So, who's in charge and when?

[Bunch24]

This question has been bantered around for days on this message board and others. Some say the burden falls with the local government, some say it's Bush's fault. Some say it's the state's fault.

Well, here's what USA Today reported on the order of response:


The burden of planning for and responding to natural disasters is shared by scores of agencies at all levels of government. As the debate rages over what went wrong in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and who was responsible, here's a look at the lines of authority when disaster strikes:

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

The first response to an emergency falls to local government, which is most familiar with local conditions. Its responsibilities include planning and prior arrangements for evacuation, shelter and first response by police, fire and medical personnel. In Louisiana, flood-protection levees also are the primary responsibility of local levee boards.

What was done before Katrina

On Aug. 27, two days before the storm hit, New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin warned his citizens not to be complacent. He advised people to board up their homes, fill their gas tanks and gather their medications. For people without cars or other ways to flee, the city designated the Superdome, convention center and other sites as temporary shelters. City bus pickups were available.

Nagin did not at first make the evacuation mandatory, and it's unclear whether the city plans included those in nursing homes or homebound residents. About 134,000 residents had no transportation, but the city didn't provide for that need.

The next day, Nagin made evacuation mandatory. "The storm surge will most likely topple our levee system," he said.

For years, engineers had warned that the levees were weak, but they hadn't been shored up because of funding shortfalls and disputes over their location and environmental impact.

What has happened since Aug. 29

Nagin's prediction came true, and the flood that followed made it clear the city was unable to cope.

A third of the city's police force, many dealing with relocating their own families, failed to show up for work. Looting was rampant, and gunshots were fired at rescue workers.

"Man, I had a pretty good plan until this latest crisis," Nagin said Aug. 30, a reference to initial failed efforts to plug a growing hole in the 17th Street Canal levee. "We need resources, and the National Guard and the Army," he said, but he stopped short of asking that martial law be declared. The Superdome became a squalid camp.

STATE GOVERNMENT

When local resources are overtaxed, the state steps in with logistical help and manpower. The state's main resource is the National Guard, which is under the control of the governor. The state also is a source of matching funds that, combined with federal money, go to build levees.

What was done before Katrina

Gov. Kathleen Blanco warned citizens to evacuate, and the state's Transportation Department and police managed traffic flow north. On Aug. 26, as the storm approached, Blanco declared a state of emergency.

Two days later, she wrote President Bush to ask for help, saying the crisis was "beyond the capabilities of the state and affected local governments."

About 65% of the state's Guard troops were available, the rest depleted by deployments to the Iraq war, anemic recruiting and other reasons.

What has happened since

Once looting broke out, there was a lag in getting troops to restore order.

By Aug. 31, the state had activated 3,780 Guard troops, and others were on the way from other states. It would be two more days before a significant presence became visible in the city.

There was a delay while Blanco and the White House grappled over whether to turn over law enforcement authority to the federal government, and whether all Guard troops should be put under federal control - both of which the governor resisted.

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Washington is the final stop when disasters outstrip state and local resources. When called upon, the Federal Emergency Management Agency takes the lead in coordinating the response, providing supplies and helping with cleanup and aid to those whose homes are destroyed. It can also enlist the Defense Department for troops, air and sealift help.

What was done before Katrina

On Aug. 27, President Bush, on vacation at his Texas ranch, declared a state of emergency in Louisiana. The next day, FEMA was moving response teams to Shreveport, La., and Jackson, Miss., and stockpiling relief supplies in Atlanta and Denton, Texas.

The Army Corps of Engineers, which built most of the flood-protection levees in the region, pulled its personnel to a safe distance, expecting rising water from the storm would top the levees.

That meant no one was checking the levees, and "that's the reason why we had a tough time understanding" the developing crisis, said Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, corps commander.

What has happened since

On Aug. 30, the day after the storm hit, Bush made a V-J Day speech in San Diego, prefacing it with some remarks about the disaster. After the event, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the Pentagon has "a lot of capabilities that are engaged and on standby."

The next day, Bush ended his vacation two days early and returned to Washington.

In an interview with ABC News on Sept. 1, the president said, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees."

In fact, FEMA had run a mock disaster exercise a year ago in which the levees were breached by a fictitious "Hurricane Pam."

The White House issued a fact sheet detailing the federal government's response, including 50 medical assistance teams, 25 search-and-rescue task forces and 1,700 trucks to move supplies. Eight Navy ships were headed to the Gulf of Mexico, though they would take days to arrive.

Bush's management team at FEMA came in for criticism, particularly from editorial pages and Democratic leaders such as Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada and Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California. Charges included slow decision-making, spurning offers of aid from the Red Cross and states, and a lack of experience in managing disasters, particularly for FEMA Director Michael Brown.

