Barrel-scrapings
I must say, I’ve been a little surprised at some of the reactions to my (fairly mild, I think) comments on New Orleans.
They reinforce what I said to a different reader last week: that I’m emphatically not a tragic realist, who thinks ‘the strong do what they want and the weak endure what they must.’ No. On the contrary – I think we have to fight and resist, argue and keep on arguing, not give up, not lie down, not surrender, and certainly not shrug and say ‘that’s just how it is’ and go about our selfish business. I’m a little shocked at the amount of ‘that’s just how it is’ I’ve received in the past couple of days, in censorious emails as well as in comments.
This for instance, from an academic: ‘Please focus on what can be done to help the poor people of New Orleans. Spare us the superior morality stuff.’ I replied, and was replied to in turn: ‘I doubt that many of us need reminding that inequality exists in the US. Indeed, it’s a fact of life everywhere on this planet.’
True, inequality is a fact of life everywhere on this planet. So – ? So there’s no point in talking about it? So it’s wicked to talk about it (because, the first message said, catastrophic events are exploited for ‘political gain’)? But that doesn’t follow, and it isn’t true. All sorts of things are a fact of life on this planet; some of them can and should be changed; it’s worth trying to change them. Why wouldn’t it be? How can the fact that inequality is a fact of life everywhere possibly mean (all by itself) that it’s necessary to rebuke people for mentioning it or condemning it?
For another instance, ‘As for the the rich living on high ground, in any culture that has ever existed part of the definition of being rich is to live on high ground.’ Actually that’s not true – in volcanic areas it’s the other way around. But that’s a side issue. The central one is the same as the first. Yes, the difference between rich and poor is an old one and a widespread one – so what? It doesn’t follow that there’s no reason to discuss it. It doesn’t follow for instance that there is no difference, or no difference that matters, between relatively small gaps between rich and poor, and enormous ones. It also doesn’t follow that there is no difference between having a small underclass and having an enormous one. These things are eminently discussable (and in fact there are quite a few perfectly respectable academics who do discuss them), so the cold scorn of my critics has surprised me.
The hell with tragic realism.
I agree, Ophelia, I think those reader responses were breathtakingly arrogant. But I guess that’s the attitude that prevailed in Washington until Bush & co. realized there’d be political hell to pay.
“But I guess that’s the attitude that prevailed in Washington until Bush & co. realized there’d be political hell to pay.”
Indeed, I suspect that’s exactly what’s behind all these frantic postings: that this total cock-up will really hurt the Republicans come next year’s elections. Deny, deny, deny. Attack, attack, attack.
I’m apprehensive about even commenting about the disaster, living on the other side of the Atlantic – except that just about everything happened so far seems very, very horrible.
One thing I can’t quite get out of my mind – what if this were a terrorist strike, not a natural disaster? I know how hard it is to sabotage a levee, but bear with me. How would the American government’s response look, four years after 9/11, and, after four years of constant alert? I think your (and Karl’s) critical comments are quite pertinent.
Well exactly, Merlijn. I think we’ve all been thinking exactly that! Oh, great, this is how well they’re going to handle it.
How can they handle anything if key job appointments are made on the basis of political affiliation instead of competence? The FEMA chief is spectacularly unqualified for his job, going by recent reports. Couldn’t even hang on to his last job, managing some horse association for chrissakes! Gets more and more surreal by the hour.
I understand some of the commentators here are engaged in damage control for their party/prez. However their undisguised contempt for the victims is rather shocking.
OB: “True, inequality is a fact of life everywhere on this planet. So – ? So there’s no point in talking about it?”
Pretty much… It’s not so much that there’s no point in talking about it, but that there’s no point in talking about it here. Whining and moaning on some Internet forum about man’s inhumanity to man or human inequality is unlikely to change anything.
OB: “All sorts of things are a fact of life on this planet; some of them can and should be changed; it’s worth trying to change them. Why wouldn’t it be?”
