"Los Angeles County is refusing to take evacuees."
I bet they couldn't get any sort of guarantee for reimbursement. I'd be willing to bet that all these cities offering to take in "Our Gulf Coast Neighbors" have recieved only verbal (read: political promises) of reimbursement. We'll be hearing for years how some of those promises were never fulfilled and how smaller cities got stuck with very big bills. Los Angeles has to look out for its own citizens.
Isn't it strange that mostly Red states have beared the brunt of the refugees? Is it a geographic thing? The only blue state I have heard of taking refugees was Mass and they have Mitt Romney. Texas, Arkansas, Tennesse, Kentucky, Ohio, Idaho, Iowa, Arizona, New Mexico all accepting refugees too.
Blue states? Blues State? Do you care...
I could do like Kanye West and make an irrational statement something to the effect that Blue States don't care about poor people.
All the housing now is being reimbursed by FEMA...why do you think Texas stepped up so quick. I mean the stadium costs, security, hospital, etc.
FEMA was looking at buying every mobile home in stock in the United States, and told the manufacturers to start hiring people...there is some large plan on housing these people in new areas.
Los Angeles might not be able to guarantee the safety of innocent people, either. There's also a lack of housing for them. I couldn't imagine trying to house them at the Staples Center. It would be a nightmare for those people.
My bf told me that crews cleaned up the housing on the former George AFB, for fire victims, but it wasn't needed. Maybe we could take in families? We have a criminal element up here, but nothing like L.A.
As for getting reimbursed, I think Bush won't tolerate anyone getting stiffed.