New Orleans Two Years After Katrina:
This Douglas Brinkley essay is a few days old but still a very important read. Here's a taste:
Over the past two years since Hurricane Katrina, I've seen waves of hardworking volunteers from nonprofits, faith-based groups and college campuses descend on New Orleans, full of compassion and hope.Thanks to Hilzoy for the link.
They arrive in the city's Ninth Ward to painstakingly gut houses one by one. Their jaws drop as they wander around afflicted zones, gazing at the towering mounds of debris and uprooted infrastructure.
After weeks of grueling labor, they realize that they are running in place, toiling in a surreal vacuum.
Two full years after the hurricane, the Big Easy is barely limping along, unable to make truly meaningful reconstruction progress. The most important issues concerning the city's long-term survival are still up in the air.
(The mitigating factor being rampant corruption that preceded, and contributed to, Hurricane Katrina.)
The trouble is, anybody says that (like Mr. Hastert), they get savaged by the Moron Caucus as being "insensitive and callous" for denouncing idiocy.
Bush deserves qualified praise for his approach here. It would certainly be better if he forthrightly said we should write off New Orleans; however, at least he is implementing the correct policy.
An interesting meteorological theory, to say the least. And here I thought it was a combination of low pressure systems and warm south Atlantic water.
$120 Billion / 1.4 million comes to about 85k for every man, woman and child.
Well, strictly speaking, although it may be beyond the scope of Article I for the federal government to rebuild New Orleans, there's nothing in the clear language of the Constitution that says it's beyond the scope of Article I for the federal government to give money to someone with the expectation that that person will use the money to rebuild New Orleans.
Anyway, with the feds throwing money at anything and everything, with seemingly nothing too obscure or too local to merit federal funds, the plight of New Orleans hardly seems like the time or place to begin a new initiative of adherence to pre-New Deal federalism.
We'll be getting around to your porch furniture eventually.
Yours truly,
The U.S. Federal Government
Perhaps all this money should've been directly deposited in the bank accounts of the 300,000 people living in New Orleans. All divvied up, that $127 billion would come to $425,000 per person...
Before handing out even more taxpayer loot, wouldn't it be reasonable to demand a detailed, independent audit, showing whose pocket each and every one of those 127,000,000,000 taxpayer dollars went into?
This isn't about any sort of ideology, except a deep sense of pragmatism. NO was not one of our most successful cities. Lets not make the same mistakes twice because its a nice thing to do!
I can't help but think that the hatred towards New Orleans comes from one or a combination of the following: 1) it's in the South, 2) it's largely Democratic, 3) it has a large number of poor, black residents.
If nothing else, maybe we can appeal to your sense of history. A lot of historical cities have suffered disasters around the world during the last 100 years. No one has suggested abandoning them.
The commonsense political (and humane) compromise is to tell people that we won't help rebuild anything below sea-level BUT we will provide much financial aid for for people to relocate and for communities to welcome them.
Of course humane commonsense is not in evidence in the White House so we get what we have: nothing.
As to why there is a Federal obligation: national environmental policy dredged the Mississippi and allowed the destruction of the barrier island/wetland complex.
Now what I have yet to see are some realistic estimates on the cost of pulling a Galveston on New Orleans. You cannot realistically rebuild a city in a bowl. Either change the bowl into a hill or be done with it.
Events have shown that it isn't reasonable to maintain a city the size of NO in that location. We should let the city shrink to a manageable size, only clearing (with Hastert's bulldozers) what is necessary for public safety.
There are plenty of good arguments I've heard for why NO should not be rebuilt, or rebuilt differently, or whatever. But to argue that the people of NO are too darn lazy to deserve your tax dollars is . . . let's just say it's not one of them. Whatever you want to say about the people of NO, they were most certainly the victims of massive government incompetence at all levels. I ask you, what would your self-help plan be if you lost your home and your job, the insurance company refused to pay on your policy, and you had a thousand dollars (or less) in savings? Remember, no complaining.
I'm not arguing for a massive giveaway, but it is, in fact, "heartless" to hold the victims here -- mostly poor and black -- responsible when no other city or industry in a similar situation (see, e.g., post-9/11 giveaways to NY and the airlines) has been.
