Katrina and the World Posted by Heather Hurlburt

Today I have been fielding two kinds of inquiries, and I don't know which is worse.  One is from Americans who aren't foreign policy experts, asking what the rest of the world must think of us.  The other is from Europeans, asking, with exquisite politeness, why on earth we can't get medical supplies and relief to our own people within 72 hours.

There's genuine bewilderment out there -- people may scorn our politics and culture, but they do still tend to belive that we are technologically advanced and incredibly citizen/consumer friendly -- that this is basically a great, if soulless, place to live.  The scenes on our tvs do not compute.  (I know, they don't compute for us either.)  And, if only we can lift up our heads to see it, there's a genuine outpouring of sentiment -- and donations -- at least among foreign bloggers.  Check out some non-US blogs on this mixture of fondness and astonishment:  France, Croatia, Britain/Spain.

Had the incredibly odd experience of listening to the BBC interview rural Delta residents who were asking when the foreign aid was going to show up.  One of our readers suggested that this period will presage a tremendous turn toward isolationism -- I'm not sure that's true.

Meanwhile, we hear the Germans are sending aid and a Dutch frigate is steaming in from the Caribbean.  NATO to the rescue, after all?

It will be interesting to see whether this spurs a decline in views of US hyperpower/omnipower.  If so, this Administration will have only itself (and global warming) to blame.   This interview with Homeland Security Chertoff, in which he denies the nightmare at the New Orleans convention center, and a staffer has to call later and admit NPR was right, is one of the most shameful performances by a Cabinet-level official I've witnessed.  Robert Siegel finally says to him, more or less, but didn't someone near your office have a contingency folder that said, "New Orleans is inundated" on it?

Good question.  Juliette and Derek, Gingrich and Mitchell are all very well, but when we have your Katrina Commission, let's insist that it be run by people who are familiar to -- and have credibility with -- the folks who were left behind in New Orleans and the Delta.  The folks the planners forgot, because they don't have cars and laptops and cellphones and big credit cards to fund hotel stays.

 

Comments

[Dan Kervick]

Let us recall the political culture that spawned George W. Bush and his closest allies. Below is the passage on civil fefense from the 1998 Texas Republican Party platform. The passage reappears intact in the 2000 Texas Republican Party platform:

Civil Defense – America had a strong, grassroots–based civilian defense system with county level volunteers and local leadership from the World War I era until the establishment of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Now local civil defense coordinators have been replaced with federally–controlled emergency management coordinators. The priority has changed from "defending" the citizens in an emergency to "managing" the citizens. The Party supports the restoration of our civil defense system. A non–partisan effort should be made to organize communication and emergency response training for citizens to assist in times of emergency, and the local county government should appoint a civilian defense coordinator. Elected county officials should be in charge of decisions affecting the local community.

For the Radical Republican Republic of Texas, gutting FEMA, and the central government authority and capability that it represents, was not just a sort of by-product of the budget cuts that would be necessitated by their chief commitment to tax cuts. Nor was it simply an unfortunate casualty of war. It was a cause, a political end in itself. Disaster response, in their book, should be handled by county-level civil defense coordinators, and much "effort" should be put into organizing communication to help local citizen-volunteers - little private teams of bucket-brigaders, civic organizations and church groups - take care of their own problems.

The ideology of Bush and his people has been, and still is to divest the federal government of power, responsibility and authority, and devolve all that power back to states, counties, municipalities, private enterprise and private voluntary organizations.

For Bush and Rove, a storm like Katrina was now doubt supposed to be the perfect demonstration piece for the virtues of Radical Republicanism - Texas style. It would show the country how governmental functions that we have come to see as federal responsibilities could be handled perfectly well at a smaller, more local scale.

And who knows how far this could go, right? Once the American people saw how well state, country and municipal governments, and even volunteers - local guys with pickup trucks and walkie-talkies, and ministers handing out soup and blankets - could handle this job, surely it would then be clear to Americans that the locals can also do the job of taking care of the elderly, of protecting health, of educating children and all of those other functions the Radical Repubs wants to strip away from the federal government.

So staying in Texas wasn't just Bushian cluelessness - it was a calculated political symbol expressing the Republican creed that the feds are not really needed to handle hurricaines. The President can stay on his ranch and do a little bit of "coordinating". But he doesn't need to direct anything.

And sure enough, Bush blathered on the first couple of days about how Washington's job was "coordination" between state, federal and local agencies, and about how all those wonderful faith-based organizations were chipping in to solve the problems on the Gulf Coast.

Surely this episode shows you can't trust people who actually despise the federal government, and want to destroy every aspect of it except for their beloved military, to run it correctly.

The grotesque, miserable failure of this approach is what has Republican leaders fuming. It's because they are seeing their cherished dogmas and agendas going up in smoke. It's because Social Security privatization, the continuing erosion of federal power, and the anti-government fantasy of volunteerism to the rescue are dead. It's because the country is now seeing what happens when a people comes to hate government so much that they can't even manage the basics of governing themselves anymore.

