Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 12:08 PM        FEMA To Reimburse Faith Based Groups
I know this was in another thread, but it was a thread that started about something else, and I wanted this to get the full attention it deserves. Thanks to Abcdxxx for alerting me to this story to begin with.


FEMA Plans to Reimburse Faith Groups for Aid
By Alan Cooperman and Elizabeth Williamson
The Washington Post

Tuesday 27 September 2005

As civil libertarians object, religious organizations weigh whether to apply.

After weeks of prodding by Republican lawmakers and the American Red Cross, the Federal Emergency Management Agency said yesterday that it will use taxpayer money to reimburse churches and other religious organizations that have opened their doors to provide shelter, food and supplies to survivors of hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

FEMA officials said it would mark the first time that the government has made large-scale payments to religious groups for helping to cope with a domestic natural disaster.

"I believe it's appropriate for the federal government to assist the faith community because of the scale and scope of the effort and how long it's lasting," said Joe Becker, senior vice president for preparedness and response with the Red Cross.

Civil liberties groups called the decision a violation of the traditional boundary between church and state, accusing FEMA of trying to restore its battered reputation by playing to religious conservatives.

"What really frosts me about all this is, here is an administration that didn't do its job and now is trying to dig itself out by making right-wing groups happy," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

FEMA officials said religious organizations would be eligible for payments only if they operated emergency shelters, food distribution centers or medical facilities at the request of state or local governments in the three states that have declared emergencies -- Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. In those cases, "a wide range of costs would be available for reimbursement, including labor costs incurred in excess of normal operations, rent for the facility and delivery of essential needs like food and water," FEMA spokesman Eugene Kinerney said in an e-mail.

For churches, synagogues and mosques that have taken in hurricane survivors, FEMA's decision presents a quandary. Some said they were eager to get the money and had begun tallying their costs, from electric bills to worn carpets. Others said they probably would not apply for the funds, fearing donations would dry up if the public came to believe they were receiving government handouts.

"Volunteer labor is just that: volunteer," said the Rev. Robert E. Reccord, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's North American Mission Board. "We would never ask the government to pay for it."

When Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, religious charities rushed in to provide emergency services, often acting more quickly and efficiently than the government. Relief workers in the stricken states estimate that 500,000 people have taken refuge in facilities run by religious groups.

In the days after the disaster, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and other Republicans complained that FEMA seemed reluctant to pay church groups. "There are tons of questions about what is reimbursable, what is not reimbursable," DeLay said Sept. 13, noting that Houston alone had "500 or 600 churches that took in evacuees, and they would get no reimbursement."

Becker said he and his staff at the Red Cross also urged FEMA to allow reimbursement of religious groups. Ordinarily, Becker said, churches provide shelter for the first days after a disaster, then the Red Cross takes over. But in a storm season that has stretched every Red Cross shelter to the breaking point, church buildings must for the first time house evacuees indefinitely.

Even so, Lynn, of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said that federal reimbursement is inappropriate.

"The good news is that this work is being done now, but I don't think a lot of people realize that a lot of these organizations are actively working to obtain federal funds. That's a strange definition of charity," he said.

Lynn added that he accepts the need for the government to coordinate with religious groups in a major disaster, but not to "pay for their good works."

"We've never complained about using a religious organization as a distribution point for food or clothing or anything else," Lynn said. But "direct cash reimbursements would be unprecedented."

FEMA outlined the policy in a Sept. 9 internal memorandum on "Eligible Costs for Emergency Sheltering Declarations." Religious groups, like secular nonprofit groups, will have to document their costs and file for reimbursement from state and local emergency management agencies, which in turn will seek funds from FEMA.

David Fukitomi, infrastructure coordinator for FEMA in Louisiana, said that the organization has begun briefings for potential applicants in the disaster area but that it is too early to know how many will take advantage of the program.

"The need was so overwhelming that the faith-based groups stepped up, and we're trying to find a way to help them shoulder some of the burden for doing the right thing," he said, adding that "the churches are interested" but that "part of our effort is getting the local governments to be interested in being their sponsor."

