Does Race And Economics Have Anything To Do With The Response To Katrinas Devastation In New Orleans

So you want Bush to show some responsibility? Ha! Read what he said.

At a news conference, Pelosi, D-Calif., said Bush's choice for head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency had "absolutely no credentials."

She related that she had urged Bush at the White House on Tuesday to fire Michael Brown.

"He said 'Why would I do that?'" Pelosi said.

"'I said because of all that went wrong, of all that didn't go right last week.' And he said 'What didn't go right?'"

"Oblivious, in denial, dangerous," she added.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050907/ap_on_go_pr_wh/katrina_washington_36

Bush can't even admit that Michael Brown is incompetent. He's just going to protect his own ass and deny any cronyism. And his bas will support that, because he said it. What we have here is cyclical thinking in the Republican base. If Bush says it, it is true, therefore if someone opposes him, it must be false. Why the blind faith? Its not. They just want to protect their money and religion, and their sense of security (in my mother's case, not rich or religious, just really conservative and scared of the truth.)

 

This is an interesting history of the (false) meme (spread here by Gallandro) that if it wasn't for Bush New Orleans would never have been evacuated.

 

Bush can't even admit that Michael Brown is incompetent. He's just going to protect his own ass and deny any cronyism. And his bas will support that, because he said it. What we have here is cyclical thinking in the Republican base. If Bush says it, it is true, therefore if someone opposes him, it must be false. Why the blind faith? Its not. They just want to protect their money and religion, and their sense of security (in my mother's case, not rich or religious, just really conservative and scared of the truth.)

I don't give a rat's nads whether Bush shows responsibility or not. I do care that he and the federal gov't did scrap at the beginning of the relief effort--at the most critical point. I do care that he parades himself around like royalty, pulling valuable relief off of their duties for presidential escort patrol.

I heard it on the news and I heard it in LA. If the exact same event had happened in Los Angeles or Boston, we would have seen a stronger response from the onset. Why did the government say NO was unaccessible when even WalMart trucks and private boats were getting through?

 

Nice try Jediflyer "Media Matters" is such an objective source... from their own web site:

"Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media."

The New York Times reported that they have received "more than $2 million in donations from wealthy liberals" and "was developed with help from the newly formed Center for American Progress" (a George Soros funded organization). Source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Matters

Here's a little fun "incident" that the "impartial" Media Matters got embroiled in (please note the source is a right-wing media research group... but it's pretty clear Media Matters got caught red-handed):

http://www.themediareport.com/nommattersapology.htm

Oh and here's a great little blog site that actual corrects the corrections of MediaMatters:

http://www.journalhome.com/mediadoesntmatter/

But back to the point:

I read their report, and there's nothing that conflicts with what was reported earlier... it WAS the morning of the 28th when he called, and Blanco and Nagin were in a meeting together... he easily could have talked with the governor, as well as the mayor... (which he did). And, even according to the New Orleans Times-Picayune Bush urgeed the evacuation.

And facts are facts, the evacuation was ordered only after he called. Jeez talk about parsing details... and considering how many buses were submerged in New Orleans it's pretty clear there was no concerted effort being made to evacuate the city by local officials.

"oh and didn't do scrap at the beginning????" Well please explain how within hours of the hurricane's passage Coast Guard rescue teams (part of DHS) were in place, and in fact rescuing people??? or why Navy vessels arrived shortly after the hurricane hit??? guess none of the feds were doing their job.

Yancy

 

But really I read their report, and there's nothing that conflicts with what was reported earlier... it WAS the morning of the 28th when he called, and Blanco and Nagin were in a meeting together... he easily could have talked with the governor, as well as the mayor... (which he did). And, even according to the New Orleans Times-Picayune Bush urgeed the evacuation.

And facts are facts, the evacuation was ordered only after he called. Jeez talk about parsing details... and considering how many buses were submerged in New Orleans it's pretty clear there was no concerted effort being made to evacuate the city by local officials.


I think the point is that first of all, the evacuation would have been made in the exact same way at the exact same time if Bush had called or not. Presumedly "shortly before" is used as a descriptive term to denote that the time was too short to have really had a substantive effect on thier plans.

