• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Bush says response is "unacceptable"

What is the root cause for the poor response to the distaster he refers to in that statement? You ma


  • Total voters
    61
  • Poll closed .
Woman are traditionally not listened to and thought to be hysterical, etc.  (They do not get proper medical care b/c their concerns are not taken seriously).

Yeah, like Condoleeza Rice  ::)

The US has had a number of lady Governors. I live in a State with a lady Governor. She has never complained that she wasn't listened to, because she was female. I think your statement is off, in this context.
 
Gunner has hit the nail on the head.

The US has a very complex domestic operations and disaster response system.  Under it, the initial responsibility for disaster response is firmly in the hands of the states and local governments.  A state will typically request assistance from neighbouring states before it requests Federal help and there is a system of agreements in place to facilitate that.  For example, you saw Guardsmen from the Texas ANG on the scene quite quickly and Texas is sheltering a large number of evacuees.  The Governor of each state is a very powerful person under these circumstances.

However, that being said, the entire US military (Federal) structure, including NORTHCOM and other formations, cannot - legally - get involved until a formal request is received.  Moreover, once Federal troops are deployed they cannot - again legally - get involved with domestic law enforcement.  It will always be the National Guard conducting police-type operations.

Believe it or not, IMHO the Canadian system is much simpler and robust than the US maze of local, state and Federal agencies, PSEPC politics not withstanding.  After only two days of disaster response planning with NORTHCOM in Colorado Springs a couple of years ago, my head was spinning...
 
I've been following the hurricane and it's aftermath in the news and on a number of US blogs and message boards, and this is by far the most reasoned, intelligent discussion I've encountered so far. It seems to me that when the water retreats, there will be a lot questions about responses and resource allocation from the local to the national level.
 
Here us the emergency response plan for New Orleans.

www.cityofno.com/portal.a...6&tabid=26

DoD site.

http://www.defenselink.mil/
 
A couple of things stand out in my mind:

First - the use of the word MAY as in the paragraph below.  That to me represents a failure to "grasp the nettle" and accept that hard decisions might have to be made - such as telling low wage civic employees that when a problem shows up on the doorstep they are going to be pressed into service to assist their community and that their families and homes are going to come second.  Fair? No. Required? Yes.

Louisiana disaster plan, pg 13, para 5 , dated 01/00

'The primary means of hurricane evacuation will be personal vehicles. School and municipal buses, government-owned vehicles and vehicles provided by volunteer agencies may be used to provide transportation for individuals who lack transportation and require assistance in evacuating'...


Second - timing

The threat appeared on Thursday the 25th.
The hurricane appeared on Sunday the 28th.

The mayor announces evacuation less than 6 hours before the storm hits.

All of those buses in the compound are school buses.  Is school in? Or is it not summer holidays down there?   They may not even have a full complement of drivers on hand.


The most telling statement I have heard so far is that after a dry run of an equivalent scenario some two or three years earlier somebody asked what would be done about all those people that didn't have cars.  Apparently there was silence in the room.  If, as presented, that was a meeting of all levels of government, whose responsibility was it to force the question and demand a solution before moving on to the next order of business?

Jurisdictional disputes, responsibilities for budgets, political credit.....and then at the end of everything the same matter of operational logistic support that military forces constantly struggle with - to push or to pull.  Should unneeded supplies be pushed forward, burdening the local commander and/or denying other commanders, or should they be pulled forward based on the commander's request, resulting in delays or even shortages if command, communications and transportation aren't available or up to speed.

In a Canadian context: Is it reasonable, in the event that Vancouver disappears under mud and water, with road and rail cut off, power out and the homes and families of everyone from the mayor on down damaged, destroyed or inaccessible, to rely on a "pull" response with local commanders and assets responding.

With warning, as happened in this case, then movements to high ground, shutting off the gas and the power, etc, all of that should be local.  But once the incident has occurred perhaps the responsibility needs to be removed from the local to higher (or perhaps more remote would be better) agencies.

Final point - our kids have been told at school for years, as have parents that choose to listen, to prepare to be on your own for at least 72 hours after a disaster.  In our case this is critical because almost all the options we are likely to encounter will have little or no warning.


 
However, that being said, the entire US military (Federal) structure, including NORTHCOM and other formations, cannot - legally - get involved until a formal request is received.  Moreover, once Federal troops are deployed they cannot - again legally - get involved with domestic law enforcement.  It will always be the National Guard conducting police-type operations.

