tired of hearing the phrase "This shouldn't be happening in America.."

[stevenpensacola]

Does this statement not bother anyone else? Do we really think we're better than the people who are living in what we call "third world countries"?

I understand what's being said when people say "This is America, how could this happen?"....but is this not a prideful, even prejudice statement?

Just something to think about.....

[gina2000]

We have the resources to do it better. Supposedly, we also have the expertise to limit and minimize loss during a crisis situation. So, yes, I think the phrase used with that context in mind is accurate.

Your interpretation of the statement suggests that we are superior people. My interpretation suggests something completely different.

[kejoda]

Gina is reading my mind again.;)

[janette]

I agree with Gina, it's not about being better. We've got more resources than any other country in the world right now. I don't understand how babies were dying of heat / lack of water in a shelter in this country. This tragedy shows us that even with all of the resources we can still be helpless. I can't imagine how those parent's felt in the superdome / convention center unable to help their children. I expect the death tole for the elderly to be overwhelming. If we can't protect the weakest among us, who are we to call anyone else a lesser country?

[PixieDust32]

Does this statement not bother anyone else? Do we really think we're better than the people who are living in what we call "third world countries"?

I understand what's being said when people say "This is America, how could this happen?"....but is this not a prideful, even prejudice statement?

Just something to think about.....

I agree! We are in the same planet right??? Yes, we do have more resources to prevent not the hurricane but to take care of the peope before and after the hurricanes or any other natural disasters.

[minniepumpernickel]

No, this should not be happening in America. I totally agree with Gina. I hope that they do an investigation. We have the ability to cure and prevent a lot of diseases not to be responsible for starting epidemics due to bad conditions. It's absolutely appalling!

[va32h]

I agree that I am tired of hearing this too. This shouldn't be happening anywhere.

Yes, it is shocking to see children suffering; people homeless and without food. Sadly, even before the hurricane, there were people, including children in this country who were already homeless, already hungry.

This already does happen in America. This is just a larger scale, and it's on TV 24/7 for all to see.

[PixieDust32]

I agree that I am tired of hearing this too. This shouldn't be happening anywhere.

Yes, it is shocking to see children suffering; people homeless and without food. Sadly, even before the hurricane, there were people, including children in this country who were already homeless, already hungry.

This already does happen in America. This is just a larger scale, and it's on TV 24/7 for all to see.

AMEN!!

We know things are there, but if we don't see we don't feel. Its like the war, everybody was freaking out of the images from Irak, my DH a war veteran told me that, war is not pretty, is brutal, is nasty, we just didn't see it on TV 24/7 before.

[Shagley]

Does this statement not bother anyone else? Do we really think we're better than the people who are living in what we call "third world countries"?

I understand what's being said when people say "This is America, how could this happen?"....but is this not a prideful, even prejudice statement?

Just something to think about.....

I have even said this myself, and it has nothing to do with prejudice. I can't believe it because we are in such a rich country. We are not any better than anyone else on the planet, but we have a heck of a lot more money and resources than the "third world countries".

[ThAnswr]

Does this statement not bother anyone else? Do we really think we're better than the people who are living in what we call "third world countries"?

I understand what's being said when people say "This is America, how could this happen?"....but is this not a prideful, even prejudice statement?

Just something to think about.....

I don't think it has anything to do with prejudice. It has to do with the fact that we have the resources. We have the money. We have the planes, trains, buses, food, water, medical supplies, etc.

The only missing was the competence to do the job.

And, no, this shouldn't be happening in America. This is a disgrace.

[Free4Life11]

I think a better way to say it is that this shouldn't happen ANYWHERE, let alone one of the richest countries in the world.

[ThAnswr]

Do we really think we're better than the people who are living in what we call "third world countries"?

We are not better, but we are definitely better off.

And that's the whole point of "This shouldn't be happening in America".

[CarolA]

Does this statement not bother anyone else? Do we really think we're better than the people who are living in what we call "third world countries"?

I understand what's being said when people say "This is America, how could this happen?"....but is this not a prideful, even prejudice statement?

Just something to think about.....


THis is not PREJUDICE!!! It's the truth.. We are the country that comes to the aid of others and we can't help our own people.

Plus do you REALLY think that folks in "third world" think that these things should happen to them???

[bajanswife]

I think a better way to say it is that this shouldn't happen ANYWHERE, let alone one of the richest countries in the world.

I like this one!

I have been known to say "how could that happen in America" too, though, only out of surprise, not prejudice. I was quite frankly scared by America's inability to handle this disaster better than it did. Why? Because it shows me what might happen in my tiny country that doesn't have even a tiny portion of the resources that the U.S. does. We aren't exactly third world, but we aren't first world either. There have been catastrophic hurricanes in other Caribbean islands, but none of them were reported on by the media on such a scale as Katrina was in the U.S., so it wasn't really brought home to us exactly what could happen in vivid detail. In our case, we cannot evacuate by road or rail - imagine trying to get approx 260K people off an island via air and sea only! We would have to take shelter and hope for the best, and wait for the planes and ships to arrive from overseas with supplies after the hurricane has passed. There may literally be no safe place on our island to store supplies for 260K people in a cat 4 or 5 hurricane - this is one reason we would need so much help from others! I thought the U.S. had it made because everything they need is so accessible. Guess I was wrong!

[DawnCt1]

At this point yes. I think the response from the public and private sector, from churches, synagogues, other places of worship has been unprecedented. Volunteers are flooding into the Gulf states. I can't drive from one end of my small town to another without passing an opportunity to donate food, supplies or cash. Our President and our Congress will have no hesitation in providing the funds necessary to get not only the cities but the citizens back on their feet. I am proud of the outpouring of support, caring and funds that are flooding into those in need. I think that this tragedy will evolve into America at its best!

[mom2alix]

I like this one!