Now, the governor did not ask him to be involved any further than he was -- and likewise the President does not seem to have particularly offered it -- all factors indicate both the Governor and the President treated like other disasters and hurricanes that had struck the southern US, which is to say they both completely underestimated what was going to happen.

BOTH the democratic gov. and the republican president are clearly at fault.

 

And facts are facts, the evacuation was ordered only after he called. Jeez talk about parsing details... and considering how many buses were submerged in New Orleans it's pretty clear there was no concerted effort being made to evacuate the city by local officials.

Indeed, facts are facts.

Facts in chronological order:

Fact: The governor and the mayor concluded that a mandatory evacuation is needed of the parish Orleans area.
Fact: The state and city government officials call for a press ocnference to announce the mandate.
Fact: President Bush calls the governor, says he thinks there should be a mandatory evacuation call.
Fact: The governor and mayor hold press conference, announcing their call for a mandatory evacuation.
Fact: Conservative blogs give varying accounts of the above facts, hold Bush on high as the savior of the stranded [paraphrased].
Fact: Fox News reports story as retold on conservative blogs, now giving Bush credit for single-handedly convincing the governor and mayor to call for mandatory evacuation.

If you are going to call for everyone to use the facts and only the facts, you must use all the facts.

 

Again, the buses simply sitting there unused is evidence enough that the city was not seriously contemplating ordering a full evacuation under the Souteast Louisiana Evacuation Plan...

Additionally, the evac plan orders the city to use all highway lanes to evacuate the city... that wasn't even done either.

Take a look at this (dated Sunday August 28th):

http://www.nola.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1125213007249320.xml?nola

By mid-afternoon, officials in Plaquemines, St. Bernard, St. Charles, Lafourche, Terrebonne and Jefferson parishes had called for voluntary or mandatory evacuations.

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin followed at 5 p.m., issuing a voluntary evacuation.

Nagin said late Saturday that he's having his legal staff look into whether he can order a mandatory evacuation of the city, a step he's been hesitant to do because of potential liability on the part of the city for closing hotels and other businesses.

"Come the first break of light in the morning, you may have the first mandatory evacuation of New Orleans," Nagin told WWL-TV.

What the Hell!?!?!?!?!?! You were urged by the President of the United States to order an evacuation, but you are taking time to talk to lawyers "because of potential liability on the part of the city for closing hotels and other businesses."

So he waits until SUNDAY evening (10:48 PM to be exact)!!! Almost a full flippin 24 hours before ordering a mandatory evacuation!?!?!?!?! Really, this guy is incompetent... as much as I've railed on Governor Blanco, the person who should be held to account is Mayor Nagin.

BTW here's a pretty good timeline of events (with pictures):

http://www.americandaughter.com/timeline.html

Yancy

 

All these people scrambling to protect the President... it's like the extension of the secret service.

"The President AND the Governor AND the mayor are responsible. But even though the mayor of New Orleans isn't the mayor of mt city, and even though the Governor of Louisana isn't my governor, I would rather talk about thier failings."

Do people here think, for instance, that the Federal response would have been quicker under presidents Bush Snr., Clinton, Reagan or Carter?

 

No, the response time would have been virtually identical... that's the nature of a large federal government. It took 3 days for serious federal assistance at NYC, it took 3-4 days for hurricanes Ivan and Hugo... that's the way it is.

That's why local and state officials are first responders... not FEMA, the DHS, or the military.

Yancy

 

I think a potential problem is that analysis on both sides is now being conducted from an outsider's perspective.

People who actually live in New Orleans go through this every year, and most make up their mind on what they are going to do long before the disaster ever hits. Sure, this time it was worse than what normally occurs during hurricane season, but that doesn't change the fact that people evacuate the city in varying degrees every year.

Again, on the positive, around 1.3 million people safely and securely evactuated the city, which was the focus of the plan from the beginning. My brother, for example, secured his property and left 2 days before Katrina even hit. Over 1 million people did the same.

