FEMA

[CO. Hoosier]

The emergency food and shelter fund is irrelevant to this debate. It has nothing to do with disaster relief.

Never mind. I went back and reread this thread and twenty clearly and without ambiguity demonstrated that you're plain wrong on this last week. It doesn't affect you. I think your hatred of Democrats had made it difficult for you to discriminate reality from fantasy.

The Emergency Food and Shelter Fund was never intended for migrant relief. Mayorkas used that fund by saying migrants posed an emergenctpy. FWIW, Congress created a separate migrant fund in 2022. That is the fund the press is using to justify Mayorkas’ use of FEMA. Funds for migrants. That fund and the use of it is irrelevant. .

Back to the Emergency Food and Shelter Fund. That is more or less a duplicate of the Rec Cross. It will fund food and shelter for emergencies, or even disasters, for those in areas not receiving a presidential disaster declaration. (Maybe also for declared disasters). The purpose of a presidential declaration is to kick in all the general FEMA disaster relief. There are disasters that don’t receive a declaration. There could be areas outside of a declared disaster who are affected by the disaster. They will be eligible for these funds. An example would be those operating shelters for the displaced people.

Bottom line is Mayorkas used these emergency funds for migrants, a problem of his own making, then played hide the ball. This fund is not for migrant relief. When government and big media quickly sync up on a narrative, it’s a good bet that you are being conned.

 

[BradStevens]

I think the confusion is two similarly named programs. There once was a Emergency Food and Shelter Program. In 2023 Congress renamed it and specifically tasked it to help migrants.

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/homesec/R47681.pdf

The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (P.L. 117-328) directed the establishment of a new grant program—the Shelter and Services Program (SSP).89 Specifically, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2023 (Div. F, Title II of P.L. 117-328), transferred $800 million from CBP to FEMA “to support sheltering and related activities provided by non-Federal entities, including facility improvements and construction, in support of relieving overcrowding in short-term holding facilities of [CBP].”90​

...​

Through the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2023 (Div. F, Title II of P.L. 117-328), Congress made funding available for FEMA to implement the EFSP-H in a different manner than EFSP-H had previously been authorized. Instead of appropriating a set amount of funding directly to FEMA for the EFSP-H, Section 211(a) stated that a portion of the $800 million—specifically, up to $785 million—may potentially be used to provide shelter and supportive services to migrants encountered by DHS through EFSP-H.92 Although it was initially unclear how much, if any, funding would be provided for the EFSP-H, FEMA awarded grants of $75 million and $350 million of the potentially available $785 million (totaling $425 million) for the EFSP-H.93​

​

So there you have it, the money was properly spent in immigrants, end of story. No money from disaster relief was spent, end of story.

Except it won't be because - POLITICAL GAIN!.

I don't know why CO is so angry that the executive branch spent the money exactly as congress intended.

Now, let's see if he provides a link proving the Congressional Research Service is wrong.

Can we address the underlying issue? Why are we spending nearly a billion dollars housing, etc. people here illegally? Why shouldn’t and why can’t the United States control the number and type of people immigrating here?

We can tie that to another question related to this thread: why are we subsidizing people to live in places where hurricanes are normal, annual events?

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Can we address the underlying issue? Why are we spending nearly a billion dollars housing, etc. people here illegally? Why shouldn’t and why can’t the United States control the number and type of people immigrating here?

We can tie that to another question related to this thread: why are we subsidizing people to live in places where hurricanes are normal, annual events?

The first question I have no answer for. I've argued for more funding (though I find walls to be more symbolic than practical. Illegal becomes a question in that the world has long held some people are allowed to seek protection. So only those that do not qualify are illegal. And that does appear to be a good percentage.

The second question is that we know the world is warming (many of those who don't agree with the A believe in GW). We need people to stay away from areas next to the ocean.

The second half is what happened in NC. An organization tried to get NC to tighten its building codes, including building in flood plains. NC made it optional*. We need to take flood plains more seriously, and we need to rethink what a 100-year flood is. Evidence is such floods are now more common than 100 years in most areas.

* In all probability the code would have made little difference. Older homes would have been grandfathered in, so since 2019 or so only so many new homes have been built. Building them up 1 foot probably would have made little difference in a thousand year flood. But we need to take this more seriously going forward, and yes, it will unfortunately make many homes more expensive.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Can we address the underlying issue? Why are we spending nearly a billion dollars housing, etc. people here illegally? Why shouldn’t and why can’t the United States control the number and type of people immigrating here?