Foreign countries ponying up to offer aid and send assistance, just as they would for a third world country? Relief for a country that possesses as much wealth as the United States? What an outrageous humiliation!

[brian]

Here in Australia,the events in the USA have been widely reported in all sections of the media;. There is suprise and I must say , disgust at the sheer stupidity of Bush and Co. Australia has donated $10 million for medical suppies ,and offered to send expert help in relief administration,which Americans clearly don't have ! Australia gave massive aid to Indonesia after the Tsunami,and has a lot of expertise. In 1974 the Australian city of Darwin was totally destroyed in a huge tropical storm,and the federal Govt. moved the whole population within days by air to cities in the south where everyone was housed and given a social security pension to tide them over,as well as free medical care(which everyone here gets anyway under our National health scheme ) The US response seems unbelievable here,and the media is full of shock and amazement at the way a "super-power" treats its own citizens!...not "so super-...as one TV station said .Surely the American people deserve better leadership than they have !!!

[doc]

Brian -

your assessment of America's current leadership is, unfortunately, spot on.

thnaks to austrailia and all other contries fro doing what bushco would not.

[Jay.Mac]

Didn't Bush get involved and urge that a mandatory evacuation order be given?

http://americansforfreedom.blogspot.com/2005/09/ive-had-it-with-people-blaming-this.html

I think the problems New Orleans is seeing are more to do with faults at local government level- not national.

You only have to look at the images of all those buses lying unused and water-logged to see that this disaster has been made worse because of bad decisions at the local level.

Buses were there which could have taken roughly 15,000 people out of harms way. With two days notice of the hurricane's approach i'm sure more than one trip could have been made. In that case we could be looking at 70,000 people trapped in NO instead of 100,000.

Why didn't the city/state have this sorted out? That isn't Bush's fault.

I'm not saying that Bush couldn't have acted more quickly or done things differently but bear in mind that you're talking about a massive bureaucracy with conflicting spheres of influence. The mayor of New Orleans and governor have to take their share of responsibility too. Compare the effort their with that of neighbour Mississippi, which took worse initial damage from the hurricane.

Any developed country- whether it's the US or in Europe- would have been hard pushed to deal with a disaster like this. Perhaps what's needed is not Bush-bashing for the sake of it, but a long, hard look at what agencies are involved in dealing with disasters like this and how they are run. When a disaster hits, whatever it may be, wouldn't it be more useful for a single entity to take complete control? Right now, doesn't the Governor have to request help? How do her decisions affect those groups also trying to help here? If she won't take a decision quickly enough (for the sake of argument) is there anything that can be done?

Remember, elected officials are just that- they aren't disaster response experts.

I'm no expert on which groups are involved in something like this but FEMA, DHS and the National Guard are all involved among others. There are also city, county and state level bureaucrats. Seems to me that streamlining disaster response/control would make for a speedier reaction time to a future disaster of this level. How would they operate with the various levels of government in Amercia? And I'm sure that this is not a problem limited to the US but all developed countries. The British government was able to send help to the Tsunami victims and also to NO- but I'm sure that they would not be able to cope with a disaster like the one which has hit NO.

For example, they recently did a mass mailing of leaflets advising on what to do in the case of chemical or biological attack. Their advice essentially boiled down to remain indoors and wait for help. I have little confidence of their ability to cope with something like NO.

Brian- thanks for the info on the Darwin evacuation. Any comments on the current effectiveness of the Australian government's abilities?

[Dan Kervick]

Right now, doesn't the Governor have to request help?

Jay Mac,

The governor is supposed to request a Presidential Emergency Declaration and/or a Presidential Major Disaster Declaration. The Emergency Declaration for Louisiana was in fact issued on August 27; the Major Disater Declaration was issued on August 29 - both of them before the levees were breeched.

[Clint]

Dan-

It's my understanding that the two declarations you're talking about were primarily related to releasing FEMA funds to the State, and were not sufficient to authorize, for example, sending the U.S. military or any non-Louisiana National Guardsmen into New Orleans.

It's worth reading the Governor's Disaster Relief Request letter of August 28th.

She makes specific requests totalling $130 Million in Federal money. She makes no requests for, nor does she authorize, the presence of Federal troops -- which she eventually authorized only on Wednesday. She reiterates her belief that the state's Hazard Mitigation Plan is sufficient, and lists all of the things she's doing (that is, that the State is doing) to help.

President Bush responded to the request for $130 Million by requesting $10 Billion to handle the immediate crisis, with much more to follow. He also asked the Governor to permit the use of Federal troops in facilitating the evacuation. She refused.

[Clint]

Jay Mac-

"Why didn't city/state officials have this sorted out? That isn't Bush's fault."

It's even worse than that. FEMA ran drills of this sort of emergency last year with the local New Orleans and Louisiana emergency response people (this is a big part of what FEMA does, in between emergencies). Amazingly, they discovered that those groups had woefully inadequate plans for evacuating the city, particularly for the poor. (In their drill, they ended up assuming that two thirds of the city would be left behind -- in practice, 80% got out in the evacuation.) As a result of FEMA pressure, the city drew up plans to use city buses and school buses to help evacuate the city.