You refer of course to the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act).  A very powerful piece of legislation in the US that restricts Federal involvement in "State or domestic" law enforcement.

Canada did not evolve/develop along US lines and the requirement for a provincial run "national guard or militia" was negated by the ability of provinces to request forces directly from the CDS (no Federal veto ability) to quell civil disturbances.  The CDS also retains the authority to decide what and how much of a response is made in assisting the provincial authority.  This has been done several times in our past (FLQ crisis and OKA crisis to name but two).



 
Gunner:

That raises an interesting point about the nature of governance in Canada and the roles of the Federal and Provincial governments.

Moderators - off topic alert.

There is the constant debate about equality of provinces and whether the provinces are masters of, the equals of or subservient to the Federal government.

It seems to me that while the Colonial First Ministers were finagling the roles and responsibilities based on them allowing the Fed's certain powers that the actual Colonial Administration, which was based on a hierarchy of Governors and that they didn't disavow, put the provinces in a distinctly subordinate position.  Gunner's comment about the provinces appealing to the CDS directly for assistance, with no federal input can only be seen in that light.

The army is not a creature of the government.  It is a tool of its Commander-In-Chief, the Governor General.  The Federal Government may advise the GG on various issues but the army follows the GG's instructions.  The CDS then ultimately advises and obeys the GG.

How does this relate?

When a provincial Premier had a problem in the past it was also a problem for the Lieutenant-Governor.  The Lt-Gov would then likely have appealed to their boss, the GG, for assistance, and the GG would have directed the equivalent of a CDS to respond to the request.

Interestingly to me that suggests that while our politics are not hierarchical our governance is.  A source of further and continuing confusion.  The GG owns the only military force in Canada, not the government although the GG has become a creature of the government.

The US has 50 "traditional" armies in the form of the National Guards - armies that can swing between public order or policing duties and conventional warfare roles, conceivably in defence of the State against other States or the Federal Government.  The Federal Government in the meantime is restricted to having an army that can "destroy" any "traditional" army but has little ability to impose its will on the citzens of the States.  A workable balance for the US but an imbalanced Federal Army for the types of "imperial duties" necessary in Iraq and Afghanistan etc.  Thus the need for employing National Guards Infantry.

As I said, a divergence, and sorry for it.  If this prompts comment perhaps it should be sent to another thread.  This was the equivalent of me thinking out loud.

Cheers.
 
Tomahawk6 - it seems someone at Loyola University in NOLA (in this version of their disaster plan cached on 28 Aug 05):

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:kbVWujvWpX8J:www.loyno.edu/studentaffairs/hurricane.emer.plan.html+%22City+of+New+Orleans%22+bus+contract&hl=en

was told/thought the City was going to contract busses for evacuations of vulnerable populations:

"Limited bus transportation is available to evacuate those resident students who are unable to evacuate on their own. Loyola can only evacuate approximately 150 remaining residents. The City of New Orleans and other agencies contract commercial bus carriers to evacuate hospitals, nursing homes, retirement communities, etc., and those providers will not normally reserve busses for the university to transport college students. "

Wonder how many others thought the same?

 
Kirkhill, you mentioned one instance where the  problem of transporting the poor was highlighted, but were these disaster plan excercises  a regular occurance? Or was what you mentioned just a meeting and not an excercise? I've googled a bit, but nothing anwering my question came up.
 
Spruce Tree:

Honestly I can't remember the exact reference myself.  There has been a ton of comments seen and heard recently and I can't remember if I saw it in hard copy, on-line or on TV.  Pretty sure it wasn't the latter.  I am inclined to think it might have been a National Post article.

As I recall it the meeting was associated with the dry run that they did 2-3 years ago?

Too much info.  Too little brain. :-\
 
No worries Kirkhill! I have bouts of the big info/small brain syndrome at time as well!  :) 

 
This is from a sometimes army.ca contributor, in today's Globe and Mail at: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050906/COGRANAT06/TPComment/TopStories
My emphasis added.

Katrina: a black eye for America, a lesson for Canada
By JACK GRANATSTEIN

Tuesday, September 6, 2005
Updated at 11:43 AM EDT

We have all watched as a large part of the United States fell from a First World society into Third World death, chaos, and societal breakdown. President George W. Bush initially missed the nature of the crisis; his performance, wrote The New York Times' Bob Herbert, was "one of the worst ever by a president during a dire national emergency." It took days to get food and water to survivors, and even longer to put National Guard and regular troops into the region. A week after hurricane Katrina, whole families were still being plucked off rooftops by helicopters. The Americans will have their own inquiries into what went wrong. What lessons should Canadians draw from the aftermath?