Members of Congress such as Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York questioned whether folding FEMA into the Department of Homeland Security had weakened its disaster-relief role amid a heightened emphasis on fighting terrorism.

 

[Bunch24]

I don't like replying to my own post, but I didn't want to take away from that post and make it seem like I was trying to influence anyone. That's as it was printed.

Now, my feelings are that everyone shares the blame.

Nagin is to blame for not overseeing the evacuation of the citizens with no transportation. He's to blame for not providing adequate food/water at the shelters. He's to blame for not issuing a mandatory evacuation early enough. Those were all HIS responsibilities.

Blanco is to blame for hesitating in regards to every decision. She didn't want to relinquish control to the feds until it was too late. There's a certain way to do things, and she knew the feds COULD NOT move in until she gave them the word. Ultimately, it's her state, and she's responsible for it.

Bush's biggest goof was his lie when he said no one anticipated the levee breach. EVERYONE anticipated that. Even the Federal Government did, because they did an actual drill called Hurricane Pam. Surely Bush had to know about that drill.

What it comes down to is Nagin is responsible for his city, first and foremost. If he couldn't do the job, he was to ask Blanco. She's responsible for her state, if she couldn't do the job, she was to ask Bush. He's responsible for the entire nation, but will not and can not act until asked by the governor. As messed up as that sounds, that's the government for you. It's always been that way. That's why each state has its own constitution, it's own flag, its own capital.

BTW, in case you're wondering, I'm neither Republican nor Democrat, so I have no horse in this race. I'm just a Louisiana citizen upset that everybody dropped the ball on this one.

 

[bicker]

Blanco is to blame for hesitating in regards to every decision. She didn't want to relinquish control to the feds until it was too late.

That's really it, although actually, she has continued to refuse to relinquish control, refusing the President's request to federalize the National Guard. When the reasoned, informed investigation finally occurs, she'll have a lot to answer for.

In an interview with ABC News on Sept. 1, the president said, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees."

Bush's biggest goof was his lie when he said no one anticipated the levee breach.

As I've mentioned before, I voted for Clinton, twice, and I didn't vote for Bush. However, let's reserve criticism for the President to things he actually did. Read what you quoted him saying earlier -- the President didn't lie. As far as you know, the President wasn't aware of or didn't recall the study done in 2004.

What it comes down to is Nagin is responsible for his city, first and foremost. If he couldn't do the job, he was to ask Blanco. She's responsible for her state, if she couldn't do the job, she was to ask Bush.

And to expect a Star Trek-like transporter beam to suddenly, on a moment's notice, materialize thousands of emergency service workers, in exactly the right spot, with exactly the right equipment and supplies, is unreasonable. The local authorities must have the resources to handle the first few days of a disaster.

And here's the real crux of the issue: If there aren't enough resources to sure-up the infrastructure of a place enough, and to fund the necessary resources to address a possible catastrophe in that place, then perhaps we shouldn't have people living in that place. A key tenet of my faith is Respect for Nature. There clearly was a lot of disrespect for Nature here, and it is clear that that was not very smart.

 

[BuckNaked]

And here's the real crux of the issue: If there aren't enough resources to sure-up the infrastructure of a place enough, and to fund the necessary resources to address a possible catastrophe in that place, then perhaps we shouldn't have people living in that place. A key tenet of my faith is Respect for Nature. There clearly was a lot of disrespect for Nature here, and it is clear that that was not very smart.

Sad as it is, I totally agree.

 

[DawnCt1]

transportation. He's to blame for not providing adequate food/water at the shelters. He's to blame for not issuing a mandatory evacuation early enough. Those were all HIS responsibilities.

Blanco is to blame for hesitating in regards to every decision. She didn't want to relinquish control to the feds until it was too late. There's a certain way to do things, and she knew the feds COULD NOT move in until she gave them the word. Ultimately, it's her state, and she's responsible for it.

Bush's biggest goof was his lie when he said no one anticipated the levee breach. EVERYONE anticipated that. Even the Federal Government did, because they did an actual drill called Hurricane Pam. Surely Bush had to know about that drill.

What it comes down to is Nagin is responsible for his city, first and foremost. If he couldn't do the job, he was to ask Blanco. She's responsible for her state, if she couldn't do the job, she was to ask Bush. He's responsible for the entire nation, but will not and can not act until asked by the governor. As messed up as that sounds, that's the government for you. It's always been that way. That's why each state has its own constitution, it's own flag, its own capital.