Because it’s pointless, that’s why. Do you honestly think it is possible for all humans to be equal? First, how do you propose we achieve equal human rights for every person on the planet? Second, how would you iron out the inherent natural differences in the human race? There will always be some stronger, smarter or healthier than average and others weaker, duller or sicklier than average. Some will live in harsher climates than others and some will have greater access to natural resources than others. How do you propose we address those differences? Do you propose that the strong should help the weak, the smart should tutor the dull and the healthy should care for the sickly – total altruism with no hint of selfishness in anyone? Noble sentiments, but is it ever likely to happen?
OB: “Yes, the difference between rich and poor is an old one and a widespread one – so what? It doesn’t follow that there’s no reason to discuss it.”
It does if there is nothing that can be done about it. You can discuss these things here all you like, but it is unlikely to achieve any change. Think about it, Ophelia, most people in the world don’t even know this web site exists and, of those who do, is this whole web site anything more than light entertainment to most of them?
So then, cjb, why are you wasting your time on an Internet forum trying to disabuse Ophelia of her foolish notions? Shouldn’t you be raising funds and lobbying your Senator for your pet cause instead of hanging out around here?
Karl,
I’m not wasting my time here; I read this web site for light entertainment. I’m puzzled by your assumption that I have a pet cause. Or is this just the first in a string of ad hominem remarks I can expect for questioning Ophelia’s opinions and efficacy?
Ah, so you’re just bored with OB’s recent posts, are you?
“Or is this just the first in a string of ad hominem remarks?”
Only if you’re really into it. What’s your safeword?
I nominate Karl for the Funniest Ripose Of The Month award. That one had me laughing out loud. Cheers Karl.
Oh, and ‘cjb’, please can you give me a list of the things that are wrong with the world that _are_ worth discussing with a view to changing them? Please disabuse me of my prejudiced guess about your list, which I suspect (probably unjustly) might be dominated by Stuff That Bothers Rich Men.
No, I’m not bored. As I said, I’m entertained. When I said ‘ad hominem’, I didn’t mean I was being attacked or insulted. I simply meant that the remark was addressed at me rather than at my arguments. Do you think that it is likely that all humans will ever be equal? Do you think that discussing it here will ever make a difference?
“Do you think that it is likely that all humans will ever be equal? Do you think that discussing it here will ever make a difference?”
“It’s not so much that there’s no point in talking about it, but that there’s no point in talking about it here.”
Dude, make up your mind, will you?
Yes, yes, very clever, Karl. However, when I say there is no point to it, I mean that it won’t achieve anything in the real world. There is still a point it for its entertainment value. I notice, though, that you and Chris are still directing your efforts at me rather than at the questions.
Of course, the amusing back and forth between cjb and interlocutors is just light entertainment. What else could it be? There’s no evidence that suggests that ideas can be changed. Or even if they could, that ideas can lead to action. Or that action can lead to change. No sirree Bob.
I might add that if we can’t get rid of all inequality then we can categorically state, without fear of contadiction, that there’s no point at all in trying to get rid of any of it.
PS I second Chris’ nomination.
“I mean that it won’t achieve anything in the real world. Do you think that discussing it here will ever make a difference?”
[sits up straight and clears throat]
An itsty bitsy teeny weeny micron’s worth of difference. It gives me the strength to get out of bed in the morning and the will to trudge onward through this meaningless nightmare of suffering in this sad vale of tears we call Life.
cjb, you may wish to reflect on the fact that inequality varies from place to place and from one era to another. For the most part, this isn’t a natural process like the shifting of continents. It happens because people make it happen. Ideas matter. So surely what should be happening is worth discussing?
OB, as the one who misdiagnosed you as a tragic realist, I should spell out a little more what I meant by that. The Athenian general who spoke those infamous words (or had them put in his mouth by Thucydides) wasn’t saying that people don’t have rights. He was saying that, practically speaking, the weak enjoy those rights only to the extent that the strong are prepared to respect them. You were making a very similar point in your response to Norman Geras. That’s what prompted me to jump to a conclusion which, as I admitted a few minutes later, wasn’t really supported by the evidence.
Okay, Kevin, I’ve reflected upon it and I can’t think of any place or any time when all humans were equal. How do you propose we proceed?
“How do you propose we proceed?”
With a liberal application of KY Jelly.
So, Karl, are you saying that this entire discussion amounts to nothing more than intellectual onanism? If not, then please tell me how you think we can bring about human equality.