The first lesson is that we're not immune. The Atlantic and Pacific coasts are vulnerable to tsunamis, and British Columbia is a major earthquake waiting to happen. We have seen monstrous forest fires threaten cities, floods ravage urban and rural areas, and ice storms paralyze Eastern Ontario and Quebec. There are new pandemics that could see tens of thousands of Canadians die, and terrorists might use biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons against our cities. We need to be prepared.

Second, Canadians smugly assume that the collapse of law and order in New Orleans could not happen here. But after days without food and water and power, with little or no help on the scene, who can confidently say Canadians would not turn to looting and fighting each other to survive?

Third, to this viewer, our local police and fire departments simply could not cope with a tragedy of Katrina's magnitude. Not until the National Guard and U.S. Army belatedly arrived in force was order restored, food distributed, and rescue systematically organized.

So what should Canada do now?

The primary necessity is for planning. Public Safety and Emergency Planning Canada is the latest iteration of the federal government's emergency planning apparatus. Set up after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, it is a good start. But does PSEPC have lists of hospitals and doctors? Does it have preparations for setting up shelters to move hundreds of thousands of earthquake survivors out of Vancouver? Does it know where heavy equipment is? If so, what arrangements have been made to get access to it in a crisis? Are our stocks of food, water and medicines adequate to cope with a Katrina-scale disaster?

What would we do if the power grid collapsed -- in winter? What plans are in place when computers and cellphones don't work? What about getting information to the public? In New Orleans, TV and radio disappeared with the electricity. Perhaps Ottawa could give Canadians a tax credit to buy battery radios; such a step might save lives.

And what about the Canadian Forces' capacity to respond to disaster? We have 52,000 effectives in the regular forces and less than 25,000 reservists. We have no heavy airlift capacity to move large pieces of equipment or large numbers of personnel across Canada, and most of our medium airlift is grounded. Our few Sea King helicopters are effectively inoperable, and the army is short of trucks, the navy almost bereft of sealift or supply ships. This is a disaster waiting to be made worse.

The nation has to deal with this now. The first step was taken at the end of June when General Rick Hillier, the Chief of the Defence Staff, created Canada Command to co-ordinate all military activities in the country. This will help bring order out of military chaos, and the command's first order should be to instruct the reserve forces to begin to plan together for disasters.

Incredibly, while the army reserve has been talking to local authorities where its armouries are located, air and naval reserve units have refused to do so, or to work with the army. Yes, they have other tasks. But if Winnipeg, for example, is ravaged by a catastrophe, its air, naval, and army reserve units will be needed to bring help and keep order in the city. A thousand trained, disciplined, and equipped personnel could make all the difference in the first few days.

Another simple step would be to get the CF's Supplementary Reserve in order. Retiring regular and reserve personnel can sign on to the Supplementary Reserve now -- if they wish -- but no one tracks their whereabouts. This is foolish and wasteful of a trained resource. Every retiring serviceman and woman should be obliged to join the Supplementary Reserve and to notify National Defence Headquarters annually of his or her status and whereabouts. Called to duty when needed, these skilled soldiers will be essential to survival in a crisis.

But above all, the Canadian Forces need more: more people, more equipment, more funding. The problems faced by the regulars have been laid out very clearly by Senate committees and others, and the problems must be remedied. Aircraft, ships, vehicles, communications -- all are needed now, and the funding promises made by the Liberal government in 2005 are only a start.

It is simpler to deal with the part-time military -- and cheaper, too. The reserve units, scattered across the country, are ideally placed to respond to crises, but they are grossly under strength. The last federal budget promised to increase reserve strength by 3,000, but this is pathetic. Build reserve units up to full strength and give them the equipment they need. Lives will depend on this. And, yes, there will be other military purposes that can be served at the same time, and that is all to the good.

Some of our governments and our people will surely say that the Americans will help us if we have a disaster. Of course they will, as an American friend says -- "unless they are busy elsewhere." The U.S. forces are going to be busy elsewhere for years. We can't count on others for help.