I have been known to say "how could that happen in America" too, though, only out of surprise, not prejudice. I was quite frankly scared by America's inability to handle this disaster better than it did. Why? Because it shows me what might happen in my tiny country that doesn't have even a tiny portion of the resources that the U.S. does. We aren't exactly third world, but we aren't first world either. There have been catastrophic hurricanes in other Caribbean islands, but none of them were reported on by the media on such a scale as Katrina was in the U.S., so it wasn't really brought home to us exactly what could happen in vivid detail. In our case, we cannot evacuate by road or rail - imagine trying to get approx 260K people off an island via air and sea only! We would have to take shelter and hope for the best, and wait for the planes and ships to arrive from overseas with supplies after the hurricane has passed. There may literally be no safe place on our island to store supplies for 260K people in a cat 4 or 5 hurricane - this is one reason we would need so much help from others! I thought the U.S. had it made because everything they need is so accessible. Guess I was wrong!

I think you're right there. I don't think it's prejudice when people say this, but surprise. Most Americans would understand that it might take a day or two to get to you in Barbados to help since we need to "get there". I think a lot of us are surprised that it took so long to get help to our own people.

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I anticipated it would take 1-2 days to get to those affected by Katrina---flood waters or not. Days 4 and 5--is just too long "in America". It has nothing to do with that we are better than anybody else..just that in "rescue" mode--it doesn't and shouldn't take that long to get to someone when you know exactly where they are and how to get there.

[ThAnswr]

At this point yes. I think the response from the public and private sector, from churches, synagogues, other places of worship has been unprecedented. Volunteers are flooding into the Gulf states. I can't drive from one end of my small town to another without passing an opportunity to donate food, supplies or cash. Our President and our Congress will have no hesitation in providing the funds necessary to get not only the cities but the citizens back on their feet. I am proud of the outpouring of support, caring and funds that are flooding into those in need. I think that this tragedy will evolve into America at its best!

The donations from private citizens to our schools was phenomenal last year. Remember, we lost 8 schools and 6 have to be completely rebuilt. We had tons and tons of supplies, textbooks, etc., that came from all over the world. People dug deep into their wallets and their good will.

But, and there's always a but, if Charley was any indication, I wouldn't count too much on real dollars coming from Congress or the administration. They may've voted for the money and they may've signed off on it, but God only knows where it went. For example, storm clean up is FEMA's job. They did half a job and the taxpayers of Charlotte county had to pony up more money to get the job done. We still have yet to be reimbursed. Millions of FEMA dollars went for Charley wind damage in Miami-Dade county. There was no wind damage from Charley in Miami-Dade. And it goes on and on.

Back to the OP, it shouldn't happen in America.

[Viking]

At this point yes. I think the response from the public and private sector, from churches, synagogues, other places of worship has been unprecedented. Volunteers are flooding into the Gulf states. I can't drive from one end of my small town to another without passing an opportunity to donate food, supplies or cash. Our President and our Congress will have no hesitation in providing the funds necessary to get not only the cities but the citizens back on their feet. I am proud of the outpouring of support, caring and funds that are flooding into those in need. I think that this tragedy will evolve into America at its best!

Are you talking about the funds your president DID NOT give the area to be properly prepared for a storm like Katrina because he needed the cash for his his war?
Will not hesitate? What do you call five days to get help into the area? German and American navy vessels were faster in the Tsunami-affected areas than that.
You wouldn't recognize the truth if it bit you in the ankle :rolleyes:

[totalia]

I agree with gina.

[N.Bailey]

I just replied with pretty much this exact phrase in another thread a few 2nds ago. When I say that I'm appalled that this could happen in this country, I'm not meaning that we're superior at all. When you have citizens of this country held at gun point and told they can't cross a bridge to safety, I think that is not something that should happen in THIS country. It has nothing to do with being better, but I suspect that's what takes place in oppressed counties and should never happen here at home.

MOO though, you're free to disagree.

[poohandwendy]

When you have citizens of this country held at gun point and told they can't cross a bridge to safety, I think that is not something that should happen in THIS country. And maybe it didn't? But it could happen anywhere at any time. Why do we think we are immune to bad people making bad decisions? Isn't that universal?

[N.Bailey]

And maybe it didn't? But it could happen anywhere at any time. Why do we think we are immune to bad people making bad decisions? Isn't that universal?

Are you asking if maybe it didn't happen in this country? I heard many talking heads state that these people weren't allowed to cross that bridge. Geraldo said it more than a dozen times alone.

[totalia]

I think it means that its appauling that something like this (the gvt response, not the hurricane itself) should happen in a first world country by a gvt that has spent billions creating an organization that is supposed to help deal with disasters immediately.

So yes, especially in America this shouldn't have happened. What use is an organization that takes that long to answer when their whole purpose has been to do exactly what they should have been doing during this disaster?

Where is all that money that was spent? And why did it take so long to start the rescue?

[poohandwendy]

Are you asking if maybe it didn't happen in this country? I heard many talking heads state that these people weren't allowed to cross that bridge. Geraldo said it more than a dozen times alone.
Actually, no I wasn't. I was addressing the idea that we are somehow immune to bad things happening here in America. Of course that could have happened. It could happen again. And again and again. We can make laws...but that will not stop it. It still 'could' happen.

I guess I liken it to pedophilia. It is disgusting that anyone can do that to a child, I cannot understand it. But, I accept that it is reality. And I know there is no way to prevent it from EVER happening again. We can do what we can to try to prevent it, but sadly...it is inevitable as long as people have the desire/will and opportunity.

My point is that America is not 'special' in a way that keeps us protected from bad things and bad people.

[N.Bailey]

Actually, no I wasn't. I was addressing the idea that we are somehow immune to bad things happening here in America. Of course that could have happened. It could happen again. And again and again. We can make laws...but that will not stop it. It still 'could' happen.

I guess I liken it to pedophilia. It is disgusting that anyone can do that to a child, I cannot understand it. But, I accept that it is reality. And I know there is no way to prevent it from EVER happening again. We can do what we can to try to prevent it, but sadly...it is inevitable as long as people have the desire/will and opportunity.

My point is that America is not 'special' in a way that keeps us protected from bad things and bad people.

Well, I can agree with your logic, but it still should not happen in this country. That doesn't mean it won't, but it means, it shouldn't, and yes, I am totally shocked that it has happened here at home.

[totalia]

I think your missing the point poohandwendy.