To blame FEMA now, for the fact that the City government failed to carry out these plans is ridiculous. The city workers who were supposed to be carrying out the plans don't take orders from FEMA.

[J Thomas]

Clint and Jay Mac, you are getting the blames mixed up. I have the impreesion that FEMA made a good start in 2004 with their tutorial for state employees, and it looks to me like not FEMA responsbility that the city was not fully evacuated in the short time before the storm hit.

FEMA's inadequacies come in when they sent aid late and in small quanitities and utterly failed to coordinate aid by others. It's too soon to say whether this was due to training problems within FEMA, or to inadequate numbers, or to FEMA's own offices being flooded, or to some other reason.

[Clint]

J Thomas-

By what standards do you judge FEMA's aid to have been "late" and "small quantities"?

FEMA's efforts in Mississippi have, from all I've read, been excellent, coordinated by the state and local officials in charge of coordinating their efforts. FEMA's efforts in Louisiana have been much less effective, due to lack of local command and control.

People keep forgetting that Mississippi was hit far harder than Louisiana was.

[Adan]

To blame FEMA now, for the fact that the City government failed to carry out these plans is ridiculous.

Why not? According to your own post, FEMA would have been painfully aware of Louisiana's inadequate preperations. Shouldn't they have been prepared to take up the slack, if needed?

When it became clear that the city would not be able to evacuate or care for the remaining citizens left behind, what should the Feds' response have been? Say "we told you so"?

The City of New Orleans may be blamed for not having an adequate evacuation plan, but the Feds deserves the blame for not planning to assist Louisiana's evacuation effort if the need for such assistance became necessary.

And FWIW, its not entirely clear that the city did not carry out its plan:
http://www.cityofno.com/portal.aspx?portal=46&tabid=3

During the Recommended Phase of Evacuation:
1. The City of New Orleans Emergency Operating Center (EOC) is staffed for 24-hour operation.
2. Local transportation will be mobilized to assist persons who lack transportation.
3. Bus routes and locations of staging areas for those needing transportation to shelters in or out of the Parish, will be announced via radio and television.
4. Relatives and neighbors should help family and friends who need transportation and other assistance.

Never take any hurricane lightly; everyone is especially at risk if a hurricane is category 3 (slow moving storm) or 4 and 5 (slow or fast moving storm).

3. MANDATORY
This is the final, most serious phase of evacuation. Authorities will put maximum emphasis on encouraging evacuation and limiting entry into the risk area. The State Office of Emergency Preparedness, State Police, State Department of Transportation and The Louisiana National Guard will assume coordination and responsibility for traffic control on all major evacuation routes. Because of deteriorating weather conditions, at some point, evacuation routes will be closed and the remaining people at risk will be directed to a last resort refuge.

During the Mandatory Phase of Evacuation:
1. Persons living in designated evacuation zones will be instructed to leave.
2. Traffic controls will be imposed to direct persons to designated evacuation routes.
3. Emergency Alerting System(EAS) radio stations 870 AM & 101.9 FM and news media will issue evacuation information.

According to this, transportation was to be provided during the "recommended" phase of the evacuation. During the "mandatory" phase, people who could not get out were travel travel or to be taken to a refuge of last resort. That looks like what happened.

clint:
TITLE 10 > Subtitle E > PART II > CHAPTER 1209 > § 12304

§ 12304. Selected Reserve and certain Individual Ready Reserve members; order to active duty other than during war or national emergency
Release date: 2004-03-18

(a) Authority.-- Notwithstanding the provisions of section 12302 (a) or any other provision of law, when the President determines that it is necessary to augment the active forces for any operational mission or that it is necessary to provide assistance referred to in subsection (b), he may authorize the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a service in the Navy, without the consent of the members concerned, to order any unit, and any member not assigned to a unit organized to serve as a unit of the Selected Reserve (as defined in section 10143 (a) of this title), or any member in the Individual Ready Reserve mobilization category and designated as essential under regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned, under their respective jurisdictions, to active duty (other than for training) for not more than 270 days.

(b) Support for Responses to Certain Emergencies.-- The authority under subsection (a) includes authority to order a unit or member to active duty to provide assistance in responding to an emergency involving--

(1) a use or threatened use of a weapon of mass destruction; or

(2) a terrorist attack or threatened terrorist attack in the United States that results, or could result, in catastrophic loss of life or property.

(c) Limitations.--

(1) No unit or member of a reserve component may be ordered to active duty under this section to perform any of the functions authorized by chapter 15 or section 12406 of this title or, except as provided in subsection (b), to provide assistance to either the Federal Government or a State in time of a serious natural or manmade disaster, accident, or catastrophe.

I'm not a lawyer, but it sounds like Bush didn't need the governor for authorization.

To sum it up, even if bad decisions were made at the local level, bad decisions were made at the federal level as well. You can't absolve the Feds of their reponsibility to their own citizens, no matter how hard you try. If the locals were always able to provide for themselves in a competent manner, we wouldn't need the federal government. Since the federal government feels it apparently has no obliogation the citizens of Louisiana, perhaps Louisiana should consider ending its obligation to the federal government, quit paying is share of federal taxes, and bring its citizens home from Iraq.