Before we worry about achieving complete equality, why don’t we start by reducing gross inequality? How about ensuring sufficient infrastructure to provide adequate care for the most vulnerable among us during a major natural disaster (a competently run evacuation plan, for example)? Surely that’s not asking too much.
No, Karl, that’s not asking too much. Tell me, are you just starting with reducing inequality in the US and you’ll get to the rest of the world later? Never mind; it’s still a noble thought. So, exactly how is wishing for it here going to help?
“So, exactly how is wishing for it here going to help?”
Well, if I’m a very good boy and wish really really hard, the good fairy Ophelia will wave her magic wand and make bad little trolls like you disappear.
[closes eyes tightly and clicks heels three times]
Ah, it didn’t take long to get back to the ad hominem remarks, I see. Are you beginning to see that discussing these issues on some Internet forum is not going to accomplish anything in the real world?
Drat, it was just the other day that I was commenting on the high quality of comments here compared with other places. I spoke too soon.
Surely there must be conservatives who can argue honestly and rationally, rather than wasting time arguing with things that no one said. Then why can’t people like that argue here, instead of the other kind? Why are there all these people around accusing me of thinking absolute equality is possible? And of being a Democratic party hack?
I want better conservatives!
In fact I demand better conservatives. It’s my right. I have a human right – indeed, an entitlement – to better conservatives. It’s my right and my entitlement, so I am going to whine and moan, and express rage and fire shots at everyone, until I get them. So ‘cjb’ and ‘dobeln’ go away, and send in replacements who can argue with what I actually say as opposed to your hallucinations of what I’ve said.
OB – It also doesn’t follow that there is no difference between having a small underclass and having an enormous one. These things are eminently discussable (and in fact there are quite a few perfectly respectable academics who do discuss them), so the cold scorn of my critics has surprised me.
No cold scorn, Ophelia, I appreciate your heartfelt concern for each victim in New Orleans and share it. In fact, I’m weary from watching and waiting for a time when the last one is out of immediate danger. Mercifully, we are almost there. 230,000 refugees driven from a storm affected area the size of Great Britain, it’s been amazing.
In terms of discussion, however, I want to ask what can be concluded from network coverage of this horrific event. What can be said about the underclass across, presumably, the entire US? I found network coverage to be politicized and sensationalized. It certainly did not contribute to a balanced discussion following your post; it inflamed and divided. Karl became upset, you became not a tragic realist but a defensive literalist – in volcanic societies the low ground, as always, is the “high ground” even if it’s the low ground. :-)
The inner city in New Orleans was, until this week, not an altogether unpleasant place to live. Housing, food, transportation and medical care were provided to those who couldn’t provide for themselves. It wasn’t elegant. Sometimes is wasn’t as safe as it could have been, but it was mostly adequate and mostly it was dependable. As you saw from the numbers of elderly, and this could be surmised from CNN coverage, it was possible to be in relatively fragile health and yet live to a ripe old age in the inner city of New Orleans. In this one respect an “enromous” underclass might actually be better than a small one.
When order breaks down as completely as it did with Katrina, and this is my other point, the “first responders” are, or should be, local. Emergency response failed not at the federal level, but at the state and local level. Your readers who seem to think that George Bush and FEMA are to blame clearly do not understand a federal system. This doesn’t mean that George Bush, Mike Brown (and even the Iraqi people if Americans become isolationist as a result of this tragedy) may not pay for this breakdown. It only means that they are not to blame. To expect a federal agency to anticipate failure of state and local planning and, therefore, to have contingency plans in place to rush emergency water to every citizen in every urban center in the country is a pipe-dream not even Big Brother had in his most delusional moment.
Bill, that’s just nonsense. That is exactly what Fema is indeed expected to do – that’s what it’s there for, that’s its job. It is indeed expected ‘to anticipate failure of state and local planning and, therefore, to have contingency plans in place.’ That’s precisely its job description.
And it’s not as if it can plead ignorance. It had a five-day run-through of exactly the Katrina scenario, just last fall! And take a look at the Scientific American and National Geographic articles – every detail was predicted.