[poohandwendy]

I think your missing the point poohandwendy.No, actually I am not. We have so much money, we are a world power, we pay taxes, we elect people to make these decisions, we are above this and that....yada yada yada...

I disagree, I think we are naive to think that we can be prepared for anything. This was a HUGE hurricane disaster followed by the worst case scenario (levees failing)...a really, really big one. I would be surprised if we couldn't handle a small one...but this one was BIG!

Yes, we are more prepared than 3rd world countries. (I would love to see proof that another country would have handled this better, haven't seen it) But, we simply will not and cannot prepare for anything and everything. We had rules in place and they failed. We failed to communicate and we failed to pull it together quickly. I do not believe for a minute that everyone was sitting around with their thumbs up their butts saying, 'who cares'...I think we were once again arrogant and thought we could handle it. Guess what, we couldn't. We didn't.

We need to try harder and get more organized, but to be honest...there WILL come another day where we will be sitting arornd saying, "Why did this happen in America". We are not perfect and never will be.

[totalia]

Well said. I can't argue with you. Very well said.

[N.Bailey]

No, actually I am not. We have so much money, we are a world power, we pay taxes, we elect people to make these decisions, we are above this and that....yada yada yada...

I disagree, I think we are naive to think that we can be prepared for anything. This was a HUGE hurricane disaster followed by the worst case scenario (levees failing)...a really, really big one. I would be surprised if we couldn't handle a small one...but this one was BIG!

Yes, we are more prepared than 3rd world countries. (I would love to see proof that another country would have handled this better, haven't seen it) But, we simply will not and cannot prepare for anything and everything. We had rules in place and they failed. We failed to communicate and we failed to pull it together quickly. I do not believe for a minute that everyone was sitting around with their thumbs up their butts saying, 'who cares'...I think we were once again arrogant and thought we could handle it. Guess what, we couldn't. We didn't.

We need to try harder and get more organized, but to be honest...there WILL come another day where we will be sitting arornd saying, "Why did this happen in America". We are not perfect and never will be.


I actually do agree with you. It was that the failure afterward seemed to be on every level though and that's what's so hard to understand. It's more like, what didn't fail? We're suppose to be so prepared right now with terrorism and all, but how prepared are we? Really? It's a frightening thought!

Let me ask you this. Directly after the towers fell, how appalled do you think Americans would be if those people were blocked from running down the street to safety? It sounds ludicrous, doesn't it?! That about sums up my feelings concerning not allowing the people of NO to cross that bridge. Again, I will eat crow if it turns out to be false. Right now however, it really makes me angry.

[poohandwendy]

Let me ask you this. Directly after the towers fell, how appalled do you think Americans would be if those people were blocked from running down the street to safety? It sounds ludicrous, doesn't it?! That about sums up my feelings concerning not allowing the people of NO to cross that bridge. Again, I will eat crow if it turns out to be false. Right now however, it really makes me angry.
Well, at face value that makes me mad too. But, if I found out later that they were stopped because the officers thought that there was a different danger down the road, I would see a bigger picture. (not saying that is the case, just giving a hypothetical)

My point is, we don't have all of the facts, we don't know why things went down the way they did. Until we do, I will reserve judgement. That is all. I am not saying that it wasn't a huge atrocity that occurred, I am sayung I will wait and see the whole picture before deciding.

[N.Bailey]

Well, at face value that makes me mad too. But, if I found out later that they were stopped because the officers thought that there was a different danger down the road, I would see a bigger picture. (not saying that is the case, just giving a hypothetical)

My point is, we don't have all of the facts, we don't know why things went down the way they did. Until we do, I will reserve judgement. That is all. I am not saying that it wasn't a huge atrocity that occurred, I am sayung I will wait and see the whole picture before deciding.

Well, I can't disagree and I've always respected your opinion in the past and that's not going to change anytime soon. You're always a voice of reason.

[poohandwendy]

Awww, thanks Nance. I respect your opinion too. One thing is FOR SURE. We are not organized enough and our communications on all levels are lacking, bigtime. THAT is something we CAN do something about.

[toto2]

These are exerps from a very good piece I just read on commondreams. I know , it is a bit long , but I think the author makes some valid points. You should read the whole piece at:http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0906-33.htm

I think it starts to anwser some of the question: Why is this happening in America !

"What we are witnessing in New Orleans is nothing less than the abject failure of government at the one task it is supposed to do, deal with problems too big for private enterprise to handle. We pay taxes, we follow rules, and get things that we normally would not do for ourselves in return. It is a social contract, and in the wake of hurricane Katrina, it was a worthless piece of paper."

"The point of the planning is to do things that don't necessarily make direct or short term sense, or sometimes ever pay off at all, but when they are needed, there is no substitute. There is waste and overkill, but that is exactly the point. You could argue that having 10,000 nuclear missiles is complete nonsense, how many were actually used over the last 50 or so years? Why did we bother? Why do we have tanks, and why do we train soldiers to kill? What are the odds of someone actually threatening us?"

"The short answer is pretty damn small, but the consequences of us not having those tanks and nukes when Oceania comes calling is pretty high. Same for disaster relief. As I write this, there are tens of thousands of people trapped in an increasingly lawless city. Relief efforts are incompetent, underwhelming, and chaotic, if they are there at all. People know where the victims are and how to help them, but for some reason, no one is. This is what I mean by abject governmental failure.

Why did this happen? No, not trucks, palates of water, or the government not allowing relief helicopters to fly when our president went sight-seeing, that is all effects, not the root of the problem. The roots go much deeper, and are a lot more nebulous by design. Before we get into that, as of Sunday morning, a week later, let's look at what we know.

First, the storm was known about days before it happened. Unlike the devastation in Indonesia, we saw this one coming a long way away, and were more than able to tell everyone who cared to listen to get out of the area. Most did. Many could not.

The next thing was the effects of the hurricane were predicted time and time again, and if you read things like this and dozens of other scientific views of the situation, it becomes very clear that it was not an obscure problem. There was enough hard science before, and the devastation sadly showed that the warnings were dead on accurate, no one can honestly say this was not predicted. Specifically. Repeatedly.

