Does Treatment Of California Mean No Federal Disaster Aid For Blue States, Sanctuary Cities?.

[TheMastersNemesis]

We may be in a new era where federal funds and disaster aid will depend on being a GOP or Democratic district or state. We are in new territory that divides the country even further. Denial of funds to California for flooding disaster sets a bad precedent. And it is really criminal to play politics in this way.

So when the tornadoes hit or there is flooding I guess they are more deserving because they are GOP states. This kind of politics opens a Pandora's box that changes the nature of this country.

We now are finding how monstrous Trump and the GOP is.

[deminks]

1. Even though Twitler has not refused the request for aid to California, he has not approved it either

No word whatsoever, and the request went in Friday.

[frazzled]

2. That would be illegal

According to a fairly recent Supreme Court ruling, the federal government can't "punish" states for noncompliance with a federal directive by targeting an unrelated issue. So, if California refuses to let its police round up undocumented people as part of an immigration policy, it can only take away federal funds related to policing--which would mostly be for national security. It can't take away disaster funds for flooding.

ON EDIT: Of course, I guess the president has a lot of leeway in declaring areas disaster zones, independent of relationships to other issues. But it sure won't look good.

[anarch]

3. probably. or, maybe just no disaster aid to anybody

I'm sure there are more important things to worry about, like selling shitty clothes and shoes (probably made in a sweatshop somewhere in Asia), and TV ratings and stuff.

[anarch]

4. the human shit-stain has basically said outright

that federal funds would be withheld from states/cities that didn't toe the line on the racist policies, so....