Why not? And while we're at it, we can investigate Robert Kennedy, Jr's suggestion that the earlier path of Katrina (when it looked as if New Orleans would be spared the worst) was due to God's anger with Haley Barbour. I suppose that given God's feelings about Barbour, New Orleans made a serious mistake being his neighbor during hurricane season. I can't think of a safe place to put Barbour so that his neighbors aren't collateral damage from God's wrath. Perhaps we should all pray to God that Barbour should be smitten to save all the rest of us from the dangers of bad weather.
Well put!
On my own blog I've written about the Galveston model (i.e. fill-in the low parts) several times over the past two years and what has amazed is the lack of response. It simply doesn't seem like an idea people can grasp, even though they actually did it in Galveston one hundred years ago.
The Federal government helped San Francisco but it doesn't seem like they've done less for NO. Two years is not much. If indeed they want the levees rebuilt to some new standard that needs to be done first and done right.
I have been curious as to cost also.
NO has the advantage that it (of course) right on a river which can handle enormous barges so bringing in good structural fill to raise the grade of the city should be as cheap there as anywhere.
Let's look at that old Constitution. Hmm . . . Article I, Section 8:
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States"
Now, cursory review of Supreme Court decisions going back to just about forever provides that Congress's power to spend "for the general welfare" is pretty much unlimited.
Thanks for coming out though. Maybe, you'll get them next time.
Then he scurried back off into the fogs of delusion without applying that lesson to New Orleans.
With all due respect, the only thing important about that read is that it reveals what a cloud cuckooland Brinkley is in.
I suspect AQ figures that would be a waste of good money, when it appears likely the event will happen anyway.
Put it this way, if Vegas lost the Strip to a flood/blizzard/swarm of locusts, would anyone go there anymore? (Besides the folks like me that know really cheap blackjack tables can be found on Fremont St. downtown, but you get my point.) Same for NO. City planners have assumed (not unreasonably) that the economy of that region is doomed forever unless it can recover the industries that made it strong prior to the storm.
Now some, myself included, may question their wisdom in that it requires them to make the same tragic set of mistakes twice, especially since there is no guarantee that levees will be built more sufficiently this time around. I'd be curious, though, for those advocating Galveston as a model (which is an oil town and a port) as to how you'd adapt the model to fit the economic realities of NO.
And for those of you saying we have no business providing "handouts" at all, now that the idea that it's unconstitutional has been thoroughly debunked, I'd simply ask you to realize how far into the political minority you are on this one. The city is going to get help, whether you like it or not. Much of that help will come from Congress, because constituencies have made it a priority, and you speak nowhere near loud enough in a political sense to drown them out. You will be a lot more effective if you work to reduce mistakes this time, which some of us are trying to do. Plus it doesn't make you look heartless. Which is nice.
If I got my entire life wrecked tonight, I'd be back on my feet in less than a year. I am tired of the excuses. Shut up and get to work.
Even before Katrina, NO was, at best, a city rife with crime, decay and corruption, and was falling into deeper degredation each and every day. Oh, there was jazz, and seafood, and the French Quarter--well, maybe the French Quarter isn't all that good an example of something positive--and Mardi Graz--well, maybe that isn't such a good example either. And its political "leaders" were feckless reprobates even by Louisana standards. But at least they were willing to cry "racism" whenever anyone suggested that perhaps someone might look into trying to raise NO to the level of a third world hell hole.
I'm sorry Mr. Brinkley, but you have your chocolate city and all that goes with it. I'm afraid it's just a bit difficult for the rest of America to have much sympathy with the desire to return NO to its former glory. In the rest of the country, responsible governments forbid building on flood plains abutting rivers, and you want to rebuild, at costs that might even give a congressman pause, on silt, below sea level, in a hurricane zone, a place where there will, not might but will, be another hurricane, any year now? Only folks whose brains have been addled by too much exposure to NO could think folks would be amenable to that. Hey, but at least the NO brand is out there!
Simple solution with maximum reasonable amount of compassion: "Dear Mr / Ms New Orleanian, we will not rebuild a city that will only be destroyed again. Your choices are: (1) take this check for $$$ and leave; (2) don't take the check and stay if you want, but don't come crying back again..."