“Housing, food, transportation and medical care were provided to those who couldn’t provide for themselves.”
What? What gives you that idea? Do you have any references for that assertion? Is it just an article of faith?
OB: I have a human right – indeed, an entitlement – to better conservatives.
According to Thomas Frank, they are hiding behind the populist backlash, which derides them as RINOs, but it also keeps their taxes low. As you say there are quite a few academics who discuss inequality. But there are many, many Backlash types whose favourite pastime is disrupting such discussion. The “cold scorn” of your critics may surprise you, but it wouldn’t come as any surprise to Brad DeLong or Paul Krugman. They would only be surprised that you haven’t attracted the real fire-breathing types. The usual line is that discussing inequality is “class warfare” and we don’t want that now, do we? Much better to have culture wars where the attack is directed against highbrows, tort lawyers, latte-drinkers, feminists etc.
Have you read or, better still, posted anything on Frank’s What’s the Matter With Kansas? (On this side of the pond the title was …with America.) I found it interesting, but not encouraging as regards the level of debate in America.
Kevin, yep, I have posted items on Frank. I haven’t read What’s the Matter With Kansas? yet but I have read – devoured – his previous ones – Conquest of Cool, Commodify Your Dissent, One Market Under God.
No, the level of debate in the US is execrable. Bottomlessly bad. In large part because much of it is carried on by means of tv ads – a fact which not only entrenches the role of bribery and business lobbying in politics, but also causes political discourse to get more simplified and irrelevant and emotive all the time.
I know the cold scorn wouldn’t surprise Krugman. It surprises me just because I don’t think – or perhaps I mean I didn’t realize – cold scorn types read B&W much.
Though JS and I had this possibility in mind from the beginning – that B&W would look like a conservative site. Well it isn’t! We criticize the left from the left, not from the right.
For the record, from DHS website;
‘In the event of a terrorist attack, natural disaster or other large-scale emergency, the Department of Homeland Security will assume primary responsibility on March 1st for ensuring that emergency response professionals are prepared for any situation.This will entail providing a coordinated, comprehensive federal response to any large-scale crisis and mounting a swift and effective recovery effort.’
Also for the record – I’m not in the lest invested in blaming Bush and not blaming locals or Democrats. It’s my impression (backed up by what Don just quoted) that Fema has overall responsibility for disaster planning and response, but I don’t know who should have made a plan to evacuate carless, ill, infirm etc people who couldn’t get out on their own. All I know is, someone damn well should have!
It’s truly hard to believe that wasn’t obvious. Especially since it was well known and discussed! That National Geographic article from last year says 200,000 people would be left behind in an evacuation. This was not a secret! How could there not be a plan in place?
Normally I think one should just ignore trolls, but Karl’s response makes an amusing alternative.
As others have pointed out, it is probably more than an odd coincidence that we have had an influx of right-wing trolls at the very moment when the Republican Party is at its most vulnerable and looks to be in for a serious electoral comeuppance a year from now.
“Are you beginning to see that discussing these issues on some Internet forum is not going to accomplish anything in the real world?”
Yes! Yes! I have seen the light! Hallelujah. Praise cjb!
Seriously, Professor: If OB and the rest of us never backed up our complaints with any action, just sat around and griped all day without ever writing our legislators or donating to charities or doing volunteer work, then you might actually have a point. I can’t speak for anyone else here, but I myself must spend about 5 or 6 hours a week on such practical political stuff as emailing my Senators & Representatives and canvassing for various groups. I’ve even been known to write a check or two, cheapskate that I am (three days ago I gave a total of $200 to various relief agencies working in NOLA). So, am I allowed to post my gripes on Ophelia’s website now?
You honestly expect FEMA to be 100% effective in preventing any discomfort to any survivor of any emergency? FEMA doesn’t have first response responsibility and probably doesn’t have immediate jurisdiction. Its role is to work in concert and coordination with others. Who were the first responders to the World Trade Center disaster? It wasn’t FEMA workers.
By contrast, one federal agency that has automatic jurisdiction and independent authority is the Coast Guard. It was hard at work before CNN was even in New Orleans. Similarly, FEMA has been at work throughout. 230,000 people are safely away from the Gulf coast and are being cared for today. (Or do you disagree that FEMA had a role to play in that?)
