Lawsuit: Why are Texas churches seeking FEMA money after Hurricane Harvey ineligible?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

President Donald Trump stepped into a hot church-state dispute Friday night, tweeting support for Texas churches that were damaged by Hurricane Harvey and now want assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to rebuild.

Trump's tweet came after three Texas churches filed a lawsuit this week challenging a policy from FEMA that excludes houses of worship from disaster relief grants, and as Hurricane Irma barreled toward the southeastern United States.

The Harvest Family Church, the Hi-Way Tabernacle and the Rockport First Assembly of God were all damaged during Harvey, according to a lawsuit filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for Southern District of Texas. The First Assembly of God lost its steeple, roof and church van, while the other two churches were severely flooded. In addition, the Hi-Way Tabernacle serves as a FEMA staging center, sheltering up to 70 people and distributing more than 8,000 emergency meals.

Yet the churches will not be eligible for recovery money from FEMA, which "categorically excludes houses of worship from equal access to disaster relief grants because of their religious status," according to the lawsuit, which asks the court to declare FEMA's church exclusion policy unconstitutional and seeks an emergency injunction preventing its enforcement.
http://www.tylerpaper.com/TP-News+State/301347/lawsuit-why-are-texas-churches-seeking-fema-money-after-hurricane-harvey-ineligible

To me, this is added justification that there should be zero federal assistance in a disaster.  Just let the state do it, and it will solve these issues.

[RoosGirl]

Are they paying taxes that would, in part, fund FEMA?   Probably not.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Are they paying taxes that would, in part, fund FEMA?   Probably not.

So you would not allow a benefit to 45% of the Americans who do not pay income taxes?

http://nypost.com/2016/02/24/45-percent-of-americans-pay-no-federal-income-tax/

[RoosGirl]

So you would not allow a benefit to 45% of the Americans who do not pay income taxes?

http://nypost.com/2016/02/24/45-percent-of-americans-pay-no-federal-income-tax/

After all the benefit they're likely already getting?  Probably not.  Perhaps give them a choice of a one time payout and no more collection of other benefits ever, or vice versa.  Hard to say without knowing specifics.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

After all the benefit they're likely already getting?  Probably not.  Perhaps give them a choice of a one time payout and no more collection of other benefits ever, or vice versa.  Hard to say without knowing specifics.

I would say that denying almost half of the Americans any benefit assistance in the event of a natural disaster will not go over well.

[kevindavis007]

No Federal Money should be used to rebuild Churches, Mosques, or any religious building.

[Cyber Liberty]

No Federal Money should be used to rebuild Churches, Mosques, or any religious building.

You make a good point.  FTA:

...the Hi-Way Tabernacle serves as a FEMA staging center, sheltering up to 70 people and distributing more than 8,000 emergency meals.

They should have told FEMA to pound sand.

[RoosGirl]

You make a good point.  FTA:

They should have told FEMA to pound sand.

It would be nice to know if the places have insurance coverage.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

No Federal Money should be used to rebuild Churches, Mosques, or any religious building.

Please explain your logic.

Be sure to relate whether one should exclude federal assistance for any individual who also does not pay federal taxes.

And what about any harboring of refugees which might be made by them during these disasters.

[GtHawk]

After all the benefit they're likely already getting?  Probably not.  Perhaps give them a choice of a one time payout and no more collection of other benefits ever, or vice versa.  Hard to say without knowing specifics.

Specifics are important, like what percentage of that 45% are seniors that spent most of their lives working and paying income taxes. Not trying to jump down your throat, I suspect I might know where your coming from on this.
@RoosGirl

[kevindavis007]

Please explain your logic.

Be sure to relate whether one should exclude federal assistance for any individual who also does not pay federal taxes.

Since the founding of this country NO FEDERAL MONEY HAS BEEN USED to build religious buildings. There is something called the SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE!


Will it be OK if tax money was used to rebuild Mosques or maybe a coven for Satan worshipers?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Since the founding of this country NO FEDERAL MONEY HAS BEEN USED to build religious buildings. There is something called the SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE!


Will it be OK if tax money was used to rebuild Mosques or maybe a coven for Satan worshipers?

Ok, I see.  Another poster commented it was due to them not paying taxes, which seems idiotic as almost half of Americans do not pay taxes either.

