Hurricane Victim Seethes at 'Token' $1.69 FEMA Check
Like losing your trailer and having your life uprooted isn't difficult enough to deal with. Then you have the US government doing the equivalent of rubbing salt in your wound.
One day after Donald Seither's mobile home was ripped up by Hurricane Charley, the 74-year-old retiree picked up a friend's phone and pleaded for federal aid.
Technically, he got it. But mostly, he got ticked off.
Seeking the government's help, the Punta Gorda resident — after being put on hold for 2 1/2 hours — got through to the Federal Emergency Management Agency and told his tale: a damaged roof, shattered windows and no electricity.
About a week later, a check from the U.S. Treasury came in the mail. Here, Seither figured, was the hundreds, maybe thousands, of dollars he and his wife would need to help rebuild their lives.
Then he opened the envelope and read the fine print. The check's value: $1.69.
It turned out Seither and his wife didn't appear to qualify for major federal assistance because they had insurance coverage. But rather than reject them outright, FEMA says it is giving them, and several other hurricane victims, token sums instead.
It's a quirk in a system intended to provide serious relief for those whose lives have been disrupted or destroyed. FEMA says for many, a small sum is better than nothing.
Of course, at least now FEMA can say they've been of assistance, no? Hell, $1.69 won't even buy a Big Mac, and FEMA calls this assistance? Look, if the guy doesn't qualify for help, why not just tell him?
There is something to be said for dealing with people with a modicum of decency, especially with those who have suffered a major trauma like Seither. Why add insult to injury? "Hey, we're beauraucrats...we're just doing our job."
The token relief carries an unintended consequence. For residents who spent much of the past two weeks living amid rubble without electricity, it can feel less like help and more like a slap in the face.
"I fell to the floor and I started to cry," said Seither, recalling his disappointment when he opened the envelope. He said he and his wife still live in the mobile home, which sustained roof and siding damage and had a tree jutting through a window after the storm.
With friends like this, who needs enemas??
FEMA should have been honest and up front with this senior citizen. He has every right to be angry and disappointed with their response to his request.
On the other hand, if a person chooses to live in a mobile home and chooses to park it in a location where the risk of damage from natural disasters is high, he should do the responsible thing and buy insurance to offset the risk, as Mr. Seither did. I hope that he is as patient and persistant with his insurance adjusters as he was with FEMA, and that they hold up their end of the policy he purchased and provide him with prompt and effective financial relief.
What troubles me is the notion that our federal government might be responsible, liable or obligated to mitigate all loss from natural disasters. FEMA was created to help with these things, and does so with cash and by making affordable loans available to those that need them. FEMA was never intended to cure all the financial wounds suffered by the victims of naturally occuring emergencies.
That it has been represented as more than it is by opportunistic politicians, perhaps in an effort to gain the votes of those who choose to live in in hurricane or tornado prone areas and not protect their interests with insurance is a preventable disaster.
That others may wish or expect the federal government to assume such a broad role is contrary to the constitution of this country.