Then there were the barriers put up to defend against this. As I was saying, the government is there to defend against things we can't reasonably do ourselves, and they used to try and do the right thing for the right reason. Some people have to make tough decisions, partly economic, partly human, partly scientific, to deal with more scenarios than you and I can contemplate. In this case, the city was designed to hold back a category there storm, anything more powerful had plans to deal with the damage afterwards.

There are the general preparedness plans, when the proverbial 'bad things' happen, people get hurt. Towns get burned, flooded, flattened or covered with locusts, and people get injured or killed also. You have to deal with each situation individually, but they tend to need many of the same things, food, water, medicine, shelter, electricity and sometimes a hand to hold. This is why stockpiles are so damn important, and why if they have to go to waste, it is probably money well spent.

In summary, you have a problem that was known in advance, a scenario that was foreseen for years if not decades, defenses in place, and mechanisms for coping at the ready. It sounds good enough on paper, but why are there people starving to death a week later in a country that anyone can drive across in 3 days? We can set up a tent city in Indonesia in 24 hours, but we can't send bottled water to a capital city in a week. What went wrong?

To start out, one of the biggest culprits is privatization. No, I am not *****ing about the time honored tradition of nepotism and political cronyism, even if it becoming more flagrant and widespread by the day, but just the simple idea behind it. It is reason number one.

The point of privatization is the beloved free enterprise, something I am a wholehearted supporter and practitioner of, but is not the right tool for this job. For the same reason that communism will never work on anything but a small scale outpost, here and there, complete capitalism won't work either. The reason for this is human nature. "

"That in a nutshell is why we need governments who will occasionally waste money in our name. They play the odds that no rational person on their own would, and we all benefit as a group. If you throw that to the whims of the free market, for the same reason that they won't plan out more than a year, they won't do what it takes to protect you.

When the government privatizes the disaster planning, abatement and relief efforts, it puts your life in the hands of the lowest bidder. If the goal of privatization is to save money, that is an easily achievable goal. Imagine that there are three companies bidding to plan and build a levee for the government. One has a low cost bid that should be adequate, one has a much more expensive and sounder plan, the last has a super-ultra levee that costs more than twice the lowest bid, and will take longer to build.

The low bid obviously wins because cost is the name of the game. If your house is sitting in the shadow of that levee, which one would you want built? Would you agree that the community sitting downstream would be well advised to pay an extra $100 a year in taxes over the next 20 years for the super-ultra levee?

Now, imagine if the low bid levee costs $10 million to build, and the expensive one costs $50. The odds of the cheap one being breached are once in 50 years, not a bad number if I do say so myself. Now imagine that the odds of the bigger one are one in 500 years. To take a charitable number for Katrina, there was about $100 billion in damage, or at least that is the number floating around now, something that probably does not take national economic impact into account.

So a cheap levee costs about $200,000 a year and prevents 10,000 times its cost in damage. The big levee costs $1 million a year and prevents that same cost over a much longer period. The payback of the bigger levee is immeasurably better, but under privatization, it will never be built. This is the system being co-opted for the profit of a few at the expense of many, exactly what it is not supposed to do, much less be used for. "

"Money is something that capitalism is really good at, and the free market is really good at optimizing for it, but the government by and large sucks at this. They are pretty good at preserving life, sometimes above and beyond rational reasons to do so, something private enterprise is very bad at.

Now, if it is your life that is hanging in the balance, which would you want backing you? This is one of the reasons that the military specs things out in ways that make people scratch their heads and question the sanity of anyone involved. When you have a wounded soldier in the back of your shot up Hummer, overbuilding suddenly makes a lot of sense, and you are probably very glad that it didn't stop long after a normal car would have expired.

On a micro level, the policies that lead to people coming home alive are wasteful, stupid and economically insane. Free enterprise would never entertain this as an option, much less seriously consider it. Governments make it a priority. Currency is a fungible asset, for the most part, if someone cheats you, you go to court, get your money back, and move on. Life is not as fungible. If you die, and they rectify the problem that caused your death, you are still quite dead. "

Governments are tasked with this, equipped to deal with it, and are expected to do so even if the cost outweighs the benefits, because you can't undo a dead body. Now, with the rampant privatization of FEMA, if you do a little searching, you will see a few choice quotes on the subject from the last few appointees, they took the agency from what it should be doing to what it should not be doing. They undoubtedly saved money doing so, but several orders of magnitude less than the cost of Katrina clean up. Is this money well spent?

So, again, why did this happen? Why the rush to privatize? Philosophy and priorities to start with, and to a lesser extent, culture. The current administration, and his immediate predecessors, see the capitalist system as the only way to deal with any problem. For the rest of this paper, I will assume no wrongdoing on their parts, no kickbacks or nepotism, just an honest opinion and philosophical difference with the way things used to be done.

First came the diversion of resources. We are at war, statements of 'mission accomplished' not withstanding, and it is a very expensive and draining war, with no end in sight. The war is being fought by two main groups, the regular military and the National Guard. The former should be doing the fighting, the latter is doing more than they should.

A large percentage of the National Guard, an organization tasked with dealing with situations like Katrina, is overseas. More importantly, their equipment, designated to be used in disasters like the current one, is with them. The soldiers that remain are ill equipped to handle problems, much less ones across areas the size of England. Add in that their ranks are depleted and there is a fairly large disincentive for new recruits to join, and you have a painfully thin line of defense.

Funds have gone with the equipment, there is little political will to plan for an eventuality that may not happen for decades while your voter's children are getting shot at. Again, the newspapers are filled with fund diversions and reappropriations, usually for the Iraq war, but other reasons pop up now and again. This is a failure of government to protect it's citizens.

Then come a more troubling and vastly more nebulous problem. The current administration seems to have an absolute and unshakable belief that the free market will solve all problems. I agree, and with some limits, share that opinion. Where I draw the line is where government should step in and do the things that do not make direct economic sense.

Highways between small cities, airports and the previously mentioned nuclear missiles are not something that any citizen or company would probably build. Electricity to rural areas is another good example, same with phones to people living in rural North Dakota. Give me a business case for running a power line 20 miles to a single customer. Government mandates that it be done, at substantial cost to the entire user base, flying in the face of free markets. "

"When you apply the same thinking to disaster planning and relief, you end up with body bags and grieving people. What is the economic benefit for a company to save the dying in New Orleans? They can't pay, if they had money, they probably would have been able to heed the evacuation call. Saving the people, caring for them, providing shelter, and long term rebuilding is a large cost, and that cost has absolutely zero benefit to any capitalistic entity not getting paid to do it.