In a normal situation, this disaster wouldn't have been any different than any number of other storms that hit the city every year. This time, however, the levees that have held for 40 years broke, and created an entirely different problem.

Yes, we all know that approximately 60,000-100,000 people refused to, or weren't able to evacuate, but that doesn't change the focus. It still represents a successful plan.

At the basic level, what precautions did those who stayed take, knowing the above fact? Even if we factor into account varying economic levels, including the extremely poor, it still doesn't take a lot of money to stockpile a weeks worth of water and canned beans, knowing that the city is located under the water level, and is subject to the effects of the weather. Even a small amount of individual planning would have mitigated the effect of the disaster, before the authorities even started operations.

Instead of everyone running around trying to lay blame, why don't we just move forward. Some "out-of-the-box" thinking is going to be needed to change how the city simply exists.

 

No, the response time would have been virtually identical

Well at least we're talking about something that effects you. Unless you happen to live in LA.

 

At the basic level, what precautions did those who stayed take, knowing the above fact? Even if we factor into account varying economic levels, including the extremely poor, it still doesn't take a lot of money to stockpile a weeks worth of water and canned beans, knowing that the city is located under the water level, and is subject to the effects of the weather. Even a small amount of individual planning would have mitigated the effect of the disaster, before the authorities even started operations.

Sounds like you're stopping just shy of blaming the victims for their death. I'm sure that's not what you're trying to say. Stocking up is a great plan, as long as your house remains intact to maintain that stock. Boarding up your house does little good when a walls of wind and water tear away your walls like corrugated cardboard.

Many of the inkjured I saw were escapees from various areas who had done just as you suggested. They prepared. They stocked up. Many of their families died anyway. The stocks were washed out, they were critically injured, you name it, it happened.

That is why relief is so necessary after storms like this. People are dehydrated not because they didn't clue in to by water before the storm, but because everything they bought is washed away.

 

Sure, that's why, like I said, preparing before hand could mitigate the effects of the disaster, not eliminate it.

What can one do? The city sits below the water level, and basic physics takes over.

The
fact remains, that despite all of the "blame" being thrown around, the vast majority of the population evacuated like they were supposed to.

I'm not accusing the few who stayed, but if things became so bad that their house washed away, was it worth staying in the first place? 96% of the population of the city left before the disaster hit. Spliting the difference between those who refused to leave, and those who couldn't leave, it would be hard to get a larger "success" rate than that.

they prepared. They stocked up. Many of their families died anyway. The stocks were washed out, they were critically injured, you name it, it happened.

Exactly. In a disaster the unexpected happens, that's why it's called a disaster. I don't know how much blame can factor into that, at any level.

 

Exactly. In a disaster the unexpected happens, that's why it's called a disaster. I don't know how much blame can factor into that, at any level.

The only blame that can or should be leveled to anyone is in regards to the response time to aid those who did stay (or were left) behind. Regardless of whether they left of the own accord or no, no one can validate or justify take one's own sweet time to assess and deploy emergency aid.

It's bizare that the only people who seem to say, "oh well, these things happen," are those who have not been there, but have caught the occassional blurb on CNN or Fox. Spend a week there and see what I saw just in one area of town (on of the better areas, at that) and tell me these people were not wronged by the lack of response.

 

But again, you have to examine the situation as it exists.

Katrina did very little overall damage to the city. Monday night, it looked like it was going to be just another hurricane.

The levees didn't give way until Tuesday, and by Wednsday, the situation transformed into what it is now.

Aid started being organized by Thursday, and was up and running within another day or so.

It wasn't a continous disaster that was ignored, but each segment of the event required different responses and planning.

It's bizare that the only people who seem to say, "oh well, these things happen," are those who have not been there, but have caught the occassional blurb on CNN or Fox. Spend a week there and see what I saw just in one area of town (on of the better areas, at that) and tell me these people were not wronged by the lack of response.


Or maybe those people have been directly impacted by the situation, and just look at it differently than you?

 

Oh Sweet Lord in Heaven, a number of you clearly do not understand how federal government works, or how it responds in cases of emergency.