[Adan]

People keep forgetting that Mississippi was hit far harder than Louisiana was.

When measured against what?

I'm willing to bet, that when the death toll is finally tallied up, the vast majority will have been citizens of Louisiana. Care to take me up on that bet?

[John Penta]

In terms of people, yes, Adan.

In terms of overall infrastructure damage? MS wins, hands down.

New Orleans may be down for the count, but (most) of LA is OK.

Most of Mississippi is not OK.

[Clint]

Adan-

I agree with you. Far more people will have been killed in Louisiana. That's partly because New Orleans is under sea level, and even more because of the incredible difference in the competence of the responses of the local authorities.

A far larger storm surge hit Mississippi than Louisiana. Had the eastern side of the storm struck New Orleans, rather than the western side of the storm, the damage to the city would have been even worse.

[Clint]

Adan-

At the end of the day, when your house burns down in a fire because the local fire department doesn't show up, that's not FEMA's fault, but the fault of your local fire department.

If you can't understand why it's not the fault of anyone at FEMA that the Mayor of New Orleans failed to carry out the evacuation plans, then I really don't know what else to say about it.

If you were a policeman in the city of New Orleans, and someone from FEMA called you up and ordered you to hotwire a city bus and drive fifty people to Baton Rouge -- you would be legally obligated to refuse. If the Mayor gave you that order, you would be legally obligated to obey.

Responsibility and power are the two sides of the same coin.

[Clint]

Re: Title 10 citation...

Laws are fairly densely written. You've misread this one.

This section authorizes the President to call up members of the reserves to active duty in the event of a terrorist attack (as defined in subsection (b), which you quote in full). The first section you highlight states that a soldier in the reserve doesn't have the option to refuse reactivation. I'm not sure what point you intended to make by highlighting this.

The second section you highlight, in "subsection (c)", says that the President CANNOT order units to active duty to perform "chapter 15" functions or "section 12406" functions -- whatever those may be, and further that the President CANNOT order units to active duty to help in a disaster, except under the specific circumstances laid out in subsection (b) (i.e. a terrorist attack).

.
.
.
To sum up -- the section of code you've quoted refers solely to the President's power to reactivate members of the reserve to respond to a terrorist attack, even if he doesn't declare a national emergency. The section you highlighted means exactly the opposite of what you seem to think it means. In any case, this section of code doesn't apply, because the President declared a state of emergency.

Go back and re-read the first sentence of the section you cited -- this is talking about when he can reactivate the reserves other than during a declared war or a declared national emergency. President Bush explicitly declared a state of emergency before the hurricane struck -- giving him the authority to activate reserves. He then used this authority to activate some reserves, and have them standing by.

But the question I raised had nothing to do with this. He had the authority to reactivate military forces on his own. He could even send them off to Iraq, or to invade Cuba for that matter, on his own authority. What I believe he can't do is order them to invade Louisiana on his own authority -- not without a finding that the state is in Rebellion, at any rate.

[Clint]

Finally, re: the disaster plan exactly as you quote it...

It states that during the "Recommended Phase" (Friday and Saturday) -- "(2) Local transportation will be mobilized to assist persons who lack transportation."

This did not happen.

As a result, tens of thousands of people were unnecessarily stranded. Many of them suffered, and numbers as yet unknown died.

Which part of this isn't clear?

[J Thomas]

Clint, your argument that the president lacked authority to invade louisiana is hysterically funny, except it's so sad.

Look -- if Bush had sent in the marines with amphibious vehicles and working communication gear and they saved hundreds of old ladies and babies and thousands of others who were doomed to death without them, do you think he'd have been impeached for it?

If some misguided fool started impeachment process do you think it could have gotten a 2/3 majority of the House?

Unlike iraq, he could have broken the law (if somebody wants to argue that such a law applies) and *told the truth about it* and the whole country would have approved. The governor and mayor of LA would have approved.

Of course if the Marines had gone in and killed thousands of people, if they had raped women and napalmed buildings and eaten up the supplies that other people brought in, then he wouldn't look so good for breaking the rules. But that wouldn't have happened.

After everything that's happened in the last 5 years, you want to credit Bush with following the laws NOW? When the result of following them is obviously BAD?

It's a sad, sad joke.

[Adan]

At the end of the day, when your house burns down in a fire because the local fire department doesn't show up, that's not FEMA's fault, but the fault of your local fire department.

The destruction of what is arguably America's most important port city is hardly analogous to a house fire. The scale of damage and lives involved make it an issue of national importance. But I suppose a more proper analogy would be for my house fire to completely overwhelm the local fire department, forcing them to ask a neighboring dept. for assistance, only to have them pull a no-show after promising the locals that aid was on the way.

If you can't understand why it's not the fault of anyone at FEMA that the Mayor of New Orleans failed to carry out the evacuation plans, then I really don't know what else to say about it.

Its the federal government's fault for not having a competent plan to aid the locals when they asked for that aid.