BTW, in case you're wondering, I'm neither Republican nor Democrat, so I have no horse in this race. I'm just a Louisiana citizen upset that everybody dropped the ball on this one.

Nagin is responsible for all of the obvious reasons.
Blanco and the La. Dept of Homeland Security denied the Red Cross access to the Superdome and areas of "last refuge" because they didn't want to create a magnet.
I believe that when President Bush said that no one expected the levees to breach, it was after the storm had passed. They were expected to breach during the storm. They breached afterward. Interestingly enough, it was the area that had recently been worked on.

 

[WDWBetsy]

However, let's reserve criticism for the President to things he actually did. Read what you quoted him saying earlier -- the President didn't lie. As far as you know, the President wasn't aware of or didn't recall the study done in 2004.

I think that is giving him too much leeway. As I pointed out in an LSU link to the practice Hurricane Pam exercise,

One important result of the exercise was the understanding among agencies at all levels of the seriousness of such an event. “A White House staffer was briefed on the exercise,” said van Heerden. “There is now a far greater awareness in the federal government about the consequences of storm surges.”

Some possible scenarios:

1) someone (that White House staffer) didn't pass on that info
2) that White House staffer did and Bush didn't take it seriously or even remember it, or even
3) the Bush Administration is covering their butts and trying to act like the feds didn't know about it.


I'm sorry but Bush should have known about the risk when the Army Corps of Engineers requested funds to fix/improve the levees. Maybe he didn't think it was significant enough since he cut the funding. Or maybe his advisors (who he appointed and who may or may not have the experience to understand disasters) didn't know what they were doing and advised him in a really bad way.

Again - there were major mistakes made on ALL levels.

 

[DawnCt1]

I'm sorry but Bush should have known about the risk when the Army Corps of Engineers requested funds to fix/improve the levees. Maybe he didn't think it was significant enough since he cut the funding. Or maybe his advisors (who he appointed and who may or may not have the experience to understand disasters) didn't know what they were doing and advised him in a really bad way.

Again - there were major mistakes made on ALL levels.

You do understand that the Army Corp of Engineers requests and receive funds every year to fix/improve the levees. The Army Corp of Engineers in La. receives more funds than any of the other 49 states, including California which has 10 fold the population. That more money has been funneled to La. in the last 5 years of this administration, than in the previous administration.
I am not sure how funding was "cut" or that it was cut at all.

 

[JimMIA]

A couple of quick comments.

First of all to OP -- thanks for posting the most accurate, objective explanation of the basic landscape in disaster response I've seen. Every disaster planner, and every person who has ever worked in one of these events understands the protocols, but very few civilians do, and it's understandable that people would not know who is really responsible for what.

I've done this work for many years during my police career, and it's a complicated web looking in from the outside -- especially when every politician in America has a vested interest in either criticizing what was done, or defending what was done...almost exclusively based on the politics of the official who made the decision, rather than facts. Also, we "common folk" get most of our information from the electronic news media, who a) don't know, and b) have a compelling interest in playing "Let's YOU and HIM fight!"

Second -- Although many criticize the Governor, she made the right decision. We faced this issue for weeks during Hurricane Andrew. The most helpful capability of the National Guard units in a disaster is law enforcement. If the Guard is nationalized, federal law prohibits U.S. military from performing any law enforcement functions. They will be nationalized at the appropriate time -- but that time is not until the law enforcement job is finished. There are many, many other military resources being used to do non-law enforcement tasks, and they've been doing them since the morning after the hurricane.

Third -- the Hurricane Pam drill. Please. FEMA conducts thousands of disaster drills each year. In my community, we have at least three each year -- a terrorist response, a hurricane, and a nuclear power plant incident drill. I can assure you that our county commissioners and Mayor are not familiar with any of the details of any of those drills...much less our governor...much less the President of the United States. That process is repeated in thousands of cities and counties all over the US and US Territories.

There will be abundant "blame" for officials at all levels, including the political hacks in both parties who try to politicize everything that occurs. Keep your powder dry -- you'll have plenty of sitting ducks with legitimate reason.

 

[BuckNaked]

If the Guard is nationalized, federal law prohibits U.S. military from performing any law enforcement functions.

This is incorrect. There have been many amendments to statutes that govern posse comitatus, including the ability of the governors to request federal troops to aid in maintaining law and order, and to request the federalization f of National Guard troops. While there is a generally accepted precedent that such help must be passive rather than active, it is incorrect to say that federal troops are prohibited from performing any law enforcement functions.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

I'm sorry but Bush should have known about the risk when the Army Corps of Engineers requested funds to fix/improve the levees. Maybe he didn't think it was significant enough since he cut the funding. Or maybe his advisors (who he appointed and who may or may not have the experience to understand disasters) didn't know what they were doing and advised him in a really bad way.