#1) Gonk, yes, I dont care who would have been President during this crisis... it wouldn't have mattered. President Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Bush Sr., even a President Kerry, it would not have mattered, the federal response would have been no different. And you know what, I would staunchly have defended any President because the Constitution is clear on whose in charge in these matters... state and local officials.

I worked, in a support role, during Hurricane Andrew when Clinton was President... and guess what, it took almost four days before full blown federal assistance got in there. That's why the DHS web site states quite clearly that local government is essentially responsible for rescue/aid efforts for 72-96 hours after an event. The Federal government assists, it's not in charge.

And yes, I'm sure wackos in the right-wing spectrum would be calling for the head of a President Kerry and his FEMA director, and that wouldn't be fair either.

#2) Everyone in Congress is carping about FEMA being under the Department of Homeland Security and that FEMA should be a Cabinet-level poisition again. Well guess what, they are the geniuses that decided that FEMA should be controlled by DHS; they voted for it. Hillary Clinton is now calling for an investigation on Katrina and the decision to move FEMA to DHS... so she's actually calling for an investigation on herself (BTW, she voted Yes on the bill that moved FEMA)?!?!?!

Oh, and by the way whose bright idea was it for a Department of Homeland Security??? I'll give you one hint, it wasn't the guy with the initials GWB... it was Joe Lieberman a Democrat. Bush, if you remember was initially opposed to the notion but after a lot of pressure in the press and from democrats, and some within his party, he relented. This the same department that everyone has been disparaging for the last couple of years. Complaining about the TSA, about FEMA, about security on the railway system, and in our ports. Well as the old saying goes "you can't have your cake and eat it too."

And now my favorite part of the show... Civics 101 quiz time!!!! Okay since everyone here is so sure the Federal government is ultimately responsible for everything I give you this pop quiz!


1) What is the "police power?"


2) Where does it reside?


3) Is there a federal "police power?"


4) Can the federal government order the evacuation of a city when state and local officials have not done so?


5) Who has first call on a state's national guard?


6) Who controls a city's police department?


7) Can a federal official order a police department to deploy in strength to specific points within a city such as the Supredome or the Convention Center?


8) Can a federal official commandeer a city's supply of school busses, city busses, and city personnel?


Bonus Question: What act forbids the U.S. Military from taking control during an emergency within the United States? (hint I mentioned it earlier in a previous message)



Back with the answers later!


Yancy

 

It is ridiculous to suggest race had anything to do with the President Bush's lackluster response time to this disaster.

The claim that Bush would have responded more quickly if the victims were white is a baseless accusation. Where did these people get the idea that President Bush could do anything "quickly?" I can think of many words to describe President Bush. "Quick" is not one of them. Remember, this is the guy who sat by and did nothing for over 7 minutes after hearing the World Trade Center had been attacked. (Lot's of white people there, but to be fair, it was a pretty diverse crowd of victims.) What was he doing for seven minutes?? He could have humed the enitre extended version of Stairway to Heaven in his head, but I digress. Have these accusers been paying attention to this guy for the last 5 years? The fact that he isn't still in Crawford impresses the heck out of me.

Yes, the President and many others screwed up. Race had nothing to do with it. You give President Bush too much credit by suggesting he would have responded better for white people. Sadly, he responded the best he could.

 

Here's a more appropriate analysis of what happened with Katrina but everyone is afraid to say it. My dad emailed this to me a minute ago.


An interesting slant on New Orleans
by Robert Tracinski

It has taken four long days for state and federal officials to figure out how to deal with the disaster in New Orleans. I can't blame them, because it has also taken me four long days to figure out what is going on there. The reason is that the events there make no sense if you think that we are confronting a natural disaster.

If this is just a natural disaster, the response for public officials is obvious: you bring in food, water, and doctors; you send transportation to evacuate refugees to temporary shelters; you send engineers to stop the flooding and rebuild the city's infrastructure. For journalists, natural disasters also have a familiar pattern: the heroism of ordinary people pulling together to survive; the hard work and dedication of doctors, nurses, and rescue workers; the steps being taken to clean up and rebuild.