Finally, re: the disaster plan exactly as you quote it...

It states that during the "Recommended Phase" (Friday and Saturday) -- "(2) Local transportation will be mobilized to assist persons who lack transportation."

This did not happen.

I haven't read anything regarding what went on before the mayor declared a mandatory evecuation, so I can't say that no effort was made to transport people out. But its beside the point.

The president promised Louisiana federal aid on the 26th. Nothing happened for days.

[Clint]

Adan-

The worst problem with this kind of blame-shifting complaint is that it all-but insures that the same mistakes are going to be made next time.

Every city and state disaster planning agency KNOWS they are primarily responsible for handling any disaster for 72 hours before the Federal response begins to arrive.

I would hope that everyone's response to this disaster will be to find out where their own local disaster shelter is located -- and find out whether their own city council has allocated funds to stock it with enough food and water for 72 hours.

I would hope that we will not respond by demanding that the Federal government build a new capacity to airlift food and water to feed hundreds of thousands of people from central stores to anywhere in the country within twenty-four hours.

And at the very least, I would hope that we won't blame the Federal government for not having already had this capacity, that we've never before asked them to build.

[Clint]

J-

I'm sorry that you feel the rule of law is a sad joke.

I disagree.

I feel quite certain that every voice currently raised to accuse George Bush of racist indifference in his response to Katrina would absolutely be raised in righteous outrage against genocidal tyranny had he sent the troops in illegally, and had some "looters" shot (as they, in fact, were). And many other voices would join the chorus -- many Americans actually do believe that public servants ought to be bound by the law. Dick Durbin would be on TV nightly taking the line that of course you can understand the President's need to do something (especially given that it was all his fault) -- but there's a proper chain of command that one follows here in a free country. Mention would be made of Nazis and of the Patriot Act.

I don't believe that the President would be impeached, had he violated the law here. I do believe that every judicial nominee this fall would be asked to comment on the legality of his actions (and would solemnly point out that they were illegal), and that it would add extremely powerfully to the leftist assertion that he's become a dictator. I do believe Congress would censure him for it -- and rightly so.

[J Thomas]

Clint, I don't think the rule of law is a sad joke. I think your argument is a sad joke.

First, I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the law. But that isn't important. Because, suppose you're right. Suppose Bush sent in military search-and-rescue people and they rescued even 1000 of the people who actually died. Even 500.

And suppose that after he rescued those 500 people the result was he got impeached and spent 5 years in Leavenworth. It would still be the right thing to do.

If he thought that military search-and-rescue guys were needed, and he thought it was illegal to use them, the proper thing would be to ask permission. And if there wasn't time to ask permission then the right thing would be to go ahead, and ask forgiveness when there was time.

The laws are here to promote the general welfare. We don't live and die primarily to uphold the laws. When the laws are wrong and it's important, then break them, challenge them -- and get your results first.

Again, if Bush sent search-and-rescue teams into a giant natural disaster and they saved lives, that's a perfect excuse. Would he lose politically by it? My guess is that if anti-Bush people tried to say he was wrong to save those people, Bush's supporters would laugh at how inept they were.

He'd have more trouble sending in troops to do law enforcement. But that wasn't the big issue. The big issue was the thousands or tens of thousands of people who were trapped by high water and in immediate danger. And there weren't enough people to rescue them. People and boats or helicopters. And fuel. Also there wasn't enough food or water.

Who's better at moving supplies across blasted terrain? Why didn't they get their chance to find their way through? Why weren't they landing planeload after planeload of supplies at the nearest site? Because Bush didn't want to break the law?

I know you want to say that Bush is blameless. And you're good at what you do. But this time around you just don't have anything to work with.

It's a sad joke.

[Clint]

J-

It's hard to discuss anything rationally with you. I presented a detailed expert opinion on levees, and you dismissed it with the assertion that your intuition is superior to anyone's expertise and they must be lying if they say anything else. (Even when their statements are of simple, verifiable fact, to which hundreds of thousands of New Orleaners would have been witnesses over many years.)

You blame President Bush for not (illegally) giving orders to the New Orleans Police Department, with no blame for the people actually authorized to give such orders (the Mayor); you blame President Bush for not (illegally) ordering in the Louisiana National Guard, with no blame for the people actually authorized to give such orders (the Governor); you blame President Bush for not (illegally) sending in the National Guard from neighboring states without a formal request from the Governor, without blaming her for refusing to issue such a request until quite late.

I'm happy to blame President Bush for things that are his fault -- like the appointment of Michael Brown to head FEMA. It is his fault when members of his team, who he appointed, screw up. He's not, however, responsible for the weather, or for the actions of the New Orleans city government.

[Adan]

Assuming this thread is still alive:

The worst problem with this kind of blame-shifting complaint is that it all-but insures that the same mistakes are going to be made next time.

The way I see it, lack of accountability is what ensures that mistakes don't get fixed. The administration and its lackeys are doing all they can to ensure that they avoid accountability.

