3 ms·
They didn’t in 1989. The relief bill was entirely for repairing damaged infrastructure. FEMA specifically mentions that you can’t expect replacement housing co
by kasey_junk 4y ago
They didn’t in 1989. The relief bill was entirely for repairing damaged infrastructure.
FEMA specifically mentions that you can’t expect replacement housing costs to be paid in many of their documents: https://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/earthquake-survivors-apply-fema-disaster-assistance-may-31 https://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/earthquake-survivors-apply-f...
- refurb 4y ago‘89 saw minimal damage save for a few neighborhoods like the Marina. If SF sees 50% of houses uninhabitable and 12% have earthquake insurance you think the govt will shrug and say “too bad”?
- kasey_junk 4y agoIn 2020 the house passed a supplemental bill to enable funds that can go to home replacement for Puerto Rican earthquake victims because the existing law doesn’t allow it. The Senate never passed it and the President promised to veto it. I have no crystal ball to know what might happen in the future but right now there is no earthquake equivalent to national flood insurance and recent history suggests the federal government doesn’t have the appetite to add it.