"You can't really just "move" the French Quarter above sea level, at least that I'm aware."
Especially since (I believe) the French Quarter is already above sea level.
I'm thinking January 21st, 2009...
The thrill of NO is the sleaze. I believe "frisson" is French for "cheap thrills". You go to NO and come back with a knowing leer.
But nobody went to the Ninth. The sleaze was real, there. Dangerous, unpleasant, and not at all fun. In the tourist areas, it was commercial, vitiated. Sort of like Vegas, "baby". Hur-hur-hurk. And back to Council Bluffs.
Aha, that would make sense. I guess, to reword: you can't move the French Quarter miles away to a city site that would be more safe, nor can you rework the "bowl" parts of the city and leave the French Quarter the way it is.
I dunno if that's really the case though--it's just the rationale I've heard often for rebuilding right on the ruins of old NO. Am I right about this? Someone with more city planning/engineering experience might know--is there a way to rebuild NO that is at once 1) minimally safe from this sort of destruction and 2) effective at retaining one of the city's primary industries without damaging that industry's necessary district?
tywebb,
There, fixed your typo for you.
1. The federal army corps of engineers (COE) was responsible for building the levees and flood protection system
2. The levees were rated for category three and failed at a level far below that because of design flaws
3. The COE knew years before Katrina hit that the levee design was flawed and would likely fail
That the federal government has some responsibility to fix New Orleans since the damage was caused by their lack of due diligence on the flood control projects. To me that is a pretty reasonable argument.
However, the biggest obstacle to a successful rebuilding is the incompetence and bureaucratic inertia start at the level of the New Orleans city council and working all the way up to the top of the state government.
It is difficult for people who are not familiar with Louisiana in general and New Orleans in particular, just how dysfunctional and corrupt the state is.
NPR gave an example of that this afternoon. The FBI building in N.O. was destroyed by Katrina and it was rebuilt in 8 months.
The New Orleans Police Department building was also destroyed. Two years later the building has not been rebuilt and the police are still working out of trailers and having to use porta potties
My response is why not? Why even touch those parts of NO (e.g. French Quarter) which are above sea level? Fill the low-lying parts and leave the rest be.
I would bet that over a fifty years or even one hundred that the cost of filling is much less than maintaining levees. Of course the barrier islands should be rebuilt in any case.
As TJIT observes: the problem IS the city, parrish and state administrations. 127 Billion dollars the tax payers of this country have pumped into to NOLA are more than sufficient to demonstrate a commitment and compassion. My compassion for that cesspool and residents thereof is totally depleted. The city still has one of the highest murder rates in the country and the idiot Mayor, elected by his fellow idiots, somehow sees that as the branding of NOLA. Right. Pathetic.
Do you have a source for that statement? It sounds inaccurate.
Again, you may be right. I certainly hope that's the case.
Humans often provide aid to innocent victims, while other animals do so very rarely. I think it's fair to call compassion one of the fundamental human virtues. New Orleans, as well as other areas victimized by heartless water levels who have no respect for human structures, have given us a reasonable supply of victims for us to exercise our compassion upon. The general welfare of the nation benefits from this exercise.
You miss the point. We "animals" are showing compassion. Have you forgotten the billions that we have poured into NOLA in the two years since K?
A "disgusting" lack of compassion might be to say, "You had a flood. You didn't have appropriate insurance. You'll get nothing and like it." Of course, such a statement is easily justifiable economically, but like you said, we have values that militate toward charity in certain circumstances.
What many of the posters are saying is "You had a flood. You didn't have appropriate insurance. We can be reasonable and compassionate. Here is some money to make a new start. Now rebuild your life somewhere safer. However, if you rebuild in a bowl again, don't come crying to us after the next flood."
Don't forget, we are talking about more than just money. We are talking about people's lives. The loss to an individual who rebuilds in an unsafe area is more than can be covered by just cash. Why should we provide economic incentives for the poor to rebuild in an area where they are certain to be wiped out again? Just to make you feel better? What about the "humanity" of those whom you would put back in harm's way? Doesn't their suffering count?