I understand perfectly that the state of Louisiana and the City of New Orleans failed to adequately prepare for Katrina. But additionally, I believe that our federal government has SOME responsibility towards its citizens, especially when they face a disaster of this magnitude, and because the feds have the largest pool of resources available at its disposal. And further, because they also seem to have taken some responsibility for hurricane relief efforts in the past.

Every city and state disaster planning agency KNOWS they are primarily responsible for handling any disaster for 72 hours before the Federal response begins to arrive.

For an event that is at least somewhat predictable, 3 days is too long, especially if elements of a coordinated disaster response are already in place. If this is the best we can expect ,then God help us all if we are seriously hit by a major terrorist attack.

And FWIW, it was at LEAST 3 days before FEMA started to act. However, as near as I can tell, most of their initial efforts were to try and contain any publicity fallout from being caught with their pants down.

I would hope that everyone's response to this disaster will be to find out where their own local disaster shelter is located -- and find out whether their own city council has allocated funds to stock it with enough food and water for 72 hours.

But also keep in mind, that even if we do (as the citizens of NO demonstrated), that federal indifference or incompetence will dictate that we will, in all likelihood, still be SOL.

I would hope that we will not respond by demanding that the Federal government build a new capacity to airlift food and water to feed hundreds of thousands of people from central stores to anywhere in the country within twenty-four hours.

Why not? What sort of high moral position demands that our OWN government not aid its citizens in times of dire need?

And at the very least, I would hope that we won't blame the Federal government for not having already had this capacity, that we've never before asked them to build.

Perhaps we've never asked them, because we believed, from various disaster relief efforts conducted abroad, that they've always had this capacity. I suspect its more a question of will, and not capacity.

Frankly, I always assumed that one of the basic functions of a legitimate government was that it could provide its citizens with the absolute basics (food and shelter) in times of severe emergency or stress. I always assumed that the government agency responsible for this function would be FEMA. However, it seems, if I read you correctly, that I've been wrong, and that the feds had at best, a very limited responsibility in times of national disaster.

But now that you've set me straight, Clint, might I suggest that those of us who held these quaint expectations of our government (you know, the expectations that our government provide for the safety and protection of its citizens) respectfully forswear our alligiance to our current government, and create a new one that will be more responsive to our needs.

[J Thomas]

"You blame President Bush for not (illegally) giving orders to the New Orleans Police Department,"

I don't believe I've ever suggested that Bush give orders to the NOPD.

"you blame President Bush for not (illegally) ordering in the Louisiana National Guard,"

Likewise. If there were elements of the Louisiana NG that the feds forbade to participate, that would be bad.

"you blame President Bush for not (illegally) sending in the National Guard from neighboring states without a formal request from the Governor,"

What the hell? She declared her state of emergency very early. FEMA had the legal right to send them in without her specifically requesting NG from neighboring states. Your assertion that this is illegal is silly.

"I'm happy to blame President Bush for things that are his fault -- like the appointment of Michael Brown to head FEMA."

We're agreed on that one. And maybe it was Brown who refused to act when he should have. But maybe he thought he needed some direct order from Bush that he didn't have. You've been making that kind of argument, and if you believe in it maybe Brown does too. If Bush gave Brown the impresssion that it would be illegal to send in aid before Bush ordered him to, and Bush didn't give the order, then it wasn't Brown's fault but Bush's. Except, didn't Bush publish very early that FEMA would be doing all those things? So where's the problem for Brown to do them?

"It is his fault when members of his team, who he appointed, screw up. He's not, however, responsible for the weather, or for the actions of the New Orleans city government."

Agreed on both of those.

[Susan]

Okay guys, I have to weigh in here..... When the President declared a state of ER for LA and MS, it allowed Federal funds to flow to the state and local level to do the necessary to protect the cities infrastructure and it's citizens.

IF Govenor Blanco had allowed the activity of the military to be under federal control, she would have given up the policing ability of the military. By keeping the military under the state's control, this gave Govenor Blanco the ability to ask the military to assist the NOPD in policing the city, however, the military in this capacity, under the state can ONLY shoot in self defense.

The military CANNOT go into any city within the US and act in a FULL military capacity UNLESS directed by the President.

When the mayor called for a mandatory evacuation, the city and state entities are SUPPOSED to be mobilized immediately to remove any and all citizens from that area. For some reason, the buses that were supposed to be going TO New Orleans, were actually seen going FROM New Oleans - empty.

When the President declared a state of ER, FEMA (under it's prior independent status) was to mobilize and station any and all ER personnel as close to the area as possible without endangering themselves. AS the storm passed through the effected area, these ER personnel were to come in BEHIND the storm to immediately effect in rescue, recovery and reclamation - THIS DID NOT HAPPEN. In fact, Mr. Brown requested another 1000 to 3000 personnel be dispatched to the area - but no hurry - within 48 hours was okay - this was on Wednesday.

To add fuel to the fire, any volunteers coming from any other area's within the US, if called by, say, the NOPD, were turned away and told by FEMA that they were not needed. Even if FEMA had called in these offers of support, they were met with resistance from the department that FEMA had designated as "in charge of that area".

