\jeff{krimmel}

That’s the creepiest and sleaziest thing I’ve heard in quite some time.

By MDA on Sep 7, 2005 at 12:27 pm

There’s also the fact that the disaster was predicted by researchers back in the 1990s, and some things were proposed to lessen or even neutralize the effects of direct hit on New Orleans. Were any of these suggestions carried out? Nope. Will they be much more ezpensive to carry out now that there has been a disaster? Yep.

The main areas that needed to be addressed according to the report were (if I remember correctly, and if not, I’ve gotten two or three for sure) the barrier islands, the wetlands, the canals, and the levees. The barrier islands need to be built up, the wetlands restored, the canals reduced (to help restore the wetlands) and the levees made bigger and stronger. None of this was done. I’ve seen in various places a lot of blame being laid at the feet of Bush regarding his wetlands policies. However, the issue of the wetlands was known during the Clinton administration too, and even earlier, yet none of the previous administrations did anything (or certainly not enough) to restore the wetlands and barrier islands. Nor did this or previous Congresses do anything/enough.

As far as blame/accountability goes, are there individuals to blame or who should be held accountable? Sure, but the list is a long one and includes several presidents, numerous administrators, and a whole heck-of-a-lot of Senators and Congressmen. However, filling out this accountability list is an issue for another day. What must be done now is to help the people, rebuild New Orleans, and implement the changes that will prevent (or attempt to prevent) this from happening again. Once that’s done we can worry about where the system broke down.

On another note, given your pimping of Firefox, Jeff, I’m surprised you haven’t mentioned the fact that the FEMA website (or at least the aid request forms) is (are) IE only. It’s a relatively minor issue, but one that is indicative of some of the thought processes going on in the agency.

By Adam on Sep 9, 2005 at 2:54 am

However, the issue of the wetlands was known during the Clinton administration too, and even earlier, yet none of the previous administrations did anything (or certainly not enough) to restore the wetlands and barrier islands. Nor did this or previous Congresses do anything/enough.

I don’t know jack about any of this, but preventative measures here seem more a state(s) issue than a federal one.

In contrast, the problems everyone saw with the recent reactive measures I think stem from a lack of communication/coordination between the various bodies; it’s all about IT.

By mda on Sep 9, 2005 at 6:28 pm

I disagree about the preventative measures being a state-level issue rather than a federal-level issue. I think they’re both. The impact of a devastating hurricane like this is felt by more than just the people in the particular city/state.

When you start having to relocate people to cities in other states, it becomes a national issue, and the evacuation of New Orleans was and is always going to involve evacuating to other states. This makes it a national issue in my mind.

Also, the prospect of damage to New Orleans as one of our major harbors, not to mention the location of many of our biggest oil refineries, means that the national economy gets hit hard when New Orleans goes out of commission. Danger to national economy = national issue.

Finally, the cost necessary to prevent this kind of hurricane damage is not small, especially for a relatively small state like Louisiana. We’re talking several billions of dollars, perhaps even tens of billions of dollars. A small southern state can’t handle that. FYI, Louisiana has roughly 4.5 million citizens. This is smaller than the population of the Houston metropolitan area (>5 million). Even with help from Mississippi, there’s no way that Louisiana could afford to protect the city. When a state is unable to protect its populace, it is the responsibility of the federal government to step in.

And, finally Mike, my last argument for it being a federal issue is that these sorts of projects are one of the reasons that we have the Army Corps of Engineers. I believe that they were the ones that did much, if not all, of the work in building the canals in New Orleans in the first place. Even if that isn’t the case, they almost certainly would have been called upon in building up New Orleans’ defences against hurricanes.

By Adam on Sep 9, 2005 at 7:54 pm

Mind-numbing quotes about Hurricane Katrina

By Adam on Sep 10, 2005 at 12:09 am

Spoken like a true Tennessean

So it’s been a solid three weeks. Sorry.

If more preparation had been made, however, people might not have had to be evacuated to other states. So, in my mind, it’s not as clear cut as you make it, The fact that it effects the entire nation’s economy is a compelling argument, but then why are we not blaming Spain and the UK for not pitching in with preventative measures? Danger to global economy = global issue.

As for cost, since both businesses and the populace had so much to lose (and indeed did), why not have both contribute to the efforts you mentioned? The populace in the form of taxes and the businesses in the form of direct support (or taxes, I suppose).

In the end, though, I suppose I’ve come to agree with you, but I’d be interested to hear if you (or others) think the financial burden of such efforts should be spread equally among those (citizens and corporations) from both Louisiana and, say, North Dakota. My thoughts lead me to the belief that there exists a certain responsibility for the area in which you live and that that responsibility in part dictates the financial burden you hold for that area. I don’t know how to quantify that, though.

Anyway, this is all from a long time ago. Go about your business.

By mda on Sep 30, 2005 at 3:23 pm