If you base your disaster planning on saving of money rather than the saving of lives, you end up with the potential for a New Orleans. What are the odds? Fairly low. What is the savings? Fairly high. What is the cost for abject failure? Barely calculable, and a double digit percentage of the countries GDP.

"Now, the current administration is all for privatization and calculated savings. This is a perfectly valid philosophy on running a government, and one with potentially large paybacks. The problem is that the price of failure is absurdly high, if you don't play your cards perfectly right, the whole process will unravel."

"Can you blame the President? In a word, absolutely. The government was tasked with protecting citizens, and providing for them when the protections fail. Neither was done, in a spectacular fashion. The decisions that lead up to the disaster and tragedy were informed choices, flood control money was diverted to Iraq, contracts were handed out where it was done in house before. Wetlands were built on in places that would have lowered the storm surge for New Orleans, and other economic choices were made."


All this from :http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0906-33.htm

[DawnCt1]

Toto, the article you posted was indeed lengthy, wordy and well written, however, it was factually incorrect and the conclusions are wrong. Just a few things that have been repeated ad nauseum, but I will try one more time;

1. The initial disaster response is the responsibility of the local and state governments.
2. An evacuation plan developed by NOLA was not implemented.
3. What was "privatized"? FEMA is not a private organization. The Coast Guard, the National Guard, etc are not private organizations.
4. The levee issues date back for 40 years, through numerous Congresses, presidents and state and local governments.
5. If money was poured into those levees 4 years ago in vast amounts, the problem still wouldn't have been solved. It would have still breeched.
6. Most of the troops that could help "weren't in Iraq".
7. The governor did not want to relinquish her power to invite the feds in, even though she was contacted before the storm.
8. There was water, there was food in trucks ready to go to the Superdome by the Red Cross. The Louisana Dept of Homeland Security, AKA the governor's office did not want the food to be a "magnet" and draw more people there. They would not let the trucks in. They wanted the people out.
This information is on the Red Cross web site.
That's just a start. I think when you look, you will see that a lot of the issues start and end right in Louisiana.

[toto2]

Dawn , I understand those things . I think that the piece is more about the situation about emergency responce in general and how it has been weaken and the impact it has.

As to who did what , when , why , how , we will know in time.

But , from what I can read now , and I will again quote:

"Bush's denigration of "bureaucracy" raises the question of the principals responsible in his own bureaucracy. Within hours of the president's statement, the Associated Press reported that FEMA director Michael Brown had waited five hours after the hurricane struck to request 1,000 workers from Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff. Part of their mission, he wrote, would be to "convey a positive image" of the administration's response.

The New Orleans Times-Picayune disclosed that Max Mayfield, head of the National Hurricane Center, briefed Brown and Chertoff before the hurricane made landfall of its potential disastrous consequences. "We were briefing them way before landfall," Mayfield said. "It's not like this was a surprise. We had in the advisories that the levee could be topped." The day after Bush's Cabinet room attack on bureaucracy, the St. Petersburg Times revealed that Mayfield had also briefed President Bush in a video conference call. "I just wanted to be able to go to sleep that night knowing that I did all I could do," Mayfield said. "


And regardin FEMA and privatization :


"After its creation in 1979, FEMA became "a political dumping ground," according to a former FEMA advisory board member. Its ineffective performance after Hurricane Hugo hit South Carolina in 1989 and Hurricane Andrew struck Florida in 1992 exposed the agency's shortcomings. Then Sen. Fritz Hollings of South Carolina called it "the sorriest bunch of bureaucratic *******es." President Clinton appointed James Lee Witt as the new director, the first one ever to have had experience in the field. Witt reinvented the agency, setting high professional standards and efficiently dealing with disasters.

FEMA's success as a showcase federal agency made it an inviting target for the incoming Bush team. Allbaugh, Bush's former campaign manager, became the new director, and he immediately began to dismantle the professional staff, privatize many functions and degrade its operations. In his testimony before the Senate, Allbaugh attacked the agency he headed as an example of unresponsive bureaucracy: "Many are concerned that Federal disaster assistance may have evolved into both an oversized entitlement program and a disincentive to effective State and local risk management. Expectations of when the Federal Government should be involved and the degree of involvement may have ballooned beyond what is an appropriate level. We must restore the predominant role of State and local response to most disasters."

After Sept. 11, 2001, FEMA was subsumed into the new Department of Homeland Security and lost its Cabinet rank. The staff was cut by more than 10 percent, and the budget has been cut every year since and most of its disaster relief efforts disbanded. "Three out of every four dollars the agency provides in local preparedness and first-responder grants go to terrorism-related activities, even though a recent Government Accountability Office report quotes local officials as saying what they really need is money to prepare for natural disasters and accidents," the Los Angeles Times reported.

After Allbaugh retired from FEMA in 2003, handing over the agency to his deputy and college roommate, Brown, he set up a lucrative lobbying firm, the Allbaugh Co., which mounts "legislative and regulatory campaigns" for its corporate clients, according its Web site. After the Iraq war, Allbaugh established New Bridge Strategies to facilitate business for contractors there. He also created Diligence, a firm to provide security to private companies operating in Iraq. Haley Barbour, the former chairman of the Republican National Committee and now governor of Mississippi, helped Allbaugh start all his ventures through his lobbying and law firm, Barbour Griffith and Rogers. Indeed, the entire Allbaugh complex is housed at Barbour Griffith and Rogers. Ed Rogers, Barbour's partner, has become a vice president of Diligence. Diane Allbaugh, Allbaugh's wife, went to work at Barbour Griffith and Rogers. And Neil Bush, the president's brother, received $60,000 as a consultant to New Bridge Strategies. "


And finally :

"Hurricane Katrina is the anti-9/11 in its divisive political effect, its unearthing of underlying domestic problems, and its disorienting impact on the president and his administration. Yet, in other ways, the failure of government before the hurricane struck is reminiscent of the failures leading into 9/11. The demotion of FEMA resembles the demotion of counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke. In both cases, the administration ignored clear warnings."


