Fightin’ words: Who should pay for destroyed homes in disaster-prone areas?

Meagan Lucero
Meagan Lucero

Meagan Lucero

Reporter

I believe that it’s the government’s job to help protect people who live in a disaster area.

Government tax dollars could be used when disaster strikes, such as the tragic Oso mudslide.

On March 22, a major mudslide occurred near Oso, Wash. The mudslide covered a neighborhood; ending with 39 confirmed deaths, four serious injuries, four reported missing and a total of 49 homes and other structures destroyed.

With events such as this, a topic of concern has risen: Should insurance be subsidized for people living in a disaster prone areas?

With the high taxes Americans pay each year, some of these taxes should be used to help rebuild homes that have suffered these disasters. Without policies to help during difficult times like these, then families may become homeless.

According to king5news.com; “A typical single-family home insurance policy in Washington state costs $595 per year… for a home that would cost $300,000 to rebuild, a Difference in Condition policy would cost about $1,000 per year on top of the regular insurance policy.”

The Difference in Condition policy is an insurance policy that covers landslides, including mudflows, earthquakes and flooding.

It is unknown if the Oso mudslide is covered by this particular policy; however, there are about 4,700 homes and business that take part in this policy.

If Oso is on this policy, then the damages can be covered and families can work towards getting back on their feet after tragedy.

But if it isn’t then that leaves several families unable to rebuild their homes and their lives. I believe that it is the government’s responsibility to help keep people on their feet, especially if an unfortunate event occurs based on Mother Nature.

The government will give food stamps to help those who are unemployed and in need of food. Why wouldn’t the government stay true to policies to help those who have lost their homes?

Government subsidies for homeowners insurance that are built in areas where disaster can strike should be an action that we take. It doesn’t seem to make sense to be against these government subsidies because of reasons such as: Are our taxes be put to good use? The answer is yes, we can’t continue to say that this is a waste of our tax dollars when there are several other conflicts with how the government spends American citizens’ money.

As a nation, we live on the old American dream that you can do anything. How can that dream continue if we don’t help those where were caught in the wrong place at the wrong time?

 

The Puyallup Post is the award-winning student news of Pierce College Puyallup in Puyallup, Washington. Copyright The Puyallup Post 2017. Twitter/Instagram @puyalluppost

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Fightin’ words: Who should pay for destroyed homes in disaster-prone areas?

by admin time to read: 2 min
0