SAFER was originally authorized for the purpose of increasing the number of new firefighters in local communities, a hand up, not a handout. SAFER was not intended to rehire or retain firefighters, and certainly was not intended to serve as an operating subsidy for what is unquestionably a municipal local responsibility. However, the Democrats waived many of these requirements in fiscal 2009 and then again in 2010. Yet, here we are today, debating the continuation of a subsidy that our country simply cannot afford. Under these costly waivers, there are no controls, no salary limits, no local commitments. These proposed waivers totally undermine the original purpose and intent of the SAFER program by forcing the taxpayers to subsidize the everyday operating expenses of local first responders, taking over, in essence, the funding of the local firemen.
Hal Rogers: “SAFER was originally authorized for the purpose of increasing the number of new firefighters in local communities, a…”
Editor's note · Context
The speaker addresses concerns about the SAFER program and its funding waivers.
Share
More from Hal Rogers
Thank you for the service to your country that you have performed for many, many years.
On that I demand the yeas and nays. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question are postponed. Amendments En…
While you are having so much trouble operating abroad, and don't appear to be receiving the necessary support from the administration, how can we be assured that we are making a smart investment in the agency at this time?
I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, this amendments en bloc contains several measures that could have enjoyed broad support. Unfortunately, it also includes several…





