divide the topic into whether it should be the local and state governments that are responsible or the federal government. There are many supporters that feel that the federal government should take full responsibility for rebuilding after a natural disaster because it should be their concern while there are also many that would disagree. They feel that they only need to depend on state and local governments or some even feel that the government should not even get involved at all because there is no need to help those that live in places where natural disasters are expected yet they foolishly chose to live there anyway.
Non-supporters of the federal government having to be made responsible for rebuilding after natural disasters argue that in order for the government to raise enough money for when natural disaster do occur, they would need to cut out budget money from other places that could be more necessary there at the moment. Many conservatives and libertarians argue that it should be the states and local governments that take care of the issue because the damage would be done locally and relief could be broght faster in a state level than in a federal level anyway.An example of this would be the state of New York. The city clearly does well when handling emergencies yet the same cannot be said about rebuilding. Before Sandy hit, the city was successful at evacuating 218,000 people from the flood zone A areas yet the rebuilding took a very long time. Because the efforts are dependent on federal money, they are processed slower and is dependent on Congress to agree and get funding passed. Critics also state argue that federal relief means free insurance which would bail out the people that chole to live in disaster prone areas. .
Supporters of the federal government playing a role after natural disasters argue that it it the U.