The US Federal Government's Lack of Action, New Orleans & The South USA Options

[Guest_Jox_*]

Lori suggested porting this here - so I have done so...

What I don't understand from this side of the Pond is the US Federal Government's (lack of) reaction. I saw GW Bush on tv asking people to give donations to Sally Army and Red Cross. Why? Shouldn't the Government get on and rescue people. I'm completely bewildered that the richest nation on Earth should just abandon people for four or five days whilst society breaks down. Of course, going in is not easy but no attempts at much were made for so long. Many people are saying that the rich powerful men in Washington (at best) don't have a clue about the urban poor of the south - let along the racial issue which is being discussed by the hour on tv over here.

However, that was me being gentle over in that tile. Here I would like to know why the US Government should not be charged with negligent homicide and crimes against humanity. It has presided over many deaths which were preventable. Most people are poor and many black. How much does that tell us about the powerful white Republican establishment in DC?

If the people in this disaster had been New England white liberals, would help have come quicker? There is much discussion on UK tv that this represents a major racial schist in the USA and that the black poor don’t matter to the white republicans. I’m not actually sure I agree with that - as far as I can see this simply looks like massive incompetence. I marvel at the fact that Clinton was impeached for having an affair with his associate simply to attack his liberal regime - using Star as the battering ram - but GWB will probably serve-out his time in office after precising over what seems tantamount to mass murder.

The weather situation was known. But why were the urban poor (mainly black) populations not evacuated? Because they couldn’t afford it? Because they had no cars? Because no one cared?

OK to be logical for a moment we have split responsibilities here. It is hard for a Brit to appreciate that States and local governments do not appreciate having their jurisdictions infringed by the US Federal Government. The US is a federation: to a large degree individual states are politically independent. So the initial failure may be fairly charged at the New Orleans and Louisiana authorities; they must have cases to answer. Of course, they may have asked for Federal assistance then - I don’t know yet.

But from the moment the weather system hit the US State had a responsibility. Instead it has allowed people to thirst to death, to die from lack of medical care, from violence in a society which has partially dived into anarchy. TV showed the New Orleans Police giving up I believe. One can’t blame them - the disaster was overwhelming.

Overwhelming is that a defence? Nope. Because the US could deploy people far faster; break-out reserves of water, food, medicine far faster. The European Union (including the UK) have asked the US if they would like humanitarian assistance. None (to my knowledge) has been taken up. Why? Because the US can cope? Well it should be able to and may be it can but it has not hitherto. Is there a political fear that such aid would be politically damaging to this dreadful President? Important to save the No1 skin, of course.

Troops had to be diverted from humanitarian relief to tackle looters, violent criminals, murderers. Why has that city broken down so quickly? Might existing poverty and deprivation have been factors? Hour upon hour here in the UK we’re seeing women plea that gangs are raping people, others hold babies aloft to the camera, pleading for their lives to be spared from disease and thirst. These are scenes fit for Dante’s Inferno, played out in the Southern swamplands of Louisiana.

Those of us who regard the US as one of our very top international friends are horrified at the state of affairs. Globally, everyone will be appalled at the humanitarian catastrophe that has suddenly happened. As a friend we should be ready to give any human assistance at all which is needed - and we are.  But we should also make sure the utter disgust and contempt, which we feel towards the appalling way in which this crisis has been allowed to fester, over the rotting corpses of New Orleans especially, is voiced. (There are many other places too but their situation - terrible as it is - is not quite as awful). The US Federal Government is only responsible to the US people - I do hope they let no one in the Administration off the hook. But, also, there is a wider responsibility in terms of human care - we are all concerned about that. So we can all, in our own ways, try to help hold the US Federal Government to account.,, if only to maintain pressure to help those that still desperately need it.
J.

[Cleo_Serapis]

Hi everyone.

Let me start by saying this: I hope that everyone affected by the worst natural disaster in our history gets all the help they need at this tragic time. That is most crucial to over-coming the obstacles. I am only addressing the points that James raises. Everyone will have their own opinions and I welcome them. I am not stating I agree with what I state below, just what is known.

Jox writes: The weather situation was known. But why were the urban poor (mainly black) populations not evacuated? Because they couldn’t afford it? Because they had no cars? Because no one cared?

As late as Satuday morning, it was still a category 1 hurricane, just off the Floriday coast. Nobody expected it to grow in 24 hours to over a category 5 hurricane before weakening slightly and making landfall as a category 4. How can anyone evacuate a half million people in less than 24 hours regardless of their color?

Jox writes: OK to be logical for a moment we have split responsibilities here. It is hard for a Brit to appreciate that States and local governments do not appreciate having their jurisdictions infringed by the US Federal Government. The US is a federation: to a large degree individual states are politically independent. So the initial failure may be fairly charged at the New Orleans and Louisiana authorities; they must have cases to answer. Of course, they may have asked for Federal assistance then - I don’t know yet.

