Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MrScorpio

(73,631 posts)
Sat Jan 25, 2014, 01:24 PM Jan 2014

Another Chris Christie outrage: Data shows stark racial gap in Sandy aid distribution



Amid growing questions about lane closures on the George Washington Bridge and Sandy aid to Hoboken, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is facing an additional charge about his administration’s disbursement of relief aid. State data, obtained from the Christie administration through a lawsuit by the Fair Share Housing Center, reveal a dramatic racial gap in who received preliminary approval for funds from Sandy relief programs.

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?

We’re still trying to figure that out. And really, we’re 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 they’ve been rejected for no reason. You know, we’ve talked to people who live in mold-infested houses [with] serious damage, and got a rejection letter — and they can’t figure it out. So we’re 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/


4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Another Chris Christie outrage: Data shows stark racial gap in Sandy aid distribution (Original Post) MrScorpio Jan 2014 OP
"African-Americans were more than twice as likely as whites to get rejected" El_Johns Jan 2014 #1
On a liberal's commentary of a non-liberal's but accurate analysis of Christie cassiejack Jan 2014 #2
Show us the data seveneyes Jan 2014 #3
This doesn't surprise me at all gollygee Jan 2014 #4

cassiejack

(1 post)
2. On a liberal's commentary of a non-liberal's but accurate analysis of Christie
Mon Jan 27, 2014, 03:14 PM
Jan 2014

No doubt there’s discrimination in the Christie administration that must be addressed. It’s 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 Stone’s 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)
3. Show us the data
Mon Jan 27, 2014, 03:23 PM
Jan 2014

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)
4. This doesn't surprise me at all
Mon Jan 27, 2014, 03:23 PM
Jan 2014

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.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Another Chris Christie ou...