Newsfeed
Printer-Friendly ModeFederal compensation for hurricane victims unjustified
September 12, 2005 —
The disaster that was and still is Hurricane Katrina has brought out many different emotions in me.
There has been sympathy for the victims, apathy after seeing it on TV 24/7, anger for the way the government - state and federal - has handled the situation, and even some disbelief and laughter for the comments made by Kanye West about George W. Bush and the subsequent reaction of Mike Myers.
But I had a different type of emotion come out in me a few days ago while in class.
I guess I am not sure what to call the emotion; I suppose selfishness would work, but I just do not know. But while in class, the idea of the victims of Katrina being personally given a form of compensation was floated by us students.
It was not necessarily being advocated - I don't think - but it was just thrown out there in a discussion about slavery reparations. Now don't get me wrong; I'm certainly not comparing the two. But reparations are reparations - money given to those whom the government feels are deserving of monetary compensation. And while I certainly feel those who were enslaved in the 1860s should have been given reparations at the time, I do not feel the victims of Hurricane Katrina should be personally given compensation.
Now before everyone gets their undergarments in a bunch, let me clarify: I am not saying organizations like the American Red Cross should not be taking donations and providing those left homeless with relief. In fact, I think it is tremendous that in less than a week the SVSU community has already raised over $1,000. But donations, in their truest form, are voluntary. Taxes are not. And that is my problem.
I have no problem with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) providing volunteers to clean the mess up, providing the shelter that they did, and helping in the management of the unfortunate failure of the Superdome and the subsequent move to the Astrodome in Houston.
But I do have a problem with a plan to give families a debit card, transfer through direct deposit or straight check worth up to $2,000 to use at their free will. Providing help is one thing; giving money to the families personally is unacceptable to me.
I could go on for days listing the ways I feel the government - again, both state and federal - screwed up in its immediate response to Katrina. I won't, of course, but I do think it is relevant here.
I pay my taxes in part so the federal government can do its job. They failed on two different levels: preparing New Orleans properly, and in the immediate response.
There were public service announcements that had been airing for the past two years featuring a clay animation character named Mr. Bill that warned of the levees in New Orleans breaking.
Well what do you know, they broke, and President Bush was the first to claim nobody anticipated the break of the levees. Clearly, someone - or, to make matters worse, something - did: the animated Mr. Bill.
"Washington rolled the dice, and Louisiana lost," said Democrat Mary Landrieu, Louisiana's senior senator, on the Senate floor Thursday. "We know the president said 'I don't think anyone anticipated the break of the levee.' Everybody anticipated the break of the levee, Mr. President. How can it be that Mr. Bill was better informed than Mr. Bush?"
Again, I will not bring up the two-week-old criticisms about the federal response to the hurricane, but to make it clear, I certainly agree with some of them. But my point is simple: why should I have to pay for not only the government to screw up twice, but to alleviate a problem brought on by a natural disaster?
Look, I can understand the compensations paid to the families of those that perished in the 9/11 attacks. While it is definitely still debatable, the federal government, in many different ways, can be blamed for those attacks. It should have to pay the families affected by the tragedy.
But the government can't be blamed for the hurricane itself, can it? It was a natural disaster. Nothing can be done to stop those. And as such, my tax dollars should not be paid to the families that have been affected by a hurricane that could simply not be avoided.
Like I said, I am sympathetic. Hell, I am just thankful that isn't me down there.
The obvious question one would ask is, "What if that was you down there? Would you want compensation?" I suppose I would. But that does not mean it is right.
What has happened the last two weeks in Louisiana and Mississippi was terrible. But I should not be the one paying for it as well.