POLITICS: NYC Recieves $50 Million In Federal Money For GOP Convention

NYC Recieves A Extra $50 Million In Federal Money For GOP Convention

Official's now report that almost $50,000,000 in Federal dollars were given to New York for security at the convention to be held August 30th at Madison Square.
After a bill was shot down in the House earlier this summer that called for the shift of $450 Million in anti-terrorism funds from rural areas to cities, NYC's mayor was furious at unidentified lawmakers for what some lawmaker's are calling "political pork" and what other's call "Homeland Security monies" after pointing to NYC as a city that lives under heightened terrorism codes daily.
Never fear, however, as the President's saftey seems to be top priority.He will also be looked after by 10,000 police officers, (despite the ongoing Union strike) Secret Service Agents, and specially trained anti-terrorism units among others.

( Source-Kelly Sheridan, New York Reporter )

A major security operation is under way in New York City for the Republican National Convention at the end of this month.An estimated 250,000 protesters are planning to march during the convention, amid a heightened terror alert.

The Secret Service is overseeing all convention security. Officials say New York City recieved $50 million in federal money for convention security, and close to $20 million is being spent on what they call "non-lethal crowd-control devices."

Elena Brady, who lives outside Manhattan on Staten Island, says she worries about her neighborhood."The fear is while the police are brought to the Republican National Convention, Staten Islander's are more vunerable to crime,"

In a traditionally Democratic city, the first ever GOP convention to be held in New York since the Republican National Commities founding 150 years ago, will be held about 3 miles from Ground Zero and promises to be as controversial as the attacks on 9/11.

(Other Sources courtesy of www.insightmag.com and www.voanews.com)

[edit on 8-17-2004 by William One Sac]

[edit on 18/8/2004 by justus]

[edit on 19/8/2004 by justus]

[edit on 8-20-2004 by Valhall]

What do you deem unethical?
I would grant that this president has been campaigning from the start of his term, has been absent from the wheel during the course of 'war' and recession...that is unethical.
As for delivery of funds to secure NYC dsuring their dog & pony show, they should pay for it.
It's one of the stupidest things in a long list of stupid things that the Rove Republicans have done.
They think the protests won't be at a fevor pitch?
They think NY won't cover/report the heavy handed response?

This isn't Seattle where they can spray pepper spray in baby faces or choke out old ladies & get away with it.

Well, given the fact that we are facing a huge FEDERAL deficit it just seemed impractical for the GOP to recieve $50 million more on top of the 7&1/2 million (13 million between the Democrat and Republican parties combined, $500,000 for the Libretarian) they already received when they seem to be very well covered in the area of security.Unless, ofcourse, I am wrong in assuming we are the ones who seem to be suffering from the deficit.
It was not a question or statement. I was just trying to present facts in a fairly unbiased manner as I thought that was the goal here...should I have placed this somewhere else? As I am a newer member here, I would/do appreciate any suggestions or comments you have or anyone else for that matter. Thanks.

The City of New York received an additional 50 million dollars for security, I'm not sure how that translates into the GOP receiving 50 million dollars (easy answer: it doesn't). If you would like to discuss Federal funding of elections I will be glad to entertain that offer, otherwise I think a review of your initial post may be in order.

But NYC is receiving this money for security during the GOP convention, right? I think a better option would be relocating the convention to another city. Why have it somewhere where there is heightened terror alerts and then have to pay even more to secure all the people who will be there?

I don't have any solid theories about why they would want to hold it in NYC, but I have some suspicions. It just seems to me a better option would be relocating the convention to cut the costs.

Yes, NY did receive the money for security purposes for the convention. When the bill was not passed it was the New York's mayor who was angry and pointed to the convention as an example according to sources. So, in order to "supplement" the House's decision if you will, NY then received the extra money. A statement was issued from the mayor (D) to the effect that at least now it wouldn't be as the convention was in Boston with "barbed wire around the Fleet Center."
I agree that it would be a better decision to move the convention as NY is already lacking in security and seems to be a prime target for all the threats. A interesting side note is that the U.S. Open, a Yankee's game, as well as other events are also scheduled for the same weekend.
I apologize if I wasn't clear in the story and do hope this clears it up. I am glad to see that somebody got it.
As far as how the story translates: I've decided that it may not be possible for everyone to look at it the same as I tried to present it. I guess that is what makes everyone have a different point of veiw and angle. I did add a few extra words upon review. Otherwise, I think my story will stand as is unless it is still unclear. (Writer's Prerogative) Once again, thanks for all the help.

