Listen carefully to Mitt Romney. He seems to say stuff and you think he agrees with you. Last year there was an exchange with CNN’s John King at a debate that seemed to indicate he did not approve of FEMA. I guess it was easy to believe he would abolish it but that is not what he said.

This partial transcript is from breitbart.com.

KING: Governor Romney? You’ve been a chief executive of a state. I was just in Joplin, Missouri. I’ve been in Mississippi and Louisiana and Tennessee and other communities dealing with whether it’s the tornadoes, the flooding, and worse. FEMA is about to run out of money, and there are some people who say do it on a case-by-case basis and some people who say, you know, maybe we’re learning a lesson here that the states should take on more of this role. How do you deal with something like that?

ROMNEY: Absolutely. Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that’s the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that’s even better.
Instead of thinking in the federal budget, what we should cut — we should ask ourselves the opposite question. What should we keep? We should take all of what we’re doing at the federal level and say, what are the things we’re doing that we don’t have to do? And those things we’ve got to stop doing, because we’re borrowing $1.6 trillion more this year than we’re taking in. We cannot…

KING: Including disaster relief, though?

ROMNEY: We cannot — we cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids. It is simply immoral, in my view, for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids, knowing full well that we’ll all be dead and gone before it’s paid off. It makes no sense at all.

This is commonly interpreted to mean that Romney would eliminate or severely cut back FEMA. But that is not what he actually said. The Breitbart article cited above suggests that he just avoiding the question and reciting one of his talking points. If so, it came back to haunt him.

The technique of not answering questions is common enough among politicians not wish to offend anyone listening by actually taking a position. In this case it did not work out. It is frustrating to those of us who are trying to find out what a politician believes we should do (and what that politician may do if elected).

But now Romney seems to be supportive of FEMA. Below is a very recent quote from CBS News.

I believe that FEMA plays a key role in working with states and localities to prepare for and respond to natural disasters. As president, I will ensure FEMA has the funding it needs to fulfill its mission, while directing maximum resources to the first responders who work tirelessly to help those in need, because states and localities are in the best position to get aid to the individuals and communities affected by natural disasters.

But notice again what he actually says. While the statement appears to support FEMA in general, it offers no specifics. What is the “funding it needs”? Is what he thinks it needs similar to what you think it needs or in the same ballpark that recent administrations have allotted.

It seems unlikely to me that given the severe cuts to the domestic side of the budget promised by Governor Romney that FEMA or many other non-military or security agencies would fair well. FEMA seems especially unlikely to get adequate support since he seems to believe in state and local action in natural disasters.