The key lesson of Katrina is that no one will ever again cut any slack for government in a national crisis. The shameful rescue and relief debacle in Louisiana will stand as a lesson for decades. Canada's government has been warned, and our leaders must draw the appropriate lessons.

Historian J.L. Granatstein is a fellow of the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute.

© Copyright 2005 Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights Reserved.
 
While the article is interesting I dont agree that the US went from a first world country to a third world. Maybe New Orleans went from a first world city to a third world city almost overnight but not the entire country.
 
A lot of hyperbole floating around the airwaves these days Tomahawk 6.    And you are correct to point out that the 500,000 people in New Orleans (10,000 to 100,000 hard cases) are not indicative of either the personality nor the current condition of the other 250,000,000.  In fact judging from NOAA's aerial imagery currently available the situation west of the levees, on the river and 4 Blocks inland of the Gulf Coast isn't the same as shown in the Disaster clips.

On the other hand, up here midst my compatriots, our people need a hard shaking to realize that bad things happen to good people.  The act of declaring yourself to be good will not protect you from much. 

They need to see that what happened down south can happen up here.  They need to be able to look after themselves (not just nationally but personally).  They need to spend money to be able to do that.  Not other people's money.  Their own money.

In a nation where large parts of the population are already besotted with the notion of moral superiority over the Great Satan and those poor benighted individual trapped within its belly, Jack's article may actually serve to make the case.

Up here you have about 30% of the population that is supportive of the US and its administration and anything up to 60% of the population for whom, no matter what you and your government do, you will always be wrong.  Those numbers don't change on the basis of a few articles.  Much like your red/blue numbers don't change much regardless of the issue.  We have a degree of tribalism settling in internationally.

From where I sit it is as important, if not moreso, to get our people out of their torpor and start facing up to realities, as it is to reduce the ill-will towards America.  I believe that America is strong enough to survive a few external critics, no matter what their intentions.  I am not convinced that our people yet understand just how vulnerable they are and how much work is required.

Cheers, Sir.
 
The rhetorical flourishes are interesting once you deconstruct them. Apparently, President Bush should have God like powers to stop or divert the storm, as well as being able to micromanage everything. Perhaps he should have phoned the Mayor of new Orleans to ask why no evacuation order had been posted (the mayor got around to it about six hours before the storm struck). Maybe he should have led a convoy of city busses out of the city, rather than, like the mayor, park them so they now form an artificial reef. The real position of those writers and posters is the American Federal government should have unlimited powers unfettered by any sort of legal or constitutional restraint. (There goes the Republic).

As for "beleted response", the Military was prepositioning men and equipment around the area for days ahead of time, but perhaps some commentators forgot that helicopters and airplanes don't fly in hurricane or gale force winds, and when ALL the roads are washed out, it is exceedingly difficult to drive in your supplies (how many really good MLVW drivers are out there?).

I was in Kemptville during the ice storm, and we had a heck of a time in the cold weather without power, even though we had road access, food and fuel, plus a cooperative population who were proactively helping themselves (where do you think all those trees went to?). Factor all that stuff out of the equation, and the ice storm could have been a very different picture indeed.

Here is why the response was unacceptable:

Ghost Plan for a Ghost Town
Ghastly oversight in New Orleans.

By Chris Regan & Bryan Preston

Until it became known as the city of looters threatening jihad against Red Cross rescue workers, New Orleans, Louisiana was known as a city of ghosts. A walk through its French Quarter made clear why. Stately homes dating back to the city's founding look out on streets that have seen war, flood, storm, and pestilence over the centuries. Those floods used to literally raise the dead: The water table is so shallow in the Mississippi delta that even a slight rain would make buried coffins float. City residents eventually tired of seeing Uncle Etienne, dead ten years, riding the rapids down Canal Street after the latest spring shower, so they started placing all of their dead in above-ground mausoleums. But the ghosts, it was said, still stalked the streets, haunting the city whose spongy ground and seasonal storms had disturbed their eternal rest.

After hurricane Katrina, thousands of new ghosts will take up the march. Their lives, history will record, were taken not so much by yet another natural disaster, but by a human-made disaster of epic scale. If you go looking for these ghosts, any New Orleans bus lot will be a good place to start.