Originally posted by Bout Time
As for delivery of funds to secure NYC dsuring their dog & pony show, they should pay for it.

Just out of curiosity, who payed for the massive security at the Dems dog and pony show? If the dems payed for it, then the Republicans should as well. However, regardless of your issues with Bush, he is the President and the security at the convention should reflect it Period. If Kerry was the sitting president, I would expect no less.

It's one of the stupidest things in a long list of stupid things that the Rove Republicans have done. They think the protests won't be at a fevor pitch?
They think NY won't cover/report the heavy handed response?
This isn't Seattle where they can spray pepper spray in baby faces or choke out old ladies & get away with it.

No doubt the THK supported Tides foundation has sent money to the groups to try to cause havoc in New York. And yes there will be a responce from the security forces if the protestors become violent. However, having family members who live in Seattle and were there during the WTO riots, I could go on for pages about the behavior of the hooligans. You sound as if you support this type of violent protest. Once you commit act of violence, your first ammendment rights are over. If the protestors in NYC attempt the same level of violence, they should expect a vigorous responce to keep it from getting out of controll as in Seattle.

there was no dig, and I'm sorry if it was construed that way - I just wasn't clear on what you were deeming unethical.

Conventions for an incumbent, in my opinion, are a tremendous waste. I think it was a monumentally stupid idea to choose NY; the real reason was to link it as close as possible to the annivessary date of 9/11 and scrape some aura off of that event. Otherwise, why have it in America's Mecca where we've endured consistent high levels of alert? Did they think NYC was going to become less of a high profile target?
Republicans deserve every dime towards the overall cost of their convention. But they also deserve our disgust for such an obvious ploy to capitalize on the deaths of my fellow NY'ers.
No, I don't support violent protests or anarchy. I do abhor our embracing of Fascist policies of quelling dissent as been demonstrated by the Bush administration under the guise of "security". Please detail for us why the police attacking people who were in the designated areas fit in the "hooligan" category? Note the barriers, note the protesters behind them:







Quotes:
"We asked the oficer closest to us how we should exit the intersection. He pointed and said to exit to the NE, into the spraying police opposite him. as the crowd pressed toward us I yelled to him to let us through (south on 2nd) because we had three small children. He looked at me, and drew out his can from his hip and sprayed directly at me. I was at an angle to him and the spray hit my right eye and our three year-old who I was holding in my right arm. In the same motion he turned the can on my wife who was holding our 10 month old baby and doused both of their heads entirely from a distance of less than 3 feet. my six year old daughter was holding my left hand and was not hit directly. We ended up on the sidewalk a few feet down alder with fellow protesters holding my screaming children and and pouring water on our eyes. "

Note: Fred, this was in Portland on a Bush fund raising stop

The only problem I have with this is that there was not $50 million given to the Libertarian party for their convention.

Originally posted by Bout Time
No, I don't support violent protests or anarchy. I do abhor our embracing of Fascist policies of quelling dissent as been demonstrated by the Bush administration under the guise of "security". Please detail for us why the police attacking people who were in the designated areas fit in the "hooligan" category? Note the barriers, note the protesters behind them:

I agree that when the police go to far they need to be identified and procecuted. The pictures do not tell any part of the story though. What led up to the conflict at the barriers? Were things being thrown at the officers? Was the crowd given an order to disburse? etc etc etc. Please fill in the exact nature of the scenario in the pictures you have put forth. One can interpret them any way you like absent the background information. In regards to the parents and thier child one has to wonder why they felt that a protest that could potentialy turn violent was a good place for thier 10 month old. In fact if there were any indications that this was a possibility, then the went out of thier way to place thier child at risk.

There is a quote at the bottom of Bout Time's post, it gives the background to the story. But cops are generally trained to follow strict orders, and its about time those making these decisions in addition to those carrying them out are prosecuted for such.