Some people disobeyed the evacuation order. Disobedience is not at issue. What is, however, is that no clear idea of the number of those who had remained in the city emerged until much later when they began to gather at the SuperDome. Meanwhile the Mayor, following some gut instinct to help, remained in the city hauling people off rooftops and out of houses. He got out of touch and with communications was lost effective command of the situation. No one had reliable information and no one was in command. When the levees gave way police turned to evacuating the hospitals and nursing homes as they rightly should have.
Beyond question the screw up here was lack of effective local preparation and command. Local government should have read National Geographic, etc. The Governor at one point announced that battle hardened Reservists fresh from Iraq were on their way and that they wouldn’t hesitate to shoot. What was that all about? Was she thinking that the looters and thugs in downtown New Orleans were watching TV?
In fact, we do provide stuff and services for people without means. What makes you think otherwise? Everyone who needs eye glasses can get them. Take my word for it. When my first child was born in 1973 we paid the hospital with State of Washington DSHS medical coupons. We lived on USDA food stamps and had coupons for public transportation. Later we bought a house in the inner city with $1,500 down from the Federal Housing Authority. I had student loans for years. Now I pay taxes and am slightly proud to do so.
“You honestly expect FEMA to be 100% effective in preventing any discomfort to any survivor of any emergency?”
So how effective was FEMA then? 40%? 20%? Discomfort? How about thousands dead, four or five days without potable water and medicine? Yeah, FEMA did a bang-up job.
On the one hand, the GWB’s defenders are pointing out in mitigation that the devastation was massive and covered a wide area. On the other, they are blaming the failure of local government as well. But _of course_ local government failed to react properly: they were under water, having just been through a category 5 hurricane.
This is a damn fine excuse for fucking up and one that provides an explanation for why disaster relief is a federal responsibility.
As for ‘disobeying an evacuation order’, I boggle.
They. Closed. The. Greyhound. Station. The. Night. Before.
How were people with no cars to obey the order? How could they have got out? I’m open to suggestions.
OB: “argue with what I actually say as opposed to your hallucinations of what I’ve said.”
Okay, OB, I admit that you didn’t say that equality was possible, just that it is worth discussing inequality. And I see from Karl’s response that discussing that here in the Notes and Comment on B&W really can reduce inequality in the real world.
“I can’t speak for anyone else here, but I myself must spend about 5 or 6 hours a week on such practical political stuff as emailing my Senators & Representatives and canvassing for various groups. I’ve even been known to write a check or two, cheapskate that I am (three days ago I gave a total of $200 to various relief agencies working in NOLA).”
Good for you, Karl. My hat is off to you and any others who helped reduce inequality as a result of this discussion.
Chris, I’m not a GWB defender. There were screw ups. I say they were closer to New Orleans than Washington DC, that’s all. Don provides the FEMA Mission Statement. Clearly FEMA has a responsibility to provide “…a coordinated, comprehensive federal response to any large-scale crisis and mounting a swift and effective recovery effort….” The numbers indicate that it has provided a comprehensive response – 230,000 Louisianians are being cared for. Lack of “coordination” prevented the other 10% from receiving immediate attention though they did receive attention. As late as Thursday the Governor wanted to shoot people and the Mayor surfaced cursing a blue streak. How can FEMA coordinate with that?
The only one who has argued how FEMA could react more expeditiously without eyes and ears on the ground was Ophelia. She says launch FEMA not after the disaster has struck but before, when the order to evacuate is issued. Would that work? The only problem I can see is that you wouldn’t know if you were moving evacuees out of harms way or into harms way. This would be possible under martial law or else FEMA have to have armed response capability. That’s just too Orwellian.
Hey, Karl, 59 dead and counting. Autopsies are being done to check lungs, so we’ll know how many lives FEMA could have saved if it had arrived immediately and was 100% effective in its evacuation. In likelihood the count will unfortunately be higher; I hope we don’t get to your “thousands”, and it will become clear that lives could have been saved. I know that. My point is not that nothing could have been done. My point is that fault that more was not done lies closer to the local level than the federal. Plus, I suspect failure at the local level is a harder reality to deal with than failure at the top, an inept President or an incompetent FEMA Director.
