It is settled wisdom among journalists that the federal response to the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina was unconscionably slow.
"Mr. Bush's performance last week will rank as one of the worst ever during a dire national emergency," wrote New York Times columnist Bob Herbert in a somewhat more strident expression of the conventional wisdom.
But the conventional wisdom is the opposite of the truth.
Jason van Steenwyk is a Florida Army National Guardsman who has been mobilized six times for hurricane relief. He notes that:
"The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."
For instance, it took five days for National Guard troops to arrive in strength on the scene in Homestead, Fla. after Hurricane Andrew hit in 2002. But after Katrina, there was a significant National Guard presence in the afflicted region in three.
... and more ...
Journalists complain that it took a whole week to do this. A former Air Force logistics officer had some words of advice for us in the Fourth Estate on his blog, Moltenthought:
"We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering.
"The United States military can wipe out the Taliban and the Iraqi Republican Guard far more swiftly than they can bring 3 million Swanson dinners to an underwater city through an area the size of Great Britain which has no power, no working ports or airports, and a devastated and impassable road network.
"You cannot speed recovery and relief efforts up by prepositioning assets (in the affected areas) since the assets are endangered by the very storm which destroyed the region.
"No amount of yelling, crying and mustering of moral indignation will change any of the facts above."
I liked the quote here:
"We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering."
Jack Kelly, the guy who wrote this, is a syndicated columnist with an axe to grind. He's well known in many media circles as being somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun and has never had much of a reputation of letting impartiality get in the way of a good dig on the left.
What Katrina comes down to is this.
1 - We knew it was coming. Katrina didn't deviate significantly from its expected path.
2 - We knew New Orleans was a disaster waiting to happen. FEMA ranked a hurricane ravaged New Orleans as #3 on the list of nightmare scenarios for the United States.
3 - We failed to protect the city. New Orleans levy projects and maintenance was critically under funded from the moment we went into Iraq. The Bush administration took a gamble because it had other priorities. Sometimes when you gamble you loose.
4 - The response wasn't good enough. Yes, we were faster into New Orleans than we were into the areas hit by Andrew or Hugo, but the consequences of those hurricanes weren't as severe. Evacuation went more smoothly, and there weren't failed levees involved. The Katrina disaster was more than just a hurricane and demanded a swifter response.
5 - This report skirts the facts. Was there a national guard presence? Sure. Was it significant? No. Was there a functioning local police, fire, and emergency presence locally after Hugo or Andrew? Yes.
Mr Bush has pitched himself as the security president. He campaigned on his ability to protect the citizens of the United States better than his opponent. He failed in that capacity.
Why he failed is not of interest to me. Excuses will not bring back the dead nor restore New Orleans. The country and her citizens were at risk and Mr Bush didn't save them. There is no excuse, none at all, for the failure of the federal government to step in and make sure that everyone who wanted to get out of New Orleans could. FEMA exists to get things done in the wake of or in the face of disaster.
here is a good story about the response and the efforts that go along with it. FEMA is a lot like the DMV. its a bunch of bureaucrats who have created red tape that makes it difficult to get things done, and it takes a long time to get things done.
i think it's also important to realize that the federal government is not allowed to send in troops into a state unless they request it. the Louisiana national guard is controlled by louisiana, not the federal government. cathleen blanco, the democrat governor of louisiana, only requested that federal government fund the national guard, not control it. i think there would have been more of an uproar if a republican president had sent in troops to a state without the consent of a democrat governor.
however, blame belongs to the federal government (Congress and Bush), Louisiana governor cathleen blanco, and the city of new orleans emergency responders. to simply blame bush for the entire debacle is both folly and untrue.
"Living for the future is more important than trying to avenge the past...i guess." -Puck
Bush is the head of the federal bureaucracy. The failures of FEMA rest squarely upon his shoulders.
He had the power to declare a state of emergency and evacuate New Orleans, under protest from the governor if necessary, and failed to do so.
In his capacity as chief diplomat he has rejected help from thousands of overseas organizations that could make a huge difference in this.
I'm not saying that there weren't other agencies that could have taken action here, but I am saying that Bush and the aspects of the Federal Government under his control have a lot of power -- they could have done something and they failed to.
Does that make it totally Bush's fault? No. But it does put blood on his hands in my opinion -- and it certainly means that the response to this was not the sunshine and lollypop filled model of efficient and humane disaster response Mr Kelly tells us it was.
aren't most of the people in FEMA just political lackies Bush put in who dont even HAVE experience in emergency relief? I know patrionage is a common practice among politicians, but at least Clinton put in a friend of his who HAD the necesarry experience to handle the situation .
.