What happens in this country is that the state must first ask for help before the federal government does anything (by law). It's been know since Camille hit the area in 1969 that this problem could happen again. The state of Louisiana did not make significant strides in increasing the size of the levee walls, pumping stations, building code etc. It does not make a difference who is in the White House, the reaction from the federal authorities would have been no different. Once the request is made, it takes time to get the appropriate logistical resources in place. We just don't have 20,000 army reservists sitting at the ready at their homes bases, (even without wars going on) waiting to handle a disaster.

Plus, most of the people from the area are so entrenched in the area, that they go back to their same house for generations. A hundred miles away is a big deal to them to travel, so they don't have their own forms of transportation at the ready cuz they just haven't needed it.  Remember, they also survived Camille and any number of storms that have come through over the years and even after the limited evacuation attempts that were possible once the severity of THIS storm were known, CHOSE to ride it out anyway.

Jox writes: But from the moment the weather system hit the US State had a responsibility. Instead it has allowed people to thirst to death, to die from lack of medical care, from violence in a society which has partially dived into anarchy. TV showed the New Orleans Police giving up I believe. One can’t blame them - the disaster was overwhelming.

Yes, the individual states had a responsibility to react as swiftly as possible. The storm upgraded SO FAST they didn't have time to react and now they're faced with severe logistical issues. How do you get into the area? Bridges and highways are gone (washed out), other streets are littered with debris (including downed power lines), there was even a 6 foot shark that was swimming the streets along with many 'gators'. The area is still under FEET and FEET of water. The only ways available are helicopter and boat. So, the helicopters arrive, start trying to pick people out, and the people start shooting at them! What the HELL? They are trying to help!

Then there's the issues of looting. Yes, I would most likely do it if a grocery store situation too, since the food will go bad anyway and water is so desperately needed. However, some of the folks robbed nursing homes, kicking the occupants out into the streets (most in wheelchairsand on med equipment), gunnery shops (and now have automatic weapons in hand), among many other stores. The police pulled back because they were out-numbered and out-gunned. How can one blame this behavior on lack of governmental action?

Jox writes: Overwhelming is that a defence? Nope. Because the US could deploy people far faster; break-out reserves of water, food, medicine far faster. The European Union (including the UK) have asked the US if they would like humanitarian assistance. None (to my knowledge) has been taken up. Why? Because the US can cope? Well it should be able to and may be it can but it has not hitherto. Is there a political fear that such aid would be politically damaging to this dreadful President? Important to save the No1 skin, of course.

Whoever was in power, the results would have been the same. The local government bears primary responsibility and has failed for 30 years to do what would be necessary to protect a city that is on the coast and is 20 feet below sea-level. It was only a matter of time before a storm did this.

Jox writes: Troops had to be diverted from humanitarian relief to tackle looters, violent criminals, murderers. Why has that city broken down so quickly? Might existing poverty and deprivation have been factors? Hour upon hour here in the UK we’re seeing women plea that gangs are raping people, others hold babies aloft to the camera, pleading for their lives to be spared from disease and thirst. These are scenes fit for Dante’s Inferno, played out in the Southern swamplands of Louisiana.

Yes, this is sadly true. It might have been so, however, do people in a time of unusual crisis not have a responsibility to assist each other until other resources can arrive? What I see on the news is the stronger taking complete advantage of the weaker within their own neighborhoods. It sickens me, IMO! Yes, the scenes could be from a movie. But horrifically, they are real.

It takes time to get ships to sail into the area and as of yesterday, supplies, a medical ship and 10,000 troups have been giving out food, water and other supplies. The situation likely wold have been significantly different if there were more than 24 hours warning before landfall. Yes, we could discuss all the politicing involved, however, as you all know, I don't like to talk politics.

This is similar to what we saw when Hurricane Andrew hit Florida.

Perry provides excellent links which talk about the politics behind FEMA and how $71 million was cut from levee construction a year ago to fund Homeland Security. What about the other 29 years that the local government had?

Again, this sounds cruel on my part, it is not. It is not meant to be at all. But the federal goverment in our system does not bear primary responsibilty for local disaster preparedness. Even now, with Homeland Security and the other joke agencies that were created, the vast majority of disaster budget planning, falls on local authorities.  We are doing what can be done with floating hospitals, blood drives, food, clothing etc... that we can manage along with evacuations to Texas Astrodome (350 miles away) with the resources that arrive daily (that CAN get to the heart of the city). It boils down to this:

1) A lack of time before it hit.
2) People taking control by sinful means.
3) Local authorities lack of foresight.


It didn't matter where it hit, rich, poor, middle-class. If given the same circumstances had a storm hit Miami for example, the results would be similar. Although the effects might have been slightly shorter lived because the waters would have receded faster and ground access to the area is easier when you're not dealing with what is effectively a bunch a small islands. I had visited Miami shortly after Andrew hit and it was devastating to see. However, in time, it turns itself around.  If you google Hurricane Andrew looting, you'll see 42,000+ hits.

We're left with attempting to pick up the pieces as best we can, as swiftly as we can. We can do it, but time is required.

~Cleo