[RoosGirl]

Specifics are important, like what percentage of that 45% are seniors that spent most of their lives working and paying income taxes. Not trying to jump down your throat, I suspect I might know where your coming from on this.
@RoosGirl

Certainly your example I would not exclude.  They presumably paid into helping fund FEMA.  I'm talking about the people whose housing is being paid for them, etc.  Why should they collect from FEMA?  That's basically being double paid.

[Cripplecreek]

No individual person or entity should be getting federal disaster relief.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

It should be by the states.

[DB]

It isn't clear to me where under the constitution anyone is due a bail out after a natural disaster.

We all make choices in life. Some of those choices have consequences, such as building/living in flood zones, hurricane zones, tornado zones and earthquake zones. Why is it incumbent on those who chose not to live in those places to make whole those who did when the foreseeable happens?

And why is it those who act responsibly and get insurance aren't covered by FEMA while those who don't get insurance get covered at others expense, often more completely than those who did get insurance?

All the above is filled with moral hazard encouraging more risk at others expense all in the name of compassion for risky choices.

I'm editing this to add, just wait until California has the "big one". That will be in the trillions.

[DB]

Since the founding of this country NO FEDERAL MONEY HAS BEEN USED to build religious buildings. There is something called the SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE!


Will it be OK if tax money was used to rebuild Mosques or maybe a coven for Satan worshipers?

Care to show us where in the constitution "SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE" is? It is often quoted as fact - a fact that doesn't exist.

[Cyber Liberty]

In all fairness, then, to make it a clean business proposition, Hi-Way Tabernacle should charge $10 a head for the  meals they served for FEMA.  When are you going to sent the the check for $80,000 pal?

[RoosGirl]

The problem is, tax money has already been taken to fund FEMA, you can't turn around and say people now cannot collect.

[Cripplecreek]

It isn't clear to me where under the constitution anyone is due a bail out after a natural disaster.

We all make choices in life. Some of those choices have consequences, such as building/living in flood zones, hurricane zones, tornado zones and earthquake zones. Why is it incumbent on those who chose not to live in those places to make whole those who did when the foreseeable happens?

And why is it those who act responsibly and get insurance aren't covered by FEMA while those who don't get insurance get covered at others expense, often more completely than those who did get insurance?

All the above is filled with moral hazard encouraging more risk at others expense all in the name of compassion for risky choices.

I'm editing this to add, just wait until California has the "big one". That will be in the trillions.

I'm willing to give the feds a break when it comes to paying to open roads, get electricity back up etc. There is an arguable common good in clearing roads and restoring power. Not so much in rebuilding a neighbor's house or someone else's church.

Where were the feds when a tree fell and cut my house in half during a windstorm?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

The problem is, tax money has already been taken to fund FEMA, you can't turn around and say people now cannot collect.

where does that logic come from?

Tax money is NOT allocated to some program.

You are bringing up a revenue(tax) stream and somehow contorting it to be somehow synonymous with an expenditure(budget) scheme.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I'm willing to give the feds a break when it comes to paying to open roads, get electricity back up etc. There is an arguable common good in clearing roads and restoring power. Not so much in rebuilding a neighbor's house or someone else's church.

Where were the feds when a tree fell and cut my house in half during a windstorm?

No, what you are describing has no role by the federal government.

If this was done, it is the responsibility of the states.

[RoosGirl]

where does that logic come from?

Tax money is NOT allocated to some program.

You are bringing up a revenue(tax) stream and somehow contorting it to be somehow synonymous with an expenditure)budget) scheme.

FEMA has a budget.  Where does that money come from?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

FEMA has a budget.  Where does that money come from?

You and I both know it is general revenues.  There might be somewhere some type of minor portion from a fee it assesses.

What difference does that make to anything?

[RoosGirl]

You and I both know it is general revenues.  There might be somewhere some type of minor portion from a fee it assesses.

What difference does that make to anything?

Where do the monies in "general revenue" come from?  Taxes that have been paid in.  FEMA has a 2017 budget of roughly $17,000,000,000.  You think you can make the American people pay that and then turn around and tell the ones who have paid that they can't collect if needed?

Note, I am not saying I am in favor of FEMA having that kind of budget nor spending money the way they do.  There are some instances where I think some spending is necessary; road and other infrastructure type repair.  But seems that I remember when Florida had the 4 hurricanes go through in 2004 there were articles about FEMA handing out money for people to go buy generators and other such items,  buying trailers for Katrina victims that never got used, etc.

Now, why should your tax money be used for someone to go out and buy a generator for their personal use?