Public officials did not expect that the first thing they would have to do is to send thousands of armed troops in armored vehicle, as if they are suppressing an enemy insurgency. And journalists--myself included--did not expect that the story would not be about rain, wind, and flooding, but about rape, murder, and looting.

But this is not a natural disaster. It is a man-made disaster.

The man-made disaster is not an inadequate or incompetent response by federal relief agencies, and it was not directly caused by Hurricane Katrina. This is where just about every newspaper and television channel has gotten the story wrong.

The man-made disaster we are now witnessing in New Orleans did not happen over the past four days. It happened over the past four decades. Hurricane Katrina merely exposed it to public view.

The man-made disaster is the welfare state.

For the past few days, I have found the news from New Orleans to be confusing. People were not behaving as you would expect them to behave in an emergency--indeed, they were not behaving as they have behaved in other emergencies. That is what has shocked so many people: they have been saying that this is not what we expect from America. In fact, it is not even what we expect from a Third World country.

When confronted with a disaster, people usually rise to the occasion. They work together to rescue people in danger, and they spontaneously organize to keep order and solve problems. This is especially true in America. We are an enterprising people, used to relying on our own initiative rather than waiting around for the government to take care of us. I have seen this a hundred times, in small examples (a small town whose main traffic light had gone out, causing ordinary citizens to get out of their cars and serve as impromptu traffic cops, directing cars through the intersection) and large ones (the spontaneous response of New Yorkers to September 11).

So what explains the chaos in New Orleans?

To give you an idea of the magnitude of what is going on, here is a description from a Washington Times story:

"Storm victims are raped and beaten; fights erupt with flying fists, knives and guns; fires are breaking out; corpses litter the streets; and police and rescue helicopters are repeatedly fired on.

"The plea from Mayor C. Ray Nagin came even as National Guardsmen poured in to restore order and stop the looting, carjackings and gunfire....

"Last night, Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco said 300 Iraq-hardened Arkansas National Guard members were inside New Orleans with shoot-to-kill orders.

" 'These troops are...under my orders to restore order in the streets,' she said. 'They have M-16s, and they are locked and loaded. These troops know how to shoot and kill and they are more than willing to do so if necessary and I expect they will.' "

The reference to Iraq is eerie. The photo that accompanies this article shows National Guard troops, with rifles and armored vests, riding on an arm

 

Some interesting info from the Red Cross:

http://www.redcross.org/faq/0,1096,0_682_4524,00.html

Yancy

 

Gallandro, what is the National Guard, and how has it been implemented in times of national disaster?

Here is a link to an accurate timeline (with linked source data):
Katrina Timeline

Of particular note:
Friday, 26 August
The governor declared a State of Emergency in LA;
The gulf coast states request troop assistance from the Pentagon.

Saturday, 27 August
Gov. Blanco asks Bush to Declare a Federal State of Emergency in LA;
Federal Emergency is declared, DHS and FEMA are given full authority to respond to Katrina.

Monday, 29 August
Katrina makes landfall as a category 4 hurricane.

So, you see, DHS and FEMA had the full authority to lend aid BEFORE the hurricane even made landfall, understandng the potential threat it posed.

So, the government acted right away to help, right? WRONG. Bush didn't decide organize a "task force" to coordinate the federal response until Wednesday, and Thursday comes and goes with still no C&C.

Edit: RavenKing, I don't even know where to begin with that article. The most blatant lie I see is the reference to Martial Law as being a shoot-kill-order. It was a suspsension of Miranda, not a shoot-kill-order.

 

Sweet Jesus. What part of the Coast Guard (now part of DHS) do you not understand??? They were there, in place (on Saturday), and rescuing people (all over the Gulf States) right away after the storm passed. A number of federal assets were in place before hand, or on their way.

And again... the National Guard is controlled by the state they are from... the Governor has control of those assets, not the President. The President can only touch them to deploy them overseas during combat operations... that's it. The President doesn't suddenly, magically control them unless specifically invited to by the state government.