This is from :http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2005/09/08/limited_government/index.html


I know , Salon is not a nest of conservative writters , but this piece has some intersting points as well. I think both article are more about the " philosophy" of emergency management

[DawnCt1]

I can tell you for a fact that DMAT, under the direction of FEMA was activated and mobilized on August 26 and the Mass. unit arrived in Georgia on the 27th, the day before the hurricane. Prior to the hurricane, The Bush administration contacted the governor and requested to be allowed to come in an evacuate. They were rebuffed and denied entry. FEMA lost its cabinet position and came under the Dept of Homeland Security when Congress insisted on it and voted for it. It was Joe Lieberman, our Senator from Ct. who campaigned for a separate all encompassing Dept of Homeland Security. The Congress and the governors insisted that they knew their states and their needs more than the feds did and requested that the money go into state preparedness. It wasn't just for focus on terror related events but all major disasters that required a local response and or evacuation. The money wasn't cut, it was returned to the states "who knew best". With regard to what Brown did in his private, before government life, who cares. He was picked because he was a lawyer, understood rules and regulations which is sadly essential when working or running any behemoth bureaucracy and could run a company. If Katrina has "unearthed" domestic problems then perhaps no one should look any farther than New Orleans and Louisiana. For 60 years they have been under full control of the Democratic Party. I guess their method of running state and city government is what didn't work. If we send that same money back to those same people, we may as well flush it down the toilet.

[toto2]

According to the NPR

"The NRP acknowledges that response to disasters will typically occur at the lowest level possible, state, tribal and local. But it also distinguishes between smaller incidents and "Incidents of National Significance." These include "high-impact, low-probability incidents, including natural disasters and terrorist attacks that result in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the population, infrastructure, environment, economy, national morale, and/or government functions."

"In the event of an incident of national significance, the president can authorize the head of Homeland Security to "assume incident management responsibilities."

The plan specifically says, "If the president determines that an emergency exists where the primary responsibility for response rests with the Government of the United States ... the president may unilaterally direct the provision of assistance under the act, and will, if practicable, consult with the governor of the state." "

But the president , even with all the warnings coming at him did not implement this : he is after all the most powerfull man in the USA , no ?

[Tigger_Magic]

But the president , even with all the warnings coming at him did not implement this : he is after all the most powerfull man in the USA , no ? Actually, he isn't. His authority to act is limited by the Constitution and in many instances, such as this one, the federal gov't. will not act unless specifically requested to do so by the state's governor. It would be highly unlikely for any president, regardless of party affiliation, to act unilaterally without a request from the state gov't. If that happened, I could just see the talking heads getting worked up over the fact that now he's invading Louisiana! ;)

[toto2]

But it is in the NPR that the President can authorize the head of Homeland Security to "assume incident management responsibilities."

He did not have to wait to be asked for it, it is part of the this particular homesecurity law.

[Tigger_Magic]

But it is in the NPR that the President can authorize the head of Homeland Security to "assume incident management responsibilities."

He did not have to wait to be asked for it, it is part of the this particular homesecurity law. I think you may be reading more into that than is actually there. There are numerous federal laws, guidelines and regulations that dictate proper procedures for incidents like this. It's all that "red tape" that mucks up the relief efforts, but that bureaucrats feel is essential to balancing state's rights vs. the federal gov't. rights. It also tends to keep lots and lots of people employed so all the paper gets properly shuffled, filed, lost and forgotten.

This will, hopefully, be an area of research that the gov't. can work on to try to resolve discrepancies between the state and federal gov't.

[DawnCt1]

But the president , even with all the warnings coming at him did not implement this : he is after all the most powerfull man in the USA , no ?

You are seeing more than what is there. He appealed to the governor prior to the beginning of the storm. Her response; " I need 24 hours to think about it". It was time she didn't have. More money has been sent to La. to the Army Corp of Engineers than any other state. More money was sent in the last five years of the Bush administration than in the last five years of the Clinton Administration. Check the Washington Post article. What did the politicians in La. do with it? How was it diverted? Those are the questions that need to be asked.

[Tigger_Magic]

You are seeing more than what is there. He appealed to the governor prior to the beginning of the storm. Her response; " I need 24 hours to think about it". It was time she didn't have. More money has been sent to La. to the Army Corp of Engineers than any other state. More money was sent in the last five years of the Bush administration than in the last five years of the Clinton Administration. Check the Washington Post article. What did the politicians in La. do with it? How was it diverted? Those are the questions that need to be asked. Those are valid questions, but if the questions stop there, the whole story is still unknown. We must also ask some tough questions of FEMA, such as, why did it take so long to get help to the victims of Katrina? Why are there still reports of some victims -- a week later -- who are waiting for help (http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/08/katrina.forgottentown.ap/index.html)? FEMA's job is to get help -- stuff like water, ice, food, clothing, tarps for roofs, plywood for windows, pumps, generators, batteries, medical supplies, etc. to victims as fast as possible.

Tough questions are good. But tough questions must be asked not only of the politicans in Louisiana, but of those in Washington, DC as well.

[mom2alix]

Those are valid questions, but if the questions stop there, the whole story is still unknown. We must also ask some tough questions of FEMA, such as, why did it take so long to get help to the victims of Katrina? Why are there still reports of some victims -- a week later -- who are waiting for help (http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/08/katrina.forgottentown.ap/index.html)? FEMA's job is to get help -- stuff like water, ice, food, clothing, tarps for roofs, plywood for windows, pumps, generators, batteries, medical supplies, etc. to victims as fast as possible.

Tough questions are good. But tough questions must be asked not only of the politicans in Louisiana, but of those in Washington, DC as well.

A lot of people are trying to excuse FEMA on the grounds that the LA officials are responsible for everything, but that doesn't explain the problems in MS where reports are folks haven't seen ANY help yet. I agree that the Gov. of LA needs to go (and the Mayor of NO), but I don't think her and his inadequacies excuse Chertoff and Brown for their obvious inadequacies either.