The Lesson of Georges

The story of buses has become the seminal tale of dereliction in New Orleans. Though the city owned hundreds of buses, it failed to use them to move its most vulnerable citizens â ” vulnerable either because of poverty or physical infirmity â ” out of the bowl-shaped city to safe higher ground. Initially it seemed as if the city that knew the levees protecting it would one day break just didn't have a plan to move so many people to safety. But it turns out that emergency-preparedness officials in New Orleans did have a plan, and they did think to use buses to evacuate the city before a major hurricane. They just decided not to fully implement it as Plan A. The plan was developed as a hurricane Georges lesson learned. This appeared in an article that appeared in November 2004 in the Natural Hazards Observer:
Residents who did not have personal transportation were unable to evacuate even if they wanted to. Approximately 120,000 residents (51,000 housing units x 2.4 persons/unit) do not have cars. A proposal made after the evacuation for Hurricane Georges to use public transit buses to assist in their evacuation out of the city was not implemented for Ivan. If Ivan had struck New Orleans directly it is estimated that 40-60,000 residents of the area would have perished.

So the question after dodging the Georges bullet seemed to be, "Do we figure out a way to use buses or do we allow 50,000 people to die for the crime of not having a car?" They chose Plan B.

Hurricanes come in cycles of frequency and activity. Meteorologists don't really know why, other than that it might have something to do with solar activity and shifting deep sea currents (but responsible scientists do know the hurricane cycle has nothing to do with humans burning fossil fuels). We are currently at the cusp of an intensification of hurricanes. We can expect more of them, and we can expect more of them to be strong.

As the hurricane cycle kept building in the last decade or so, there were increasing calls to create a real evacuation plan. Many of those who pleaded for the use of buses will come forward soon, but for everyone who does, there are others who do not have the strength to come forward. They can't hack their way out of their attics right now to tell us their side of it. And the journalists at the New Orleans Times-Picayune are no longer interested in speaking on their behalf. As their "Open Letter to the President" shows, they're now the spokesmen for other political interests. It didn't used to be that way until the inevitable happened. Now they have circled the wagons to protect the guilty and accuse the innocent.

Each hurricane season Louisiana officials decided to play a game of Russian roulette with those lives. They knew disaster would eventually strike, but gambled that it would happen on someone else's watch. They did take the action that nervous officials typically take: They formed a working group to reassure themselves and look busy to everyone else. According to that Natural Hazards Observer article from November 2004, here's what the hard-charging working group came up with:

Unwilling to merely accept this reality, emergency managers and representatives of nongovernmental disaster organizations, local universities, and faith based organizations have formed a working group to engage additional faith-based organizations in developing ride-sharing programs between congregation members with cars and those without. In the wake of Ivan's near miss, this faith-based initiative has become a catalyst in the movement to make evacuation assistance for marginalized groups (those without means of evacuation) a top priority for all levels of government.

So a working group decided that the workable solution to the problem of thousands of stranded citizens was to ask churches to set up a giant car-pool system. The plan further called for a DVD to get the word out, which was still in production when Katrina struck. A cynic might say that such a plan was drafted so city officials could say they had a real evacuation plan, written down on official letterhead and signed and announced and all of the other things that make bureaucrats swoon, but was in point of fact yet another exercise in passing the buck to the next schmuck to occupy the conference-table chair. If it was a real plan, it doesn't seem a stretch to say that as hurricane Katrina bore down on the Big Easy, the real plan really failed.

More hurricane lessons from Georges and actions for Ivan, from the Natural Hazards Observer:

To aid in the evacuation, transportation officials instituted contraflow evacuation for the first time in the area's history whereby both lanes of a 12-mile stretch of Interstate 10 were used to facilitate the significantly increased outbound flow of traffic toward the northwest and Baton Rouge. The distance of the contraflow was limited due to state police concerns about the need for staff to close the exits. And, although officials were initially pleased with the results, evacuees felt the short distance merely shifted the location of the major jams.

You read it right: "for the first time in the area's history."

So not only did officials keep putting bus-utilization plans on hold, they only began using an ineffectively implemented contraflow system last year. The contraflow plan was to turn both sides of the highways into outgoing lanes, but all that did was move traffic tie-ups from nearer the city to the points where the contraflow was ended. And they couldn't make the entire highways contraflow for miles and miles because some lanes were needed to get things into the city (rescuers, etc.). City officials barely even scratched the surface of what could have been possible in competently evacuating that city using an early-warning system, buses, and contraflow.
Third Time's a Disaster

The result was that in the worst-case scenario. The Natural Hazards Observer again:
Regional and national rescue resources would have to respond as rapidly as possible and would require augmentation by local private vessels (assuming some survived). And, even with this help, federal and state governments have estimated that it would take 10 days to rescue all those stranded within the city. No shelters within the city would be free of risk from rising water. Because of this threat, the American Red Cross will not open shelters in New Orleans during hurricanes greater than category 2; staffing them would put employees and volunteers at risk. For Ivan, only the Superdome was made available as a refuge of last resort for the medically challenged and the homeless.