BTW, the link on that "progressive" news site about Bush waiting until Wednesday??? Wow talk about strecthing the truth a bit. The full article it referred to from the NY Times:

HURRICANE KATRINA: EMERGENCY RESPONDERS; Navy Ships and Maritime Rescue Teams Are Sent to Region

By ERIC LIPTON AND ERIC SCHMITT; ANNE E. KORNBLUT, SCOTT SHANE AND THOM SHANKER CONTRIBUTED REPORTING FOR THIS ARTICLE. (NYT) 1249 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 14 , Column 1

ABSTRACT - Pentagon orders five Navy ships and eight maritime rescue teams to Gulf Coast to bolster relief operations in aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, as worsening conditions overwhelm initial response; ships will carry food, fuel, medical and construction supplies and hovercraft for rescues; FEMA teams also on site; Pres Bush cuts short extended summer vacation to work in Washington with task force coordinating efforts (M)


umm there's nothing there that says he ordered the task force that day, it says he is going to Washington to work with the task force (which was already in place as of Saturday).

Yancy

 

So you see no problem with the president waiting 2 days before deciding to form a committee to talk about a federal response, even as a federal response was requested and GRANTED before the hurricane made landfall?

 

Good! Now I get to whip out my battery of Coast Guard rescue operation pics!

YEAH!


Oh, BTW:

http://journalstar.com/articles/2005/08/29/nation/doc43125e1a2fc27674813970.txt

With forecasters warning of a category five storm, the president made sure the federal response would not be delayed by already declaring emergencies in Mississippi, Florida and Alabama just hours after a similar declaration for Louisiana. Such declarations make federal aid available to assist with disaster relief, but they are rarely made before a storm even hits.

Yancy

 

I thought it was Congress' responsibility to create a committee.

 

Chev- again though, you aren't really addressing the situation as it developed.

And again for me, I'm not defending nor am I blaming anyone.

Let's review the timeline you provided:

Friday, 26 August
The governor declared a State of Emergency in LA;
The gulf coast states request troop assistance from the Pentagon.

At this stage, the "state of emergency" was simply a preliminary notice in order to get low interest loans, etc.. as needed. Since Katrina was still way out to sea, nobody knew where exactly it would fall. Thius early, Katrina could have detoured and headed into Cuba for all anyone knew.

Saturday, 27 August
Gov. Blanco asks Bush to Declare a Federal State of Emergency in LA;
Federal Emergency is declared, DHS and FEMA are given full authority to respond to Katrina.

Again, by Saturday, specific areas were simply alerted, because Katrina's exact landfall was unknown. This is when the "optional" evacuation was given, and most people prepared to leave according to the evacuation plan.

By Sunday 28 August, Katrina's location is pinpointed more precisely, and the mandatory evacuation order is given. Over 1 million people safely exit the New Orelans metro area.

Monday, 29 August
Katrina makes landfall as a category 4 hurricane.

And again, Katrina veers off at the last minute, and actually impacts in Missippi. New Orleans isn't affected that strongly. At this time, there was simply no reason to activate large scale relief efforts for New Orleans, because nothing major happened. At this stage, all anyone knew was that the disaster was over. By Monday night, people were already preparing to move back into the city.

This isn't anyone's "fault."

Strangely, this is where your timeline ends. But it wasn't until Tuesday 30 August, that the levees surronding the city begin to crumble under the pressure. It wasn't until Wednsday 31 August that the chaotic situation broke out.

So, really, it wasn't until 2 days after Katrina hit that the serious effects were seen. It can't be treated as a single, continous event.

Again, it wasn't anyone's "fault," as no one expected that the levees that had been in place for 40 years would finally crumble.

So, you see, DHS and FEMA had the full authority to lend aid BEFORE the hurricane even made landfall, understandng the potential threat it posed.

So, the government acted right away to help, right? WRONG. Bush didn't decide organize a "task force" to coordinate the federal response until Wednesday, and Thursday comes and goes with still no C&C.

Because there was nothing anyone needed before the levees failed. Disaster aid, by its very defintion is reactionary in nature. What aid could the authorities preemptively hand out if the situation didn't warrant it?