“Autopsies are being done to check lungs, so we’ll know how many lives FEMA could have saved if it had arrived immediately and was 100% effective in its evacuation. In likelihood the count will unfortunately be higher; I hope we don’t get to your “thousands”, ….”
Check lungs, eh? So we’re only going to count deaths from drowning, are we? Not deaths from dehydration, aggravation of pre-existing medical conditions, etc.? Only those bodies whose lungs are filled with water? Yeah, okay.
“I hope we don’t get to your ‘thousands'”.
I hope not either, although I wouldn’t bet on it (unless of course we’re only counting drownings).
“Good for you, Karl. My hat is off to you and any others who helped reduce inequality as a result of this discussion.”
Oh, you mean this particular discussion. Well, as a result of this particular discussion I have just donated $20,000 to the Democratic Party’s war chest, even though I despise the Democrats. How do ya like them apples, Chuck?
“Well, as a result of this particular discussion I have just donated $20,000 to the Democratic Party’s war chest, even though I despise the Democrats. How do ya like them apples, Chuck?”
I applaud your efforts. Though I would have hoped that you could save your money. Surely the voting public wouldn’t return the Republicans next time after all that’s happened, but I guess that’s what people thought last time.
Can I just say that as an non-American, this discussion and the previous one are really very depressing. I think I’m gaining an insight into the level of political discourse in the states.
I second PM, and further note that such political discourse has its second home firmly planted in cyberspace. I thought vaguely about starting a blog the other week, and since there would be no point unless it was a place for discussion, I have been taking note of the discussions on a whole series of ‘reasonable’ sites. But what I see is moderators [and moderates] spending huge amounts of time and energy dealing with a–holes of the most offensive kind: who, as far as I can see, exist only to pollute intelligent discussion, and learn nothing from it except how easy that is to do. So I shan’t bother. OB, it’s great that you do, but I don’t know why you put up with it…
Bill,
“The only one who has argued how FEMA could react more expeditiously without eyes and ears on the ground was Ophelia. She says launch FEMA not after the disaster has struck but before, when the order to evacuate is issued.”
I said no such thing!
Can nobody bloody read?! I’m getting really tired of arguing with people who read X and come up with &*%zzzzph. What did I in fact say?
“It’s my impression (backed up by what Don just quoted) that Fema has overall responsibility for disaster planning and response, but I don’t know who should have made a plan to evacuate carless, ill, infirm etc people who couldn’t get out on their own. All I know is, someone damn well should have!”
That’s what I think. I was thinking it last Sunday, while listening to the news of the approach of Katrina and the mandatory total evacuation – what about people with no cars? I wondered immediately. Is there any provision for them? There’s no mention of any. Why not?
I still don’t know the answer to that, I don’t know why that’s not part of the emergency plan, and I also don’t know whose responsibility it is.
And something else you said –
“In fact, we do provide stuff and services for people without means.”
That’s way too sweeping, and too cheery. We provide some stuff and some services, for some people with no means at all – but as little as possible, and less all the time. Your experience in 1973 is not all that relevant, on account of how this is not 1973! (You do realize the Bush admin keeps cutting back on these parts of the budget don’t you? That he wants new cuts to Medicaid even as we speak?)
PM, the level of political discourse in the US is…well below sea level.
Dave,
You have a point. But I put up with it because it’s usually better than that around here.
Dave
I’ve found the same thing in usually well-managed blogs, but it has been an emotional week. Normally rational people have been lashing out and, of course, the trolls are out in force.
Larry Johnson at TPM Cafe has a detailed post relating to jurisdiction and responsibility in the event of major disaster, based on the 2004 National Response Plan. For example;
■ Standard procedures regarding requests for assistance may be expedited or, under extreme circumstances, suspended in the immediate aftermath of an event of
catastrophic magnitude.
■ Identified Federal response resources will deploy and begin necessary operations as required to commence life-safety activities.
■ Notification and full coordination with States will occur, but the coordination process must not delay or impede the rapid deployment and use of critical resources.