One of the FIRST things FEMA is supposed to do, is to set up temporary communications WITHIN THE EFEECTED AREA. This also wasn't done, so alot of people that had come into the area to help, didn't know where to go or when they got to the area they were supposed to go into, they were told they weren't needed.

OH and as far as MS is concerned. The damage that MS suffered is across a bigger area than that of New Orleans and the surrounding parishes - BUT - the City of New Orleans has a much denser population AND 60% of all the goods transported into and out of the US, goes through the Port of NO.

Also, the response by FEMA to the state of MS was just as bad as their response to New Orleans. Since the day after Katrina hit, mobile homes/campers/RV's (50 of em I think) were ready and waiting in Atlanta. These were to be moved into the Gulf cities along the coast of MS to serve as temp housing for the residents that had everything destroyed. Senator Lott, whom as we all know had a home on the Gulf, called Mr. Brown of FEMA and wanted to know when these temp homes would be coming that direction (this was a couple of days ago). Mr. Brown said he would check on it and make sure they were sent along. Senator Lott had to call GWBush and Bush had to call Mr. Brown, in order to get these temporary homes moving into MS. (That was today).

So, there was a terrible show of incompentence on all levels, city, state and federal. ONE of the reason's that you might think that the state of MS handled things better, can be summed up in a number of ways, but one highest on the list - the Governor of MS is a Republican - Governor Blanco is not. Oh, and when GW came back down to LA on Monday, no one from the White House told Governor Blanco's office that he was coming - she was to be in Houston on Monday visiting a shelter. When someone in her office heard about the President coming in on Monday, they called the White House to confirm it. Yep, GW was going to be landing in Baton Rouge around noon. Govenor Blanco was the first one to greet him as he deplaned......

Okay, that ought to give you somethings to chew on for awhile :-)

[Susan]

Oh, and remember all those people that were at the convention center? There were told to go to the convention center and buses would be coming in to take them out of the city.
IT WASN'T UNTIL THURSDAY that FEMA learned about the people that were holed up in the convention center, waiting for buses to come pick them up and take them out of the city. THIS was a total disaster by EVERYONE - the Mayor, the Govenor and FEMA

[Clint]

I suspect it will take a while to know exactly who did what wrong, in large part because the people who have been frantically working to get things done have not, for the most part, had time to seek out the press to get their stories and complaints out.

One example: Has everyone already seen this story about the Red Cross (and Salvation Army) trucks of supplies ready for delivery to the Superdome on Tuesday (before the levees even broke) that were blocked by the Louisiana state government from entering New Orleans?

I'm backing off from some of my earlier criticisms of Mayor Nagin -- not stocking the Superdome wouldn't look so foolish had the Red Cross been there the next day, as they were apparently ready, willing and able to be, with food and water and medical supplies. I was critical when I thought he was depending on FEMA to show up immediately with supplies -- if he was reasonably depending on the Red Cross to do so, having made prearrangements for that to happen, this is a whole different barrel of fish. The Mayor should not have had to plan on the State militarily laying siege to New Orleans and starving him out.

[Clint]

Susan-

I agree with your first point -- state and federal officials worked miraculously fast on getting the money flowing.

Re: buses leaving empty (being turned back?) -- I hope we'll hear more about this, and get to the bottom of what happened.

At the moment, all of these complaints (yes, including mine) are a bit piecemeal, because our picture of what happened consists of snippets of outrageous incidents. Hopefully things will become clearer.

(It's a different thread, but I'm actually comforted by President Bush taking personal responsibility for the inquiry for two reasons: the primary purpose of a committee is to dilute responsibility -- there will be no dilution here; and with GWB personally responsible for the final report, the press will be brutal in assessing it. I'm a big believer in the adversarial process as a way to make sure things don't get swept under carpets.)

It may well be that one anecdote about mobile homes being moved from Atlanta to Mississippi (or my favorite crazy one -- the thousands of volunteers who spent a day in sexual harrassment training before being sent to the region) will turn out to be representative of the FEMA response. Or they could turn out to be bizarre exceptions. I don't think we'll discover Brown was actually doing well -- but we may discover that the professional emergency response guys who work for him were quietly doing their jobs quite well, while he was fumbling in front of the microphones. We'll have to see.

[Clint]

Re: partisanship in my opinions on Barbour and Blanco...

I think it's mostly about first impressions. My first major impression of Governor Barbour was of him quietly working to get things done (in cynical retrospective, it's possible that what I mean is posing for a photo-op with Gen. Honore -- which is rather similar to what you suggest). My first major impression of Governor Blanco was of her screaming to reporters that she'd like to punch President Bush in the face.

I've also yet to hear anything in the press about Gov. Barbour's handling of the crisis that even begins to approach the blocking of aid from getting into New Orleans. But it's possible that we just haven't heard about his failures yet -- I'm more than willing to adjust my opinions later.

[Clint]

Adan-

The reason not to have the Federal government be the first responder after a hurricane is exactly the same reason not to put the Federal government in charge of first response to fires or heart attacks. It would cost much more, and respond much more slowly.