A spokeswoman for the Salvation Army said it has been in talks with state and federal officials about reimbursement for the 76,000 nights of shelter it has provided to Katrina survivors so far. But it is still unclear whether the Salvation Army will qualify, she said.

The Rev. Flip Benham, director of Operation Save America, an antiabortion group formerly known as Operation Rescue, said, "Separation of church and state means nothing in a time of disaster; you see immediately what a farce it is."

Benham said that his group has been dispensing food and clothing and that "Bibles and tracts go out with everything we put out." In Mendenhall, Miss., he said, he preached to evacuees while the mayor directed traffic and the sheriff put inmates from the county jail to work handing out supplies.

Yet Benham said he would never accept a dime from the federal government. "The people have been so generous to give that for us to ask for reimbursement would be like gouging for gas," he said. "That would be a crime against heaven."

For some individual churches, however, reimbursement is very appealing. At Christus Victor Lutheran Church in Ocean Springs, Miss., as many as 200 evacuees and volunteer workers have been sleeping each night in the sanctuary and Sunday school classrooms. The church's entrance hall is a Red Cross reception area and medical clinic. As many as 400 people a day are eating in the fellowship hall.

Suzie Harvey, the parish administrator, said the church was asked by the Red Cross and local officials to serve as a shelter. The church's leadership agreed immediately, without anticipating that nearly a quarter of its 650 members would be rendered homeless and in no position to contribute funds. "This was just something we had to do," she said. "Later we realized we have no income coming in."

Harvey said the electric bill has skyrocketed, water is being used round-the-clock and there has been "20 years of wear on the carpet in one month." When FEMA makes money available, she said, the church definitely will apply.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 12:22 PM        Re: FEMA To Reimburse Faith Based Groups
Okay, this isn't nearly as scandalous and outrageous as we were led to believe.

First off, it would appear that a lot of the groups eligible for this money are taking a very responsible approach to this, aware that Church & State interest groups will jump on this to raise their own money and attack churches (sorry, editorial).

Secondly, it sounds like there will at least be some degree of parameters and qualifications. It doesn't sound lie a blank check to Jerry Falwell.

And I think the part of the text below is the most important:


Quote:
For some individual churches, however, reimbursement is very appealing. At Christus Victor Lutheran Church in Ocean Springs, Miss., as many as 200 evacuees and volunteer workers have been sleeping each night in the sanctuary and Sunday school classrooms. The church's entrance hall is a Red Cross reception area and medical clinic. As many as 400 people a day are eating in the fellowship hall.

Suzie Harvey, the parish administrator, said the church was asked by the Red Cross and local officials to serve as a shelter. The church's leadership agreed immediately, without anticipating that nearly a quarter of its 650 members would be rendered homeless and in no position to contribute funds. "This was just something we had to do," she said. "Later we realized we have no income coming in."

Harvey said the electric bill has skyrocketed, water is being used round-the-clock and there has been "20 years of wear on the carpet in one month." When FEMA makes money available, she said, the church definitely will apply.
I have no doubt that a huge amount of these organizations are totally maxed out, and over capacity. Being a volunteer based charity is one thing, but being asked to serve in the place of government beyond your capacity is another.

As it states in the article, a lot of these organizations stepped in where government failed. Shouldn't they be reimbursed for that?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 12:43 PM       
Not without extremely strict guidlelines, and it is very muddy water, pardon the pun.

Will individuals be reimbursed, not for their property damage, but for taking in friends, strangers or family? If not, why. If so, how? Keep in mind, these groups don't recieve charitable donations.

What will the process be, exactly, and who will oversee it? What criteria will be used to determine at what point an expense becomes reimbursable. It seems to me every able bodied person who pulled someone out of the water or put someone up or drove someone someone out of town could arguably be doing what the government ought to have done.