As you said, heartless water levels have no respect for human structures. Last time I checked, a levee was a human structure. So, what is your alternative? Cyclical rebuilding with the attendant cost in human misery, not to mention the additional billions of dollars of rebuilding costs that will come once again from the federal fisc? Or is your answer to just keep spending more of other people's money until NOLA is some kind of impregnable fortress against the sea? That'll be some check.
So what's it going to be? Take a stand. Or if you'd rather just lecture others about their humanity, that's fine too. Just don't expect the rest of us to feel charitable while you're stomping your feet.
Living here has been a mixed bag. We will not stay. It seems as though the "party atmosphere" which exists throughout the city and not just on Bourbon Street masks so many problems endemic to NO.
There are some people here who believe that Bush blew up the leeves. There are law suits against the Army Corps of Engeneers. There are thousands of volunteers who have gutted houses while (in some cases) the young and able bodies residents sit and watch them do the work - cause they feel they are owed that.
On all the Katrina specials I didn't see any mention of our Vietnamese community who took matters into their own hand post K and brought their community back without asking for any assistance. I am not saying that there isn't a place for a helping hand, but our country was not built by people who sat on their hands waiting for the government to do something for them.
I have seen the wave of "poor Katrina victim" stories since we are hitting the 2nd anniversary. Truth be told, I am tired of hearing about how some people are forced to live in trailers, etc. It's been two years! Stop looking for the government to take care of you. Go get a job! I cannot believe how New Orleans has to import illegal immigrants left and right to get work done.
If I got my entire life wrecked tonight, I'd be back on my feet in less than a year. I am tired of the excuses. Shut up and get to work.
I spent a week volunteering in New Orleans last year, a day of which was spent talking to people in the trailer camp about how they are trying to get their lives back together. A few observations:
(1) I'd say that about half the people I spoke to were elderly. They are beyond the age of retirement. As with many retirees in many areas of the country, the amount received in Social Security/Medicare/private pensions was enough for these peole to live on day-to-day when they already had furnished homes, but is not nearly enough to start from scratch. Due to their age/health impairments/time out of the workforce, it will be very difficult if not impossible for them to start over without some kind of assistance.
(2) Another big chunk of people living in the trailer parks are children. I know, I know, their parents should be taking care of them. But in the case that their parents/grandparents are unable to, I'd say we're all in for a whole lot of trouble when Katrina's kids come of age. These children were already growing up in an impoverished city with a pathetic educational system; one can only imagine the psychological scarring many of them suffered in the Superdome. You may not want your tax dollars going to them, but they'll go to them eventually when we build more prisons anyway.
(3) As for healthy adults, I remember vividly speaking with one young woman who was working, and working overtime I believe, but still unable to leave the trailer park. She was lucky enough to have her own car (many trailer residents do not, and the trailer parks are in very isolated locations) and had gotten a job as a clerk at a discount store. The job did not pay very well (and she was supporting her young son). She had had a better-paying job at a butcher in New Orleans, and the butcher was calling her and asking her to return. However, rent in her previous neighborhood had nearly doubled since the storm and she could not afford to return. Since the trailer park is over two hours away from N.O., she couldn't commute to the butcher and take care of her son. Thus, she was trying to save money while working in the lower-paying job close to the trailer park. This woman struck me as bright and capable, and even with all of the logical reasoning skills I had acquired as a second-year law student, I couldn't figure out what else she could do differently in order to get out of the trailer park.
Did I see other clearly able-bodied people hanging around the trailer park doing nothing? Absolutely. Do I think the government can solve all of the problems affecting the people in the park? Not a chance. But it's easier to say from a distance and in the abstract that everyone should just be able to pick up and get back on track in a year with absolutely no help. The view from the ground is much different.
I prefer the idea that the private sector could come in and do a much better job in a shorter amount of time with repair of the levees and management of some of the other problems here. Federal government tends to make a mess of things. Can't wait to see what a national health care system looks like!
WHOI Jacket:
According to Wikipedia, the pre-K NOLA metro population was 1.4 million.
