This bill ensures disaster victims are not penalized when receiving aid from multiple sources.
Laura Friedman
Representative
CA-30
The "Don't Penalize Victims Act" amends the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to ensure disaster victims are not penalized for receiving assistance from multiple sources. This change removes the clause that previously prevented individuals from receiving disaster relief if they had already received assistance from other sources. The goal is to allow victims to fully recover without fear of losing aid due to assistance from charities, private insurance, or other aid programs.
Bill Seeks to End 'Double-Dipping' Penalty for Disaster Aid Recipients
This proposed legislation, the "Don't Penalize Victims Act," makes a small but potentially significant tweak to how federal disaster aid works. It targets Section 312(a) of the Stafford Disaster Relief Act, specifically aiming to remove the phrase "or any other source." The goal is straightforward: stop reducing or denying federal disaster assistance just because a victim also received help from non-federal places like charities, community fundraisers, or private donations.
Untangling the Aid Knot
Right now, there's a rule often called "duplication of benefits." It's meant to prevent people from getting paid twice for the same loss after a disaster. However, the current wording – including "or any other source" – can create headaches. Imagine your home is damaged in a flood. You apply for FEMA assistance, but your neighbors also started a GoFundMe, or a local church gave you funds to help with immediate needs. Under the current rule, that generosity could technically lead to your federal aid being reduced, because you received help from "any other source."
This bill proposes striking that phrase. If enacted, it means federal agencies like FEMA couldn't count assistance from charities, crowdfunding, or similar private sources when calculating how much federal aid someone is eligible for. It essentially says help from your community shouldn't penalize you when seeking federal recovery funds.
Real-World Impact: Less Red Tape, More Help?
The practical effect could be substantial for disaster survivors navigating a complex recovery. It removes a layer of bureaucracy and potential anxiety – victims wouldn't have to worry that accepting help from a local charity might jeopardize essential federal aid. This change could also simplify the administrative side for agencies distributing aid, as they wouldn't need to track down and account for every dollar received from non-federal, non-insurance sources.
By clarifying that private generosity doesn't offset federal responsibility, the bill could indirectly encourage more community-based support and charitable giving during disasters. People might be more willing to donate knowing their contribution directly helps the victim without potentially reducing other aid they desperately need.