« Orfunner | Main | Interesting Katrina reading »
September 08, 2005
Katrina questions
While many of my fellow bloggers have been on a week-long tear of how Bush purposefully destroyed the city of New Orleans because he purportedly hates blacks (Note: someone had better warn Condi Rice!), I've remained silent. However, I do have a few questions about the handling of this emergency:
- Was the New Orleans evacuation plan followed? The city of New Orleans had an evacuation plan. It was even posted on their website. It was supposed to be able to get everyone out, including those without transportation. Did they just not use it, or did someone in the city screw up in its implementation?
- When was the Louisiana National Guard called up, and what were its orders? Specifically, I'd like to know if the Louisiana governor ordered the national guard to assist in the New Orleans evacuation, and if so, when? We may not get an answer on that anytime soon. I've heard unconfirmed reports that the governor has issued a gag order to the Louisiana Guard not to answer press questions on that subject. Sooner or later, though, some of them are going to get asked under oath, and we'll find out.
- Why did the strengthened levees fail? While we've all been endlessly badgered about how "Bush cut the levee funding!!!", it seems that many of the levees had already had the scheduled work completed. At least one of the levees that failed had already had this work done. Why did it still fail? I think I already know the answer to this, and the answer is that the improved levees were designed to hold up to a Category 3 hurricane, not a strong Category 4, bordering on Category 5.
- Given that Category 4 and Category 5 hurricanes occur every one to two years in the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea, why was this 15-year levee project only designed for Category 3 hurricanes? Was this a serious effort to protect the city, or just a Congressional pork project to send money back to the home district? It would seem that this money was largely a waste, given that it failed. How much more would have it cost to improve the levees to withstand a Category 5 hurricane? Was this even seriously debated?
- Why weren’t the local government buses used to evacuate those who could not get out on their own? I’ve read that the city and school buses could have held 15,000 per trip. I noticed that one lane of the seaward-bound side of the highways was being reserved for emergency vehicles heading out during the evacuation, i.e. they were driving on the wrong side of the highway since hardly anyone was driving back in. Those buses could have been granted the status of those emergency vehicles and made multiple trips out to Baton Rouge, Shreveport, and Houston. In the two days warning they had, how many trips could they have made this way? How many stranded people could they have gotten out? 30,000? 60,000? Why were most of the buses left in place instead? They sat in New Orleans parking lots, many flooded, even as the mayor called on the national private buslines (Greyhound/etc.) to come help with the post-flooding evacuation.
- As I understand it, Bush declared a federal state of emergency before the hurricane hit. This put a lot of resources at the disposal of local and state officials whose job it is to coordinate the efforts. What requests did they make? What, if any, requests went unfulfilled?
- Where was the Red Cross in all of this? This is an organization with an excellent history of being quick to the scene of the disaster, both domestically (think of Florida hurricanes and Mississippi flooding) and internationally. Why were they so slow to get supplies into the city of New Orleans this time? Why was there so little food and water at the Superdome and the convention center? I’ve heard unconfirmed reports that the Red Cross had trucks upon trucks ready to roll in with food and water, but that the Louisiana governor’s office ordered that they not be allowed into the city since the governor didn’t want to turn those sites into attractive havens that would keep people from leaving the city. The governor’s office is silent, but this report came second hand from the Red Cross.
- For those clamoring at the notion that the feds should have seen the poor local coordination coming and just federalized the operation at the first sign of Katrina’s strength and rolled in with troops and martial law, was it legal for the federal agencies, FEMA in particular, to have usurped local control? Could they have done more earlier without breaking the law?
- And finally, where is Rudy Giuliani? I don’t literally mean Rudy, but where is the local figure rising up to be the The Man? (Withhold the sexism complaints. You know exactly what I mean by this.) Yes, New Orleans got hit far worse than New York, but all I’m hearing is “Bush didn’t help us enough.” Within days, the feds had unleashed a huge some of money, money that is apparently being spent at the heady clip of $1 billion per day. I don’t see a local official stepping up to the plate to be in charge and make sure things happen.
I’d like some of those answers, and we all should. But then, it’s much easier to cast the blame on someone you already hate.
Politics by Dan at September 8, 2005 12:17 PM
Comments
I think a lot of the answers have to do with the fact that we are talking about Lousiana, well known as the most corrupt local/state government system in the US.
Its unclear how this is Bush's fault, with the execption of the whole global warming issue, which I haven't seen citied much.
The question of why the levee's failed will be interesting in the same way the the failure of the WTC buildings was interesting. In either case neither was designed to withstand the situtations they were put into.
On NPR today, was a discussion of the 3 worst distasters that FEMA was looking at in 2001:
1. A terrorist attack in New York.
2. A Hurricane flooding New Orleans
3. A major earthquake in San Francisco.
Leaves one some pause...
Posted by: cypher386 at September 8, 2005 05:02 PM
You know, I've been thinking some about the oft-mentioned Louisiana corruption, and that might in fact be at the root of much of this, but I also think back to really corrupt organizations, as in outright criminal organizations, which purportedly run with reasonably good efficiency. I don't know... we'll see.
Yes, the levee failures will be of an engineering interest, not so much a political interest, though much political heat and conspiracy spinning is underway on that subject. [You see, they intentionally broke the levee to flood the poor parts of New Orleans, so they could condemn it, and using eminent domain, sell it off to Haliburton. :P ]
Posted by: Dan at September 8, 2005 05:14 PM
A corrupt government functions for the service of the corrupt, not the service of the common good.
This is more extreme, but reminiscent of what happened in NYC not too long before the influenza epidemic broke out in 1918 -- knowledgeable people had been removed from their positions and replaced by people who didn't understand what the people under them were doing, and the epidemic was worse in NYC than it would have been had the knowledgeable people been kept in place and those above them having the sense to listen to them about the mess.
I can find the chapter(s) in question if you want -- the book is still on my nightstand.
(Wondering if _Plunkett of Tammany Hall_ would shed any light on the general problem of corrupt government -- it's in the second non-fiction bookcase, IIRC.)
Posted by: Julia at September 8, 2005 08:54 PM
Oh, and 1 and 5 are related, I think -- they should have used the local buses to get a lot of people out, and they didn't. I have no idea why, but the reason may come to light at some point.
Posted by: Julia at September 8, 2005 08:55 PM
Your enumerated points are quite apt. I do think additional questions can and should be made about the Federal response to the whole thing as well, though, without necessarily tarring those questioners with 'hating' or 'bashing' the president.
Certainly, the president has been extraordinarily tone deaf through much of this thing, whatever else one might say. That his administration's response to anger over his public reaction to the crisis has been to deride critics for playing the 'blame game', while pointing the finger at local and state officials is also disappointing.
Posted by: Jonathan Abbey at September 8, 2005 10:12 PM
I'd like to see those questions answered too.
I'd also like to know why the FEMA director claims to have had no knowledge of the Superdome evacuation strategy. Not the director specifically, but the whole agency. Isn't it FEMA's business to know how cities are going to be evacuated? Shouldn't someone in FEMA have looked up New Orleans' evacuation plan when it was pretty certain the storm was headed that way?
It seems that lots of people are using this disaster as an opportunity to vent their anger at Bush's leadership. I'm not a fan of this administration, and his bait-and-switch deflection style makes me crazy, but surely Louisiana itself has some 'splaining to do.
Posted by: Dan Higdon at September 9, 2005 08:39 AM