General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAnother Chris Christie outrage: Data shows stark racial gap in Sandy aid distribution
According to the data, decried by groups including the New Jersey NAACP, the Latino Action Network and the New York Times editorial board, the Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, Elevation and Mitigation Program rejected 35.1 percent of African-American applicants, 18.1 percent of Latino applicants, and only 13.6 percent of Caucasian applicants. The Resettlement Program rejected 38.1 percent of African-Americans, 20.4 percent of Latinos and 13.6 percent of Caucasians.
Speaking to Salon late last week, FSHC staff attorney Adam Gordon urged the federal government to expand its investigation to include the racially disparate aid distribution, accused the Christie administration of trying to change the topic by attacking his organization, and charged neglect and callous indifference in the needs of Latino and African-American communities impacted by Sandy. A condensed version of our conversation follows.
Your assessment of this data shows that African-Americans were more than twice as likely as whites to get rejected by the RREM program and by the Resettlement program. What explains that disparity?
Were still trying to figure that out. And really, were talking to a lot of people who have been in that situation who are African-American and Latino and, you know, a lot of people feel like theyve been rejected for no reason. You know, weve talked to people who live in mold-infested houses [with] serious damage, and got a rejection letter and they cant figure it out. So were still trying to figure it out.
http://www.salon.com/2014/01/22/new_chris_christie_outrage_data_shows_stark_racial_gap_in_sandy_aid_distribution/
El_Johns
(1,805 posts)cassiejack
(1 post)No doubt theres discrimination in the Christie administration that must be addressed. Its clear and indisputable. It may be helpful in trying to figure it out by getting more insight into the Christie administration. In a recent article by Roger Stone, he provides an analysis of Chris Christie that compares Bridgegate to Watergate. It has good historical references: http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/22/chris-christies-bridgegate-response-recalls-richard-nixons-dissembling/
And Joe Conason wrote a commentary on Stones analysis which I include here: http://www.nationalmemo.com/to-roger-stone-bridgegate-coverup-is-another-watergate-and-he-would-know
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)All the applications should be documented somewhere. Why can't we see this public data and see exactly what was accepted and what was rejected? An independent review should get to the bottom of this.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)the whole point of racism is to limit access to resources, thereby making sure more resources are available for the powerful group. It isn't just about people being mean and saying mean names. I bet classism is involved too, and if we had more information as to which 18% or whatever of white people were denied aid, I would expect that they were mainly poor.
I'd be surprised if resources were allocated and racism wasn't involved in the allocation.
But good that it's getting attention.