The key to the 1.4 Mill figure is "metro". That included NOLA (which is Orleans Parish - on both sides of the River), St. Bernard Parish, Jefferson Parish, the North Shore -- probably including as far north as Covington and as far northwest as Hammond, and along I-10 West at least to LaPlace. NOLA itself is only Orleans Parish. The estimated population pre-Katrina was 350K+ to 400K+ -- the lower estimate being based primarly on things like census data, utilities hook ups, private housing and residential rental housing, etc. The higher figure would also include "persons" receiving various types of public assistance and welfare payments -- who not infrequently couldn't be found, but someone kept cashing the checks. While I lived there, that was the subject of an investigation -- which just sort of faded away without answers being found.
TJIT:
One could argue that since
1. The federal army corps of engineers (COE) was responsible for building the levees and flood protection system
2. The levees were rated for category three and failed at a level far below that because of design flaws
3. The COE knew years before Katrina hit that the levee design was flawed and would likely fail
While it is true you can "argue" those points -- and the lawyers suing the federal gov't for something like $77 Billion are making those types of arguments, they largely aren't true.
Response to Point No. 1: After Hurrican Betsey in 1967, anyone who looked at the facts knew that New Orleans would drown if it was hit by a Cat 4 or 5 storm. Katrina was a Cat 3 when it made landfall in Mississippi. NOLA was on the NW quadrant, the weakest part of the storm and barely sideswiped. The sustained winds were barely, if at all, in the Cat 1 range, with only some gusts towards the Cat 2 range. The buildings in the Central Business Dist shed glass and other materials although under the building code applicable there should have been only minimal damages. As for building the levees, while the COE had overall responsibility for design and planning, Congress consistently underfunded the COE's designs, and the Orleans Parish Levee Board and various NOLA and State agencies opposed the designs that would have met Cat 3+ standards, requiring re-designs and revisions of plans. The biggest problem was due to the lack of a Rotterdam style dike (one that can be closed to prevent a storm surge from entering) across the opening of the Lake into the Gulf. The COE wanted to do this. However, in a suit by Save Our Wetlands, USDC E. D. La. Judge Charles Swartz held in about 1977 that the COE's Environmental Impact Statement was deficient as to considering the effects on wetlands and enjoined the project. The Orleans Parish Levee Board also opposed the project. The COE then proposed building butterfly gates at the entrances of the canals -- which was also opposed. So, building the levees that failed (and yes, building levees are projects in which the Levee Board has its fingers) was what the COE finally decided upon. NOLA did not flood due to Katrina. Rather, parts of the levees of the 17th St. and London St. canals failed, which flooded the Lakeview and Mid City areas and areas south of them. The storm surge along the Intra-Coastal Canal caused levee failures that flooded New Orleans East and the Lower 9th Ward (and at least one of those levee failures may have been due to a barge -- which should have been removed from the canal -- breaking free of its moorings and ramming through a levee). So, you cannot place the blame for poor design and plans (or even poor construction) entirely on the COE, and the Bush Administration had nothing to do with that.
Response to Point No. 2. See above. It wasn't a Cat 3 in the NOLA area, and the storm surge from the Lake after Katrina had passed NOLA caused the flooding. Interestingly, there was little flooding in Jefferson Parish (Kenner and Metairie on the "East Bank" -- that is north of the River to the Lake -- or Gretna, Marrero, etc., on the "West Bank" -- south of the River), or in Orleans Parish on the "West Bank" (in Algiers, which while part of the City of NOLA runs itself largely as a separate city), all of which coincidentally are largely Republican areas vs the largely Democratic areas of NOLA and St. Bernard Parish, and which have different Levee Boards, didn't have much flooding. True, their levees and pumping systems are far from satisfactory. Still, there is at least a facial association between the political party in control and where the major flooding occurred.
Response to Point No. 3. The levee failures were due the storm surge into the Lake. Environmental laws and politics prevented the COE projects (the Rotterdam style dike or butterfly gates) that would have prevented the worst flooding.