I don't see why this is so partisan....There are lots of folks who need to go to the woodshed for this one and I, for one, don't care if they were dems or repubs. I feel kind of sorry for anyone who thinks no one in their particular party does anything wrong. Ask yourself, are you really so partisan that you can suspend all common sense? Right now we need to focus on fixing things, later we need an independent investigation to look at EVERYONE and make sure this doesn't happen again.

edited due to gramatical error :blush: A 10 month old trying to help you type trumps good English skills every time.

[Tigger_Magic]

I don't see why this is so partisan....There are lots of folks who need to go to the woodshed for this one and I for one don't care if they were dems or repubs. I feel kind of sorry for anyone who thinks no one in their particular party does no wrong. Ask yourself, are you really so partisan that you can suspend all common sense? Right now we need to focus on fixing things, later we need an independent investigation to look at EVERYONE and make sure this doesn't happen again. ::yes:: Well said! Sadly, however, I fear this will happen again. In the mid-90's FEMA was an independent agency and it's handling of several disasters received rare bipartisan praise. Now it's been sucked into the Dept. of Homeland Security and this is the result. It may be a simple solution but maybe FEMA needs to be it's own independent gov't. agency again. It was obviously able to work well at one time.

[DawnCt1]

Tough questions are good. But tough questions must be asked not only of the politicans in Louisiana, but of those in Washington, DC as well.

I have no doubt that those questions will be asked of FEMA. They are being asked already with the media and the Dems demanding that Brown be fired. He may indeed have to step down if he has proven to be incompetent but we are so far from that conclusion or any conclusion with regard to FEMA at this point.

[mom2alix]

I have no doubt that those questions will be asked of FEMA. They are being asked already with the media and the Dems demanding that Brown be fired. He may indeed have to step down if he has proven to be incompetent but we are so far from that conclusion or any conclusion with regard to FEMA at this point.

I don't know what excuse you think any of them can come up with that makes up for the dead babies and old people. Their job is to handle emergencies and this one has not been handled well. Do YOU think FEMA has done a good job here?

[DawnCt1]

I don't know what excuse you think any of them can come up with that makes up for the dead babies and old people. Their job is to handle emergencies and this one has not been handled well. Do YOU think FEMA has done a good job here?

We won't know if FEMA did the job they were supposed to until we find out what Louisiana did or didn't do. The Red Cross reported that they were blocked by the Louisiana Dept of Homeland Security and the state gov't. officials, from the highway, the Superdome, the Convention Center etc, because the LA Dept of Homeland Security said, " Those are areas of refuge of last resort and our plans call for those people to be moved out. If you come in, they won't move out". Basically, state officials didn't want them to be "too comfortable there". There would have been immediate assistance. Items needed for life. These supplies would have been there as soon as the winds died down...before the levees broke. The very people who were screaming and yelling about the lack of supplies, caused the lack of supplies.

[DawnCt1]

Additionally, FEMA is a coordinating agency with 2500 full time employees and 4000 on call employees. I think it may have worked better when it was a direct report to the President but now, its under homeland security. It may have to be moved back to its previous position.

[mom2alix]

We won't know if FEMA did the job they were supposed to until we find out what Louisiana did or didn't do. The Red Cross reported that they were blocked by the Louisiana Dept of Homeland Security and the state gov't. officials, from the highway, the Superdome, the Convention Center etc, because the LA Dept of Homeland Security said, " Those are areas of refuge of last resort and our plans call for those people to be moved out. If you come in, they won't move out". Basically, state officials didn't want them to be "too comfortable there". There would have been immediate assistance. Items needed for life. These supplies would have been there as soon as the winds died down...before the levees broke. The very people who were screaming and yelling about the lack of supplies, caused the lack of supplies.
And the excuse for FEMA in MS is?

http://www.news4jax.com/news/4941402/detail.html

If my state were a disaster I would want better assistance than this and we should all be looking at ways to improve things rather than making excuses for politicians.

[AuntieM03]

We won't know if FEMA did the job they were supposed to until we find out what Louisiana did or didn't do. The Red Cross reported that they were blocked by the Louisiana Dept of Homeland Security and the state gov't. officials, from the highway, the Superdome, the Convention Center etc, because the LA Dept of Homeland Security said, " Those are areas of refuge of last resort and our plans call for those people to be moved out. If you come in, they won't move out". Basically, state officials didn't want them to be "too comfortable there". There would have been immediate assistance. Items needed for life. These supplies would have been there as soon as the winds died down...before the levees broke. The very people who were screaming and yelling about the lack of supplies, caused the lack of supplies.

I heard this last night also. I am surprised more has not been said about it if there is any proof.

[sodaseller]

John Allen reports on some world perception at The Word From Rome (http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/word090905.htm) "The catastrophe placed before the eyes of the United States and the world the reality of extreme inequality, and extreme degradation," one of the paper's editorialists wrote. "It has also shown the extreme fragility of the leading country of the Western world, and of the values it wants to export and of which it pretends to be the main source, but which are absent in its own country a century and a half after the war of secession."

"America lives in every sense with Africa in its back yard," the editorialist wrote. "This situation doesn't seem to be a priority for America's ruling class; but this neglect is greatly worrying to America's real friends."

How fair those judgments are is, of course, a matter of legitimate debate, but they seemed to articulate fairly widely held perceptions.


back to top
* * *
Two Americans in Rome, one a Vatican official and the other a superior of a religious community, said they believe the response to Katrina has damaged America's reputation internationally.

Cardinal Francis Stafford, head of the Apostolic Signatura, a Vatican court that deals with matters of conscience, told NCR Sept. 6 that the response during the early days of the crisis, which saw tens of thousands of people in New Orleans left without food, water or shelter, was "reprehensible."

"It is a shame on our country," he said.

Sr. Clare Pratt, superior general of the Sisters of the Sacred Heart, told me that in her Rome community, with sisters from nine nationalities, there has been "overwhelming criticism" of the way officials responded to the crisis.


Share NCR with your Friends
Pratt said the racial dimension is a strong factor in discussions.

"You turn on the television, and you see busloads being packed up at the Hyatt, while poor blacks are left behind. Who makes these decisions, and why? It's hard to explain," Pratt said.