Is this a one time deal, or i it from now on? Are we deputizing faith based organizations as an arm of government, who can count on getting paid back whenever they extend themselves? I am perfectly comfortable with my tax dollars going to FEMA, and even if I'm not, sometimes your taxes go to government programs you don't like. I'm also grateful to all the faith based organizations that have and are shouldering a massive load, but I'm not comfortable with this becoming a back door through which to legitamize more federal funds for religions.

In addition, I do not trust the administration that continues to give no bid contracts to organizations run by their friends to deal fairly with religous groups. Pat Robertson's group was listed prominently on FEMA's website until very recently. I'd like to see a close eye kept on how many immortality shakes and pancakes he bills the government for.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 12:54 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburbank
What will the process be, exactly, and who will oversee it? What criteria will be used to determine at what point an expense becomes reimbursable. It seems to me every able bodied person who pulled someone out of the water or put someone up or drove someone someone out of town could arguably be doing what the government ought to have done.
I'm going to go ahead and guess that since FEMA is giving out the money, they will be regulating it. As far as everybody doing the work of government, I'm assuming their will again be a qualification threshold that would would have to meet (check out the FEMA website, maybe there's an appication posted?).

Quote:
Is this a one time deal, or i it from now on? Are we deputizing faith based organizations as an arm of government, who can count on getting paid back whenever they extend themselves? I am perfectly comfortable with my tax dollars going to FEMA, and even if I'm not, sometimes your taxes go to government programs you don't like. I'm also grateful to all the faith based organizations that have and are shouldering a massive load, but I'm not comfortable with this becoming a back door through which to legitamize more federal funds for religions.
I suppose the argument over precedent is a good one, but it has always been an objective of this president to push a "faith based" agenda, and this seems like the prime place to put it in practice.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 01:04 PM       
"I'm going to go ahead and guess that since FEMA is giving out the money, they will be regulating it. As far as everybody doing the work of government, I'm assuming their will again be a qualification threshold that would would have to meet (check out the FEMA website, maybe there's an appication posted?). "

In Florida just before the last election, FEMA was giving out checks and in many cases not even getting receipts of any kind. In addition, they gave oiut lots of 'reimbursements' for costs nbeither incured or even asked for.

" but it has always been an objective of this president to push a "faith based" agenda, and this seems like the prime place to put it in practice."

That doesn't make it a good idea. If the adminsitration had always wanted to make dogfood out of dead people, tis would also be an ideal opportunity. This administration has abused the benefit of the doubt at every opportunity. I cannot imagine why you thinbk that's going to change.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 01:27 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburbank
In Florida just before the last election, FEMA was giving out checks and in many cases not even getting receipts of any kind. In addition, they gave oiut lots of 'reimbursements' for costs nbeither incured or even asked for.
I think creating more accountability within FEMA, and whether or not this reimbursement plan is a good idea, are two different things.

Remember, FEMA has had this vote buying accusation thrown at them for most of the 90's, particularly during the Clinton administration. That doesn't mean reimbursing qualified organizations isa bad thing, it just might mean that we need to monitor it (And supposedly Nancy Pelosi is calling for an anti-fraud commission, or whatever, to monitor what FEMA does).


Quote:
If the adminsitration had always wanted to make dogfood out of dead people, tis would also be an ideal opportunity. This administration has abused the benefit of the doubt at every opportunity. I cannot imagine why you thinbk that's going to change.
I think my point was that the president has made it a platform issue to revert charity work to localoized, religious organizations since he first ran for president. And people voted for him....TWICE.

I checked the FEMA website, couldn't find any sort of application pertaining to this, but maybe I just missed it.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 01:34 PM       
Okay, let me put it this way instead.

I hereby predict, Kreskin like, that within the next year it will turn out that the vast majority of the faith based reimbursements went to groups favored by far right wing republicans , that little or no back up was provided, that in several cases they were reimbursed for things they did not do and that in some cases the money was outright pocketed by people with close ties to the administration.