The same report recognises that, almost by definition, a catastrophic event ‘almost immediately exceeds resources normally available to State, local, tribal, and private-sector authorities in the impacted area; ‘
Ophelia, you have said variously:
“Bill, that’s just nonsense. That is exactly what Fema is indeed expected to do – that’s what it’s there for, that’s its job. It is indeed expected ‘to anticipate failure of state and local planning and, therefore, to have contingency plans in place.’ That’s precisely its job description….”
| OB | 2005-09-04 – 17:07:33 |
“Also for the record – I’m not in the lest invested in blaming Bush and not blaming locals or Democrats. It’s my impression (backed up by what Don just quoted) that Fema has overall responsibility for disaster planning and response, but I don’t know who should have made a plan to evacuate carless, ill, infirm etc people who couldn’t get out on their own. All I know is, someone damn well should have!
It’s truly hard to believe that wasn’t obvious. Especially since it was well known and discussed! That National Geographic article from last year says 200,000 people would left behind in an evacuation. This was not a secret! How could there not be a plan in place?”
| OB | 2005-09-04 – 18:28:31 |
Clearly, you expect FEMA to have a plan for the evacuation of the helpless of New Orleans. You are not specific about the trigger for the plan, so I assumed it would be carried out so as the 200,000 probable “immobiles” would be evacuated along with the rest of the city, i.e. after the evacuation order and before the storm struck, my apologies for misunderstanding you.
I respect that this is a “to hell with realism” argument so we are free to go right to the top “suits” to blame – Allan Certoff, George Bush, Mike Brown. My only point in all these posts is that this accomplishes nothing. It is pointless ventilation that quickly becomes political.
The issue is one of process. FEMA is a federal agency. It has programs for which states and municipalities make application. Applications are complex and require the serious sort of planning that you call for. Issues of accountability, verifiability, proper authority and chain of command, scope and magnitude, etc., all have to be addressed. Funds have to be established, and bank accounts; key contacts must be maintained. There are joint run-throughs – you allude to one. The State of Louisiana and the City of New Orleans were deficient.
This doesn’t mean that FEMA can’t act. It can, just not as quickly. In the absence of local authority FEMA must establish its own authority in the state. Remember, here in the US there is a jurisdictional issue you do not have in the UK. In the presence of civil disorder FEMA, with no armed enforcement capability, requires a call up of the National Guard – who arrived in New Orleans Friday morning. The Guard is a really blunt instrument. You may remember Kent State, Ohio, in the spring of 1970.
I can imagine steam coming out of your ears hearing about red tape, but hold on. In NY on 9/11 FEMA worked seamlessly. Within hours emergency response teams were coming from all over the country and emergency supplies were streaming into the City. Local first responders had all the support they needed. Emergency planning for the City – magnitudes more complex than New Orleans – was all up to date.
There is a great “Why?” when it comes to New Orleans. There is talk of “entrenched corruption”, of infamous Levee Boards where money disappears like sandbags at a breach. Some things, however, are certain. Where nursing homes, hospitals and hospices are located in the path of a potential natural disaster, and there is no contingency plan, that’s a local issue. When a natural disaster strikes and the local commanding officer, the Mayor, goes to the front line instead of the command center – this time in Lafayette – that’s a local issue. When local policemen refuse to stay at their posts, the problem is local. Where an entire inner city is allowed to rot and is used and ignored by local politicians for decades, the problem is local.
Federal agencies can act like lightening when they are thus empowered. The US Coast Guard flew into New Orleans as soon as trailing winds from the hurricane allowed. It has never stopped flying rescue missions. FEMA worked exactly like this in NY. If you think that the figureheads at the tops of the agencies caused the 60 to 72 hour delay in New Orleans you’re simply not understanding the process.
Dang, Bill, don’t you have anything better to do? Thousands of words to defend Fema? I hate to tell you, but people are raising an occasional eyebrow at Fema’s performance in other places too, it’s not just here. Even some quite well-known newspapers and tv and radio stations are not entirely impressed by Fema right now. Maybe you should rush off to set them straight, too.
“The issue is one of process. FEMA is a federal agency. It has programs for which states and municipalities make application.”