Originally posted by Jamuhn
There is a quote at the bottom of Bout Time's post, it gives the background to the story. But cops are generally trained to follow strict orders, and its about time those making these decisions in addition to those carrying them out are prosecuted for such.

I read the quote, but it also, needs to have the police version of the events as well. That is the recollection of the protestors. Im not saying thier are making up thier story, but all side should be looked at before yelling brutality. The same is true for the pictures above to baby one. Cops are highly disciplined and yes they do follow orders, but not in a SS fashion. And they do go off the reservation as Rodney King would attest to. If someone ordered protestors that were not throwing things, rioting, or destorying property, failing to disburse etc, then I agree they should be prosecuted to the maximun.

Well, I think all the pictures are related in a way. But I get what you are saying. What I think though is that that the superiors ordered that noone could cross the blockade. And that anyone doing so should be sprayed or subdued.

So, maybe in this case the superiors didn't directly make that command, but the officers should have used common sense when they see a family is trying to get out of the area.

Did these people take their children to the protest? If so that's irresponsibility on their part. Everyone knows these things can, and often do, get out of hand. That doesn't make it right to spray mace anywhere near kids. The Bush Administration has a pretty long history of quelling the voice of the protestors. Although I wouldn't want some of those people around me either.

I agree on the point that it's not very smart to have the convention in NYC. Man is that going to be a mess for anyone that actually lives and works there. I heard it was pretty bad in Boston, but this is going to be worse.

Originally posted by PistolPete
I agree on the point that it's not very smart to have the convention in NYC. Man is that going to be a mess for anyone that actually lives and works there. I heard it was pretty bad in Boston, but this is going to be worse.

The problem is both parties want a high profile city. If you think the RNC will be bad, see what it will be like if they win the Olympic Bid? What a mess. i did not share a tear when San Fran lost out. That would have been a disaster!

Hummm, so NYC was given $50. Million of Federal Monies for the protection of the GOP Convention. I wonder if the Democrat's was given the same amount for their convention, hummmm, I'll have to ask when I go into their Campaign office ? If the Dem's were not given $50 Million for the Campaign then I do not think it's fair or right that the Republicans was given it, even if Bush is going to be there.

The pictures above tell the story from what I seen, that poor baby. Maybe the parents were shopping or just out enjoying theirselves with their children and got caught-up in the protest while trying to cross the street,
, that is possible. Those pictures only show a piece of whats to come for all Americans , the Patriotic Act, that Bush pushed for is the blame for the way the police are treating people, now, Beleive me when I say that, I found out "first hand" with my two granddaughters that were 4 yrs old,

I find that whole "macing" story to be total BS...If a child of that age was maced...HE'D NEED TO GO TO THE HOSPITAL....not just be "douced" with water...anyone whos ever been maced before knows that it hurts beyond belief and doesnt wear off quickly....prostestors love to make things into great media...take their "truths" with a grain of salt...

Originally posted by BasementAddix
I find that whole "macing" story to be total BS...If a child of that age was maced...HE'D NEED TO GO TO THE HOSPITAL....not just be "douced" with water...anyone whos ever been maced before knows that it hurts beyond belief and doesnt wear off quickly....prostestors love to make things into great media...take their "truths" with a grain of salt...

Thats what I said above, you need all the accouints and I refuse to take the "report" of a protestor at face value. You do not get any press by saying, Uh we got out of controll, got violent and the police responded. Instead you get more press by crying "brutality" I ask again WHY was a 10 month old at the protest?

But hearded into an area. There are threads on the Portland fund raiser protest here on ATS. The event started out as a street fair/carnival - clowns, jugglers, music being played live.
The actions occurred when the security force , Bush's SS that travels with him, wanted the local police to expand back the buffer.
I can't fathom any justification to put a baton to a 65 yr old womans throat or to spray a man with two armfulls of kids totaling less than five years old; except, of course, he was set to tie their hair together in order to fashion a set of living nunchuks and go ninja on their arses. I can see the old lady, with all that underarm jiggling 'secret' muscle, also set to do some damage on a group of full riot gear young law enforcement officers.