Again - there were major mistakes made on ALL levels.

The levees were built to withstand a cat 3 hurricane, not a cat 4 or 5. How many decades has this been known and nothing was done to strengthen them? The fact that this last appropriations bill had less funding in it does not mean it is the proximate cause of the levee breach. How many billions have been sent to LA to help the state with their infrastructure over the many years since Hurricane Camille and how much of that money was channeled toward making the levees able to withstand a cat 5 storm?

 

[WDWBetsy]

You do understand that the Army Corp of Engineers requests and receive funds every year to fix/improve the levees. The Army Corp of Engineers in La. receives more funds than any of the other 49 states, including California which has 10 fold the population. That more money has been funneled to La. in the last 5 years of this administration, than in the previous administration.
I am not sure how funding was "cut" or that it was cut at all.

Factcheck.org has some great info on this.

While I do understand that even if the levees were improved, they probably wouldn't have stopped the flooding. And maybe they didn't anticipate the "breaching" of the levees, but instead the water going over the top. I guess my view is that the whole importance of the possibility of catastrophic New Orleans flooding has been overlooked even though FEMA considered it one of the three most likely catastrophic disasters that could happen in the United States - even before Sept. 11.

And it makes me sad to look through the big Highway Bill recently passed that yes, finances money for important highway and road issues, but also put tons of money for pet projects - even my state for curbside beautification of our wealthier areas. You can research here. That's a sad excuse for priorities - IMHO the money should be spent to make sure people don't die, infrastructures are not destroyed, and environments ruined.

 

[WDWBetsy]

The levees were built to withstand a cat 3 hurricane, not a cat 4 or 5. How many decades has this been known and nothing was done to strengthen them? The fact that this last appropriations bill had less funding in it does not mean it is the proximate cause of the levee breach. How many billions have been sent to LA to help the state with their infrastructure over the many years since Hurricane Camille and how much of that money was channeled toward making the levees able to withstand a cat 5 storm?

I know that. And I also know that the Netherlands are dealing with similar problems.

Netherlands Levee Info

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Factcheck.org has some great info on this.

While I do understand that even if the levees were improved, they probably wouldn't have stopped the flooding. And maybe they didn't anticipate the "breaching" of the levees, but instead the water going over the top. I guess my view is that the whole importance of the possibility of catastrophic New Orleans flooding has been overlooked even though FEMA considered it one of the three most likely catastrophic disasters that could happen in the United States - even before Sept. 11.

And it makes me sad to look through the big Highway Bill recently passed that yes, finances money for important highway and road issues, but also put tons of money for pet projects - even my state for curbside beautification of our wealthier areas. You can research here. That's a sad excuse for priorities - IMHO the money should be spent to make sure people don't die, infrastructures are not destroyed, and environments ruined.

What is sad is that money is appropriated like this because the public demands it. Each state wants their share of the pot and it's usually the politicians at the state and local levels who submit the "requests" for these appropriations. Then 535 individuals vote on it and 1 person signs it into law.

What is sad is that LA has squandered billions over the past decades -- money that could have been used to lessen the impact of Katrina. But LA politicians at the state and local level decided to spend the money elsewhere.

 

[Geoff_M]

Bunch24,

All in all that's not a bad write up... fairly objective. But the problem is that it's still way too early for people to start publishing "want happened" analysies of Katrina. The pieces of the puzzle are still coming to light. For example,

Bush's management team at FEMA came in for criticism, .... Charges included slow decision-making, spurning offers of aid from the Red Cross

With yesterday's news about the state being the one's who blocked (rightly or wrongly) the Red Cross from entering the city and setting up humanitarian relief efforts, that section needs some updating.

In an interview with ABC News on Sept. 1, the president said, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees."

In fact, FEMA had run a mock disaster exercise a year ago in which the levees were breached by a fictitious "Hurricane Pam."

Technically, the President is right... Academics and outside publications aside, the local, state, and federal disaster planners that met for the various planning exercises did not predict a "breach" of the levees. They predicted that they would be "topped" due to the storm surge. A "breach" means the levee breaks, gives way, etc. "Topping" means the levee holds, but significant amounts of water can overflow them during a storm surge when the water exceeds the height of the level. What's the difference: in one case it's like punch bowl flooding because you temporarily push it under the water level in the sink vs. the bowl flooding because you knock a side out of the bowl as it sits in the sink. The "Pam" excercise predicted a "topping", not a "breach" as the original posting stated. A lot of people seem to think that "breach" means "water gets passed the levee".