Anybody think there's even a chance that I'm wrong?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Abcdxxxx Abcdxxxx is offline
Mocker
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Abcdxxxx is probably a spambot
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 04:28 PM       
This is way worse then I expected. Red Cross? If you want to give money to Red Cross, you can give money to Red Cross. The organization has a monopoly. It's near impossible not to donate money to disaster relief and not watch it funneled through the organization. Pat Robertson I expect, but Red Cross? Yeah, I'm outraged they would take an extra dime when they've had a ton of fund raisers, and a banner link on every website in America, refusing anything but CASH... and now voulenteered labor.

Personally, I don't support first responders who don't respond. The smaller faith based charities stepped in part BECAUSE the Red Cross was so ineffective. I'm not talking about the ones listed on FEMA's website either, I'm talking about thos e little church groups that filled up a van and just went and did it without asking. If you asked, FEMA and Red Cross discouraged you.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
kellychaos kellychaos is offline
Mocker
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Where I Started But In A Different Place
kellychaos is probably a spambot
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 04:42 PM       
Huge loopholes to scandal when you rely on the honor of the people. From where are the records and receipts going to come? It's a bad idea in general and bad idea in the "separation of church and state" sense. While I truly value the church's contributions, I see no good coming from this.

P.S. It was a huge disaster. Many resources have been tapped in all sectors. Why should this change the normal mode of business in any one of these sectors?
__________________

Wherever you go, there you are.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 04:48 PM       
Temporary religious shelters in Houston, now filled to the max with homeless from New Orleans, is not a "normal omde of business." If those charitable religious groups are tapped out and serving beyond their capacity, then they aren't doing anybody any good.

"Huge loopholes to scandal when you rely on the honor of the people. From where are the records and receipts going to come?"

Hey guys, i think the process might be a little bit more formalized than somebody writing out an in-kind estimate on a napkin, going to FEMA, and asking "where's my check!?"

They say there will be an application process, which to me anyway, insinuates standards and qualifiers. And abc, where did you see that red cross is in line to get a lot of money? I mean, perhaps they are, but the article only says that they were pushing for the reimbursments.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Abcdxxxx Abcdxxxx is offline
Mocker
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Abcdxxxx is probably a spambot
Old Sep 27th, 2005, 09:16 PM       
Maybe I misread but it seems Red Cross is the only organization named who are lobbying for this money. A couple organizations are mentioned who were subcontracted through Red Cross.

If we're worried about over stretching out charities, then we should ease the burden by sending them supplies to continue the care they give. These organizations are not accountable to the Federal Government, so there is literally no possible way to fiscally track how to fairly reimburse these groups for the money they put out. They are all supported by private donations, and if these groups need some relief themselves - we can donate directly.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Sep 28th, 2005, 09:02 AM       
"FEMA officials said religious organizations would be eligible for payments only if they operated emergency shelters, food distribution centers or medical facilities at the request of state or local governments in the three states that have declared emergencies -- Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. In those cases, "a wide range of costs would be available for reimbursement, including labor costs incurred in excess of normal operations, rent for the facility and delivery of essential needs like food and water," FEMA spokesman Eugene Kinerney said in an e-mail."

Again, it sounds like there will be standards. How rigid those may be, I dunno. But these organizations won't simply get blank checks for handing out little pocket-sized copies of the New Testament.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 28th, 2005, 10:51 AM       
Hey guys, i think the process might be a little bit more formalized than somebody writing out an in-kind estimate on a napkin, going to FEMA, and asking "where's my check!?"


I hope you're right, there, Kev, and I hope people have seen enough of this administration in action to keep a very close eye on them. It sounds rasonable. On the other hand, one would not think after handing Halliburton a no bid contract for reconstruction in Iraq and getting repeatedly price gouged on gas and billed for services which were never rendered, we wouldn't turn around and give them a no bid contract for reconstruction in New Orleans. I mean, you might think the process might be a little bit more formalized than simply giving the contract to an organization that's already ripped you off that the vice president is on the payroll of, but you'd be seriously underestimating the bald faced corruption, greed and arrogance displayed on a daily basis by this gang of robber barrons.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
kellychaos kellychaos is offline
Mocker
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Where I Started But In A Different Place
kellychaos is probably a spambot
Old Sep 28th, 2005, 04:13 PM       
Not to mention the scandal that may develop from the dealing with the public, general.

