Discussion»Statements»Rosie's Corner» The subpremes reject extension of eviction moratorium. 6-3 of course. Sez "Congress has to SPECIFICALLY authorize it". WIILL IT?
According to what I heard on NPR ... only around 11% of the funds Congress approved to help tenants pay their rent has been issued.
This means that, in essence, government has seized control of rental properties and denied the landlords the profits from those properties. This act is in violation of the 4th Amendment against "unreasonable searches and seizures". If the government is to prohibit landlords from the normal means of evicting tenants for non-payment - it must compensate those landlords.
Yes - I believe it would be nice for the government to prevent millions of people from potentially losing their homes, due to not being able to work because of government mandates shutting down businesses. However, the government should also follow the Constitution. So rather than paying landlords, it should be paying the businesses and employees it has shut out by force.
WHAT? So 100% was allotted to mitigate the problem and only 11% of it has been disbursed? How is that justified? What the he** is going on anyway? Do you know? I did not know that. I feel like punching someone Walt. I know. What good would that do?What possible LOGICAL reason is there for withholding that disbursement? AARRGGHH. Thank you for the info. So landlords are getting stiffed...people will be put out on the streets LITERALLY I expect and someone is sitting on funds that could have prevented it? What country is this? Thank you for your reply. It gets worse and worse doesn't it?
Walt O'Reagun 