On one level that does matter, and on one it doesn't. The difference doesn't matter in terms of risk of human life due to flood waters entering the bowl. If you're up to your hips (or deeper) in water it doesn't matter how it got into the city. The primary mitigation strategy in either case is to get the city evacuated before the bowl fills.

Where the difference does matter: After the storm passes. With a topping, flood water removal can begin as soon as the surge lowers below the tops of the lowest levees. Water pours in for hours, not days (though topping reasonable could fill the bowl at a faster rate). With a breach, unless it's small one, you have to wait until the water pressure of the incoming water has decreased enough before you can start plugging the gap. Pumping's no good until the gaps are fixed. So it's basically a worst case scenario. With breaching you get maximum flooding, delaying of flood water removal, and the extra work of having to plug the breaches. And all of this has an effect on the speed of the humanitarian relief efforts. The breaching delayed the start of the pumping efforts until Tuesday(?) of this week.

 

[JimMIA]

This is incorrect. There have been many amendments to statutes that govern posse comitatus, including the ability of the governors to request federal troops to aid in maintaining law and order, and to request the federalization f of National Guard troops. While there is a generally accepted precedent that such help must be passive rather than active, it is incorrect to say that federal troops are prohibited from performing any law enforcement functions.

That's true, although there are significant restrictions on their use, and there is an enormous difference between maintaining law and order and performing law enforcement functions. For example...the biggest law enforcement task at hand right now is evacuating people who don't want to go. That's not a law and order issue, it's a law enforcement issue. Those people are not looting and rioting in the streets, they are passively declining to move out of their homes.

Probably a better way of looking at that decision is to ask, "What is the best use of specific National Guard units?" I submit that they are much more valuable to the overall effort when they have full, unrestricted law enforcement powers. If there is a specific NG army engineer company, for example, that would be better utilized, they can easily either be detached to the active duty units, or nationalized.

But, to do a blanket nationalization of all of the Guard units -- at this time -- would be a mistake. The time will come, but it's not now.

 

[bicker]

I think that is giving him too much leeway.

Sorry, but you cannot hold anyone's feet to the fire when they say, "I think..." If it was enough of an issue, then the appropriate thing to do is ask for a definitive answer, which the President could have deferred to staffers, as would, again, have been appropriate. The President is not supposed to be Walking Google.

I'm sorry but Bush should have known about the risk when the Army Corps of Engineers requested funds to fix/improve the levees.

Perhaps, but that wasn't the issue. The issue was what he actually did know and remember, not what he should have known or may have known in the past.

 

[bicker]

This is incorrect. There have been many amendments to statutes that govern posse comitatus, including the ability of the governors to request federal troops to aid in maintaining law and order, and to request the federalization f of National Guard troops. While there is a generally accepted precedent that such help must be passive rather than active, it is incorrect to say that federal troops are prohibited from performing any law enforcement functions.

Well, that's what the governor said... she's not been 100% accurate anywhere along the way.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

The levees were built to withstand a cat 3 hurricane, not a cat 4 or 5.

Actually what they weren't built to do is irrelevant.

Max sustained winds (the basis for what Cat a hurricane is classified) were cat 2 in New Orleans. They never saw the cat 4 winds (which were closest to the eyewall). They "escaped" the brunt of the storm--but then the levees failed anyway. They couldn't even handle what it was designed to do. They knew it would fail for a 4 or 5.....but didn't expect it to fail for a 3 or lower.


I almost think that is much much worse, like a broken promise and failed engineering.

 

[bsnyder]

Actually what they weren't built to do is irrelevant.

Max sustained winds (the basis for what Cat a hurricane is classified) were cat 2 in New Orleans. They never saw the cat 4 winds (which were closest to the eyewall). They "escaped" the brunt of the storm--but then the levees failed anyway. They couldn't even handle what it was designed to do. They knew it would fail for a 4 or 5.....but didn't expect it to fail for a 3 or lower.


I almost think that is much much worse, like a broken promise and failed engineering.

So that would make the maximum winds 110 MPH - and the Superdome was supposedly built to withstand 200 MPH winds.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

So that would make the maximum winds 110 MPH - and the Superdome was supposedly built to withstand 200 MPH winds.

True--but evidently something up with the roof--many threads and posts ago, I have forgotten. However--the structure did stand--yes it has bad roof damage--but the structure stood. The roof cover was a tarp--so you got me on that. I've never seen a 200mph resistant tarp.


I was just pointing out that harping on that the levees couldn't hold for a 4 or 5...almost made no sense. Because it didn't hold under a much "smaller" circumstance where it was proclaimed to be able to meet the challenge.