This doesn't mean that there aren't local fire departments, or local ambulance services, that aren't inefficient -- even criminally so. But we should fix those at the local level, not replace them with a giant bureaucracy guarranteed to be worse on average.

For a more prosaic example -- think about why you don't order your groceries from Amazon.

[Clint]

(ooops -- second "aren't" should be "are woefully")

[Adan]

The reason not to have the Federal government be the first responder after a hurricane is exactly the same reason not to put the Federal government in charge of first response to fires or heart attacks.

Maybe were talking past each other. To me, FEMA's apparent failure wasn't that of a first responder. It was the failure to act as a backstop in case the locals were in need of one.

I think the feds should have the capacity to deliver food anywhere in the union within a reasonable amount of time IF NEEDED. I'm not asking that they completely supplant local efforts, just to be prepared when the locals are overwhelmed, even if its because the locals were unprepared.

[Versace Handbags]

So, there was a terrible show of incompentence on all levels, city, state and federal. ONE of the reason's that you might think that the state of MS handled things better, can be summed up in a number of ways, but one highest on the list - the Governor of MS is a Republican - Governor Blanco is not. Oh, and when GW came back down to LA on Monday, no one from the White House told Governor Blanco's office that he was coming - she was to be in Houston on Monday visiting a shelter. When someone in her office heard about the President coming in on Monday, they called the White House to confirm it. Yep, GW was going to be landing in Baton Rouge around noon. Govenor Blanco was the first one to greet him as he deplaned......

[Versace Handbags]

So, there was a terrible show of incompentence on all levels, city, state and federal. ONE of the reason's that you might think that the state of MS handled things better, can be summed up in a number of ways, but one highest on the list - the Governor of MS is a Republican - Governor Blanco is not. Oh, and when GW came back down to LA on Monday, no one from the White House told Governor Blanco's office that he was coming - she was to be in Houston on Monday visiting a shelter. When someone in her office heard about the President coming in on Monday, they called the White House to confirm it. Yep, GW was going to be landing in Baton Rouge around noon. Govenor Blanco was the first one to greet him as he deplaned......

[injection molding]

Booklets printed by China printing is very good quality and good prices.
Plastic products made by plastic injection molding services with low costs and supeior quality
Shoring scaffolding for construction is a very useful tool.

[muhtar]

Thank you for your sharing.! seslichat seslisohbet

[cheap coach handbags]

Thank you for your sharing! I like i very much!

[nike air max]

0314
The Nike air max Shoe lives up to its name with plush cushioning and a sleek silhouette. It brings you just what you need to style it up wherever you go. you can look at the Air max 2009,air max 90,Air max 95,Air Max 2010
Features:
* Minimalistic construction of leathers and synthetics in the upper
* Nike Shox technology for optimal cushioning
* Rubber outsole for excellent grip

[digital camera]

The reports released recently iphone case by U. Manage on , Enjoy the bestE66 Dual SIM S. Internet digital camera traffic monitoring agency comScore shows that Microsoft`s share on American intellectual mobile phone market fell again. It has already fallen by 4 percentage points since last December, the newest data is only 15%. Though the ipad case share of google is not inferior to microsoft, according to comScore, data shows that google Android market share increases 5.2% in the same period, furtherly lessen the gap with microsoft. According blackberry keyboard to the trend, google soon will overpass software and become the third smartphone plate after iPhone and RIM.Adornment of TV80

Maybe, it is the reason that why microsoft concerns iphone deals mobile phone industry in 2010 so much. It has already released the new mobile operation system Windows Phone 7 Seires. In any case, microsoft will compete with iPhone and try to win back the lost market share due to the Windows Mobile 6.The Top 5 Best touch screen tft lcd google android 1.6 tablet pc

[China Tent]

This is a good,common sense article.Very helpful to one who is just finding the resouces about this part.It will certainly help educate me.

[chat]

thanks for sharing Sohbet many people are pay more attention to one's wearing than before, especially a watch. Chat .
Perhaps when you went to some place far away Chat you must borrow it from friends Sohbet you can get everything you want in this game
Chat money to invest in other industry which will return you good profit. Sohbet when you look at the surface of the watches
Egitim from the city you live in and thought you knew nobody there exsohbet

[laklak]

thanks for sharing chatmany people are pay more attention to one's wearing than before, especially a watch.zurnaPerhaps when you went to some place far away chattrou must borrow it from friends sohbetyou can get everything you want in this game

[rokettube]

en güzel rokettube videoları,
en muhteşem sex izleme sitesi
en kral rokettube yeri
kaliteli pornoların bulunduğu tek mekan
yabancı sitelerden özenle seçilmiş muhteşem ötesi porn sitesi...

[Runescapegold]

How could I be so blind!?Runescape gold
buy Runescape goldDon’t ever be depending on the rabbit’s foot for good luck when it obviously didn’t work for the rabbit.

[Cheap Air Jordan]

that terrorists may unleash attacks targeting sports viewing events events Gucci handbag For Sale events in the next few days in Kenya, the U.S.

[cebu city]

yyeah I think that is sooo great buddy. I really appreciate it.