It was to take ten days for rescue to get everyone out, not counting the dead. And city and state officials knew it would take ten days. For them to cry in the current crisis that 72 hours is unacceptable rings more than a little hollow.

Now we see belatedly that there never was a reasonable local evacuation plan or shelters with a hope of withstanding a real hurricane. And the communication process before the storm was as atrocious as the plan itself. It was no different for hurricane Ivan:

As Ivan charged through the Gulf of Mexico, more than a million people were urged to flee. Forecasters warned that a direct hit on the city could send torrents of Mississippi River backwash over the city's levees, creating a 20-foot-deep cesspool of human and industrial waste.

Residents with cars took to the highways. Others wondered what to do.

In this case, city officials first said they would provide no shelter, then agreed that the state-owned Louisiana Superdome would open to those with special medical needs. Only Wednesday afternoon, with Ivan just hours away, did the city open the 20-story-high domed stadium to the public. Mayor Ray Nagin's spokeswoman, Tanzie Jones, insisted that there was no reluctance at City Hall to open the Superdome, but said the evacuation was the top priority.

"Our main focus is to get the people out of the city," she said.

Callers to talk radio complained about the late decision to open up the dome, but the mayor said he would do nothing different.

"We did the compassionate thing by opening the shelter," Nagin said. "We wanted to make sure we didn't have a repeat performance of what happened before. We didn't want to see people cooped up in the Superdome for days."

When another dangerous hurricane, Georges, appeared headed for the city in 1998, the Superdome was opened as a shelter and an estimated 14,000 people poured in. But there were problems, including theft and vandalism.

Katrina was a three-peat major hurricane failure in planning. City and state officialdom didn't do enough after Georges warned them, kept hoping against hope when Ivan spared them, and have now reaped the mighty whirlwind of Katrina. When compassion is defined as delay and the subject is hurricanes, you are asking for a serious catastrophe. President Bush's call during the height of Katrina interrupted that compassionate liberalism. The goal of the locals was to avoid a mandatory evacuation that would cause trouble by having too many people in the shelter of last resort with too little security and no food or water. The goal was to fool more people to stay home or leave so that the city didn't look bad or descend into violent chaos if it took a direct hit. The mayor knew the danger of mass chaos with too many stuck in the Dome and planned for none of it.

Now we know that had Katrina held its strength and course at Cat 5+ it would have probably ripped most of the roof right off the Superdome. And the roof in that design is what holds the walls up. That was the other part of the scam. Nobody really knows if the Dome could take over 130MPH sustained, though they claimed a 200MPH design.

So the Louisiana state governor and emergency-preparedness officials allowed them to get by all these years with a sham plan that doesn't appear to even meet state standards. And guess what? Oh yeah, the state didn't even measure up to the federal requirements either:

Other federal and state officials pointed to Louisiana's failure to measure up to national disaster response standards, noting that the federal plan advises state and local emergency managers not to expect federal aid for 72 to 96 hours, and base their own preparedness efforts on the need to be self-sufficient for at least that period. "Fundamentally the first breakdown occurred at the local level," said one state official who works with FEMA. 'Did the city have the situational awareness of what was going on within its borders? The answer was no."

This is why every city must have sharp leadership, and a disciplined, non-corrupt police force that won't melt away into the population when under attack, like Saddam's army. And every state must have a governor who, when under pressure to perform, will not freeze and cry before consulting with lawyers and advisers before freezing up again in a passive-aggressive way that shifts blame to those trying to help. That's what we're all supposed to get in exchange for the big salaries, fancy dinners, 24-hour security, and other perks that go with the powerful political jobs. We give our politicians quite a lot. Is it too much to ask them to prepare for disasters in ways that won't get us all killed?