Oh my god. Death by bureaucracy. ‘Not my jurisdiction governor, don’t do search and rescue south of the river.’
“There is a great “Why?” when it comes to New Orleans. There is talk of “entrenched corruption”, of infamous Levee Boards where money disappears like sandbags at a breach. Some things, however, are certain. Where nursing homes, hospitals and hospices are located in the path of a potential natural disaster, and there is no contingency plan, that’s a local issue. When a natural disaster strikes and the local commanding officer, the Mayor, goes to the front line instead of the command center – this time in Lafayette – that’s a local issue. When local policemen refuse to stay at their posts, the problem is local. Where an entire inner city is allowed to rot and is used and ignored by local politicians for decades, the problem is local.”
Fly, my pretties! Fly, fly!
The mayor, Nagin, a republican at heart, shares culpability too. The weekend before Katrina hit, he was hesitant about ordering a mandatory evacuation order (only doing so on Sunday) primarily because he was concerned about the fallout from the businesses that would have been affected and the city’s liability thereof. He seems to have lost control of his policeforce since a significant portion of it went missing. The relations between the Mayor and the Governor of LA seem pretty antagonistic too, going by his recent outbursts. Total lack of leadership on all levels!
Fema, pre 9/11 was a very different agency to what it became post 9/11. Ex head, De Witt, bemoans how it was dissected and enfeebled under the DoHS and surely, this has some bearing on its poor response in this emergency.
I do not understand why so many people believe that gross incompetence and cold indifference are the exclusive property of one political party. It is obvious that the local authorities in New Orleans have bungled their jobs. The mayor and the police chief should be investigated and, if enough evidence of malfeasance is found, prosecuted. It is also obvious that the FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security have bungled their jobs. Since the Bush administration created the DoHS and re-organized the FEMA (which, before the re-organization, seems to have been a fairly effective agency) and put inexperienced people in charge (apparently as a reward for political favors), the Bush administration should be investigated and, if enough evidence of malfeasance is found, prosecuted. Cronyism and corruption, whether at the local or national level, threatens our very survival and must be rooted out.
Brian, I don’t think anyone believes that the local politicians are blameless. But it is the federal government that has the resources and the ultimate responsibility to intervene when they fail. The reason you’re seing so much focus on it is that there seems to be a concerted effort to try and exhonerate the federal government of any blame in this matter, which is so unbelievable that it hardly seems relevant to say ‘no the federal government does bear lots of the responsibility for this, but yes, the local government also bears responsibility’. That, and it is obvious to what extent the federal government has failed at this stage, but less obvious how local government failed until we have a better idea what went on immediately before and in the aftermath.
Brian: Fine by me if we go after both the mayor and Bush on criminal charges. As you say, it’s not an either/or thing. I’m just snarking at those commenters who think Bush & the Feds should be spared criticism. Mighty fishy notion, that. Rove’s minions are out in force, but they shall labor to no avail.
You bet – federal, local, Republicans, Democrats – nail them all. Who sent everyone to the Superdome without provisioning and staffing it properly? Who neglected to do anything about evacuating people without cars or unable to drive? Who actually decided not to do anything about that? Nail all of them! But Bush did plenty – cutting funding for prevention, and trashing FEMA.
If you want to know what the New Orleans authorities should have done look here: http://www.cityofno.com/portal.aspx?portal=46&tabid=26
This is their emergency plan – but they appear to have ignored it.
More on this and the implications here:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005372.php
Finally (and if the comments so far have been bad wait till I mention CUBA) this report from Oxfam America describes the Cuban approach.
http://www.oxfamamerica.org/newsandpublications/publications/research_reports/pdfs/cuba_hur_eng.pdf
– and before anyone gets into rant mode consider this:
In July Cuba evacuated 660,000 people before being hit by a Category 4 hurricane, and suffered a total of ten casualties.
That emergency plan is bizarre. There’s a lot of detail, but I see very little about the actual mechanics of evacuating people who don’t have cars.
It does say the Transit authority is supposed to make evacuation buses available though. I wonder if it did. I sure haven’t heard anything about it if so. All I’ve heard is that Greyhound, Amtrak, and all the airlines shut down Sunday evening.