Pratt stressed, however, "these racial and class concerns don't outweigh people's tremendous sympathy for all concerned."

Stafford likewise said that "one picks up" a strong sense internationally of repugnance at the fact that African-Americans, poor people, and the elderly were among the most devastated.

"In every paper I have read, and in my own conversations, I find a nearly unanimous sense that the government has failed to protect its own citizens, especially the most vulnerable," Stafford said.

Stafford told NCR that the failures were especially difficult to grasp in light of a 1998 study that predicted precisely this sort of crisis if the New Orleans levees were not reinforced. He also pointed out that other nations with major urban areas below sea level, such as Holland, manage to avoid these outcomes through regular reinforcement of defensive measures.

To President George Bush's credit, Stafford said, he has acknowledged that the response was unacceptable.

Stafford linked the failures in the wake of the hurricane to a more general neglect of urban areas in the United States.

"When I visit major cities in the United States, I've been struck by the deterioration that has taken place in urban neighborhoods," Stafford said.

"I'm not talking about high-profile areas such as Baltimore's Inner Harbor, but the neighborhoods adjacent to them," he said. "I began to see this in the early 1980s, but it has become progressively worse. The reality is that the overwhelming numbers of people who live in these areas are poor and minorities."

[CookieGVB]

We are not better, but we are definitely better off.

And that's the whole point of "This shouldn't be happening in America".


::yes::

With all of our resources, this is truly a sad situation.

[peachgirl]

We won't know if FEMA did the job they were supposed to until we find out what Louisiana did or didn't do. The Red Cross reported that they were blocked by the Louisiana Dept of Homeland Security and the state gov't. officials, from the highway, the Superdome, the Convention Center etc, because the LA Dept of Homeland Security said, " Those are areas of refuge of last resort and our plans call for those people to be moved out. If you come in, they won't move out". Basically, state officials didn't want them to be "too comfortable there". There would have been immediate assistance. Items needed for life. These supplies would have been there as soon as the winds died down...before the levees broke. The very people who were screaming and yelling about the lack of supplies, caused the lack of supplies.

This is not what the head of the Red Cross said, no matter what you find on their website now.

Joining us now in Washington is Marty Evans, the President and CEO of the American Red Cross. She traveled with the president today. The Red Cross is not in New Orleans, why?

MARTY EVANS, RED CROSS PRESIDENT AND CEO: Well, Larry, when the storm came our goal was prior to landfall to support the evacuation. It was unsafe to be in the city. We were asked by the city not to be there and the Superdome was made a shelter of last resorts and, quite frankly in retrospect, it was a good idea because otherwise those people would have had no shelter at all.

We have our shelters north of the city. We're prepared as soon as they can be evacuated, we're prepared to receive them in Texas, in other states, but it was not safe to be in the city and it's not been safe to go back into the city. They were also concerned that if we located, relocated back into the city people wouldn't leave and they've got to leave.

"Well, Larry, we were asked, directed by the National Guard and the city and the state emergency management not to go into New Orleans because it was not safe. We are not a search and rescue organization. We provide shelter and basic support and so we were depending, we are depending on the state and the agencies to get people to our shelters in safe places."




http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRI.../02/lkl.01.html (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0509/02/lkl.01.html)

[sodaseller]

Truly Fascinating slideshow (http://www.kodakgallery.com/Slideshow.jsp?mode=fromshare&Uc=14ewb3ap.b147fdut&Uy=nyvoby&Ux=1)

[mamaprincess]

Peachgirl, why can I always be sure to find you at the site of a controversial issue? You love the battle! You should change your name so people have more warning. No one thinks anyone named Peachgirl will fight to the death. :rotfl2: Is that part of your tactics?

[peachgirl]

Peachgirl, why can I always be sure to find you at the site of a controversial issue? You love the battle! You should change your name so people have more warning. No one thinks anyone named Peachgirl will fight to the death. :rotfl2: Is that part of your tactics?


Sneaky, isn't it?:teeth:

[mamaprincess]

::yes::

[N.Bailey]

Truly Fascinating slideshow (http://www.kodakgallery.com/Slideshow.jsp?mode=fromshare&Uc=14ewb3ap.b147fdut&Uy=nyvoby&Ux=1)


Thanks for the link to this site. I found it amazing that this poor man stopped for gas and they didn't take cash. Who in the world doesn't take cash for crying out loud?

[Lisa loves Pooh]

sodasellar--thanks for the pics. Great to see the inside perspective from someone who was experiencing it and not just reporting it.

[sodaseller]

Some else who hates America and doesn't support the troops:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/09/katrina.natguard.ap/index.html (CNN) Lt. Gen. Steven Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau, said that "arguably" a day or so of response time was lost due to the absence of the Mississippi National Guard's 155th Infantry Brigade and Louisiana's 256th Infantry Brigade, each with thousands of troops in Iraq.

"Had that brigade been at home and not in Iraq, their expertise and capabilities could have been brought to bear," said Blum.

Blum said that to replace those units' command and control equipment, he dispatched personnel from Guard division headquarters from Kansas and Minnesota shortly after the storm struck


By tommorrow, he will be forced to backtrack and claim he was misunderstood, and the press will be excoriated by the Conintern for making this up. And Lt. Gen Blum will find his career effectively over.

[NewEnglandDisney]

Does this statement not bother anyone else? Do we really think we're better than the people who are living in what we call "third world countries"?

I understand what's being said when people say "This is America, how could this happen?"....but is this not a prideful, even prejudice statement?

Just something to think about.....

I think the interpretation may be different than the one you choose.

I have said this very phrase, but I mean it in these terms :

We are the U.S., who goes around the world taking care of everyone else, of taking over other countries, of all this great power; we give billions and billions every year to other countries, we are the one the world counts on - and we aren't even here for our own citizens.

I'm sure some people mean it as you interpret, and I would agree with your assessment. I felt the same about 9/11 - a tragedy, but 3K people die every day from starvation in some countries, so we really need some perspective.

In this case, personally, I am angry this happened in America because it didn't have to - in our own borders we should be able to take care of our own, and we didn't.

N.E.D.