Isn't it a serious breach of the tennets of their faith to ask for kick-back for something that supposed to be done altruistically. Sure, it's a major disaster. Sure, they're being taxed iand stretched in many ways. Many sectors, both religious and secular, are smiliarly being taxed to their limits. The church doesn't pay taxes or the volunteer parishioners. Those donating get a tax-break on their donations. Absolutely not anything like the normal course of business, but still, normal rules should be followed. I find this all a little over-reactionary.
__________________

Wherever you go, there you are.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Carnivore Carnivore is offline
Red, dead meat!
Carnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Massachusetts
Carnivore is probably a spambot
Old Sep 28th, 2005, 05:28 PM       
If they're reimbursing both churches and secular institutions equally for providing the same services, there's no foul there.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
kellychaos kellychaos is offline
Mocker
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Where I Started But In A Different Place
kellychaos is probably a spambot
Old Sep 28th, 2005, 05:31 PM       
secular institutions are taxed unless they're non-profit
__________________

Wherever you go, there you are.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Abcdxxxx Abcdxxxx is offline
Mocker
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Abcdxxxx is probably a spambot
Old Sep 28th, 2005, 07:18 PM       
Reimbursing philanthropy. Now there's a concept that's sure to work!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Sep 29th, 2005, 09:44 AM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellychaos
Isn't it a serious breach of the tennets of their faith to ask for kick-back for something that supposed to be done altruistically.
Huh?


Quote:
Sure, it's a major disaster. Sure, they're being taxed iand stretched in many ways. Many sectors, both religious and secular, are smiliarly being taxed to their limits. The church doesn't pay taxes or the volunteer parishioners. Those donating get a tax-break on their donations. Absolutely not anything like the normal course of business, but still, normal rules should be followed. I find this all a little over-reactionary.
I find the reaction to this to be a slight overreaction. I think this net has been set up in order to draw the line between simple philanthropy and services.

If a Church shelter is serving as a permanent shelter for displaced people, and they are not well enough prepared to meet that need, then they aren't actually helping anybody.

If charitable organizations have been stretched to the point that they are no longer functional, once again adding the point that they stepped into the shoes of government on this one, then they might deserve to be reimbursed.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 29th, 2005, 10:32 AM       
well, heres the silver lining. Thinly stretched faith based organizations will get a little much needed help, even if it's opening a can of ethical worms, and thankfully, they'll be getting it from an adminsitration we all know won't take advantage of the situation or use tragedy to establish precedents for things already on their wish list or channel money to unqualified friends and donors or turn a blind eye to overbilling, waste and fraud. ,
Reply With Quote
  #20  
kellychaos kellychaos is offline
Mocker
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Where I Started But In A Different Place
kellychaos is probably a spambot
Old Sep 29th, 2005, 04:44 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellychaos
Isn't it a serious breach of the tennets of their faith to ask for kick-back for something that supposed to be done altruistically.
Huh?

If a church is to serve as a faqith-based organization both in terms of money, supplies and time served and they can handle it, then fine. But to bite off more than they can chew and then ask for goverment assistance/pay-back? They are then becoming a middle-man and, in effect, an agency of the government. You don't see problems with that?
__________________

Wherever you go, there you are.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Sep 30th, 2005, 01:45 PM       
Every single religious organization involved isn't getting a pay back. It sounds like they will be giving to organizations that went above and beyond their voluntary duty, and did things such as "operated emergency shelters, food distribution centers or medical facilities at the request of state or local governments in the three states that have declared emergencies -- Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama."

Again, I would like to withhold judgement until I can get my hands on a copy of this FEMA application.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:30 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.