We can tie that to another question related to this thread: why are we subsidizing people to live in places where hurricanes are normal, annual events?

that was my response. we're losing the forest for the trees. i understand there's political points to be gained by the source of the funding but the fact remains we're spending that much money on illegals is ridiculous. illegals who will be converted to entitlements. because of biden's harris' feelz.

as for subsidizing i tend to agree. let fla take care of itself. continue with its state agency budgets and ramp up the florida disaster fund.

fla is going to hit an inflection point soon. unaffordability from repairs, insurance, etc

 

[twenty02]

The Emergency Food and Shelter Fund was never intended for migrant relief. Mayorkas used that fund by saying migrants posed an emergenctpy. FWIW, Congress created a separate migrant fund in 2022. That is the fund the press is using to justify Mayorkas’ use of FEMA. Funds for migrants. That fund and the use of it is irrelevant. .

Back to the Emergency Food and Shelter Fund. That is more or less a duplicate of the Rec Cross. It will fund food and shelter for emergencies, or even disasters, for those in areas not receiving a presidential disaster declaration. (Maybe also for declared disasters). The purpose of a presidential declaration is to kick in all the general FEMA disaster relief. There are disasters that don’t receive a declaration. There could be areas outside of a declared disaster who are affected by the disaster. They will be eligible for these funds. An example would be those operating shelters for the displaced people.

Bottom line is Mayorkas used these emergency funds for migrants, a problem of his own making, then played hide the ball. This fund is not for migrant relief. When government and big media quickly sync up on a narrative, it’s a good bet that you are being conned.

Emergency Food and Shelter fund has NOTHING to do with natural disasters. It was program that's existed since the 80s to deal with general homelessness. And contrary to it's name, has nothing to do with 'Emergencies'.. Other than if you are personally homeless or hungry that's a bit of of an emergency.

It morphed into migrant relief starting in 2019 at the request of the Trump admin.

Here's a background from the very staunch anti-immigration group CIS.

https://cis.org/Arthur/Making-Sense-FEMAs-MigrantPayment-Schemes

Key quote:

That said, Congress bears some responsibility for going along with it all, because they appropriated the money for ESFP-H and SSP (both “A” and “C”).

 

[twenty02]

Can we address the underlying issue? Why are we spending nearly a billion dollars housing, etc. people here illegally? Why shouldn’t and why can’t the United States control the number and type of people immigrating here?

We can tie that to another question related to this thread: why are we subsidizing people to live in places where hurricanes are normal, annual events?

Because our immigration laws are fkd and ridiculously outdated. And tied to international agreements re 'migrants' that stem from WW2.

As such, many of these people aren't technically 'illegal'

 

[stollcpa]

that was my response. we're losing the forest for the trees. i understand there's political points to be gained by the source of the funding but the fact remains we're spending that much money on illegals is ridiculous. illegals who will be converted to entitlements. because of biden's harris' feelz.

as for subsidizing i tend to agree. let fla take care of itself. continue with its state agency budgets and ramp up the florida disaster fund.

fla is going to hit an inflection point soon. unaffordability from repairs, insurance, etc

My client in Ft Myers getting ready to be hit for the third time in less than 2 years may reach that point after Milton.

 

[mcmurtry66]

My client in Ft Myers getting ready to be hit for the third time in less than 2 years may reach that point after Milton.

My buddy in Dunedin has his house down to the studs from Helene.

 

[snarlcakes]

Can we address the underlying issue? Why are we spending nearly a billion dollars housing, etc. people here illegally? Why shouldn’t and why can’t the United States control the number and type of people immigrating here?

Because the two parties want cheap labor and the monetary system.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Because our immigration laws are fkd and ridiculously outdated. And tied to international agreements re 'migrants' that stem from WW2.

As such, many of these people aren't technically 'illegal'

And tied to the Cold War. We wanted our allies to accept as many communist refugees as humanly possible. So we based a lot of our laws on what we wanted Europe to do with Poles, East Germans, etc.

 

[stollcpa]

My buddy in Dunedin has his house down to the studs from Helene.

My client had already started cutting out bottom 2 foot or so of drywall.

 

[mcmurtry66]

My client had already started cutting out bottom 2 foot or so of drywall.

Brutal.

 

[mrhighlife]

Can we address the underlying issue? Why are we spending nearly a billion dollars housing, etc. people here illegally? Why shouldn’t and why can’t the United States control the number and type of people immigrating here?

We can tie that to another question related to this thread: why are we subsidizing people to live in places where hurricanes are normal, annual events?

It seems that arguing and pointing fingers about issues garners more votes than actually fixing them. In others words, it's our fault.