New Orleans is a major port of entry and exit for commerce. It's sinking into a bowl and is threatened by a gulf, a lake, and a river. It needed leadership, but what New Orleans had was an old political machine, a corrupt police force, and no real disaster leadership. Since the state knew of the problems with that police force though, the Louisiana National Guard could have had a dedicated special force with a plan to secure the city after the big one. A whole team of fast boats and such could have been training for years and deployed immediately to not just rescue but to keep order. That's the governor's job to think up something creative like that, not the feds. Coulda, shoulda, woulda. And here come the ghosts.

When you're clearly vulnerable to a nuke-sized catastrophe every summer, and you fake your emergency preparation like you've got it all under control, and then you still pretend that you have things under control even after it's perfectly obvious that everything has spun out of control, then you shouldn't blame others for being angry at the negligence. Who would want to have that many dead on their watch? You have to assume they had done everything humanly possible to save lives. But Governor Blanco and Mayor Nagin did not even come close. Neither did others before them. Local leaders kept pulling the disaster trigger, but got empty chambers. Blanco and Nagin were just the unlucky pair who got the bullet.

It seems as though emergency planners in New Orleans gave up serious disaster preparedness a long time ago, even as the hurricane cycle swung toward intensity. They counted on luck and instantaneous "rescue welfare." Only the recent hurricane cycle woke them up. Slightly. They were still half asleep, under a strong spell of complacency any New Orleans voodoo witch would have been proud of casting. Anyone left out of the evacuation plan was given a massive overdose of false hope. It was playing Russian roulettewith 50,000 people, first fearing, then knowing this time that the fatal bullet had moved into the chamber offshore, just praying that it didn't actually go off when the trigger was pulled at the shoreline and hoping to blame the world's universal scapegoat, George Bush, for racist genocide if it did.

The levees were designed to protect against hurricanes only in the lowest three of five categories of intensity, Strock said. Katrina was Category Four when it hit the U.S. Gulf Coast on Monday.
"We figured we had a 200- or 300-year level of protection. That means that an event that we were protecting from might be exceeded every 200 or 300 years," Strock told reporters. "So we had an assurance that 99.5 percent, this would be OK. We, unfortunately, have had that 0.5 percent activity here."

"The intensity of this storm simply exceeded the design capacity of this levee."


Plans, working groups, more plans, an in-progress DVD, a near-miss, a relieved sigh, a folding of the hands, and then back to sleep. The city and state had directives to plan the planning session to start the process of making a plan, but little in the way of any real plan to deal with a real disaster. So the buses sat in their lots. The winds and the floods came, the unlucky local officials kicked in Plan B, and the city of New Orleans drowned with its least fortunate trapped inside. The evacuation plan was a plan, but it was really just a ghost plan with ghost buses and ghost drivers, with ghost emergency supplies kept in ghost "shelters" under control of a ghost police force with a ghost emergency communications system overseen by a ghastly governor.

It was a plan for a ghost town. That plan worked.

And here come the ghosts.

We'd better learn from them. The countless dead will expect nothing less.

â ” Chris Regan and Bryan Preston are freelance journalists. You can see Louisiana's plan here http://www.ohsep.louisiana.gov/plans/EOPSupplement1a.pdfand New Orleans's here http://www.cityofno.com/portal.aspx?portal=46&tabid=26.
 
  http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/regan_preston200509061439.asp 

 
So after reading the article, once again we see:

Piss poor planning and preparation results in piss poor performance.

rings true once again....
 
I have cnn on in the background, and they just said 5 people have died from cholera. And E-coli is everywhere. They are warning people to stay out of the water, and stay out of New Orleans. Also they want everybody from New Orleans to get a Hepatitis "A" How the hell are they going to find everybody they have already evacuated.

This could get even more out of control.
 
I think the planning was right, just poor execution and throw in state/local vs federal power. Evidently Bush met with the mayor and governor the friday before the hurricane struck, to get them to sign off on emergency plans. The governor was confused and wanted 24 hours to think the plan over. Both the governor and mayor are democrats so politics has a factor in this. One can plan for any eventuality but to act decisively at the proper time is what may be the weakness of any emergency plan. I really hope that one positive change will be to streamline the bureaucracy to enable it to respond quickly in times of crisis.
 
I wonder if the politicians wouldn't prefer an "automatic" trigger, one that is negotiated ahead of time and called by bureaucrats or better yet one that is objective (ie Category 4 hurricane 48 hours out - go to mandatory evacuation plan).  Politicians generally seem to loathe making a decision.  More particularly they hate to be seen to be wrong.
 
Back
Top