So what is the "compassionate" response -- a point argued by several above? Is it compassionate to do things in a way largely similar to the ways they were done before, recognizing that you'll likely have the same result in the future? You can, again, spend a lot of money -- and a lot was spent pre-Katrina. However, until the money is spent effectively -- and not in response to political pressures by different groups -- there is no reason to believe that the same situation won't be re-created -- only maybe the next time a Cat 4 or 5, or even Cat 3, storm will, in fact, hit NOLA and not merely sideswipe it with Cat 1 intensity. Is it really compassionate to move people back and await them, or their children, being drowned?
Some comments have been made about the political corruption in NOLA and LA. I've lived in Arkansas under the Falbus and part of the Clinton regimes, in NY (do "Albany Mall" and "Port Authority" ring any bells as to boondoggles?), and now live in KY (if you've followed the news for the past couple of years, that should also ring some bells, too). I've never found that State or local governments anywhere are especially clean. However, all of the above States are minor leaguers compared to LA. And, LA is an example of positively clean, good government compared to NOLA.
A post-Katrina example: An Aunt of mine has gone with her church 3 times to do Katrina relief and rebuilding. The first time they went to NOLA (the others were to another Parish in south LA and to south Mississippi). Before the first trip I warned her about the NOLA tradition of Lagnappie (a "little something extra", usually in advance), and suggested that they take plenty of $20's. In the week in NOLA, they accomplished nothing. They couldn't start removing damaged materials from a house until they had a city permit. They couldn't do any repairs with out other city permits (and then would have to have the work inspected by the city and approved). They couldn't place trash out for pick-up without arranging for someone to haul it away, which required that the hauler also have a permit, and another permit to dump it at an approved landfill. To get anything done, they had to first coordinate with FEMA, state and NOLA departments, which were only open during regular working hours -- assuming that someone was there then -- none of which were co-located and none of which coordinated with each other. In pre-Katrina days I knew that if anyone wanted to get anything done, including the paperwork for permits/inspections moved along timely, some Lagnappie was not infrequently helpful. In the other 2 places she and her church group went, the agencies either were co-located or would call ahead on permits, the people processing the permits and the building inspectors would work long after business hours and on weekends, and for trash hauling a list of licensed, bonded firms was provided with their phone numbers so that all that was needed was a call and payment of the fees (which were known in advance). They were able to get a lot done in their time in those communities -- and unlike in NOLA, people would show up with food and drinks and say "Thank you for helping us." My Aunt doesn't recall ever hearing that in NOLA.
Prof. Brinkley completely overlooks the possible effects of allowing people who have not lived in NOLA for 2 years to continue to vote there. I am unaware of any other instance in which people who moved 2 years before are allowed to continue voting inn local elections. Does any one know of any other examples? In the last Mayorial election, Mr. Naguin's margins that got him into the run-off and his victory came from voters living in places like Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, and Monroe, LA (where my in-laws live). How much involvement in a city do you expect of people registered to vote elsewhere? How much consideration by the local government of such people, who don't vote in local elections, do you expect?
As far as expecting those who now live elsewhere to get jobs and start helping themselves, I think that this is best illustrated by the experience of my in-laws. Their church perpared food for Katrina evacuatees who were living in a hotel 2 blocks from their church. Only 4 people took the effort to walk over to the church to pick up free meals. There were some complaints about the church not delivering the free food it had fixed. As far as getting jobs, the reason for not doing so has been "We don't have cars, and so can't get to a job." The city has an adequate bus system -- not great, but you can get all over Monroe and West Monroe using it. The reason for not using the bus system that has been stated is the "In New Orleans free bus passes were provided by the city, but none have been provided in Monroe." In Psychology this is call "Learned Helplessness." If your whole life you have been told that someone else is responsible for taking care of you and providing for you, you learn to be helpless. The hotel, where the evacuatees still live is within walking distance of a college, which has day-care facilities for students' minor children and which will arrange financial aide and work programs. Only a handfull of the evacuatees have taken courses. Rarango asks "How long do we have to support the victims?" That's the wrong question. The correct question is "How long are you going to have to support the victims?"
Is everyone in LA like this? No. When Hurrican Andrew (which was a Cat 5) hit, I lived in Baton Rouge. There was significant wind and water damages and we were without power for 4 days. During that time I got out my chain saw, and with others, cleared fallen trees. A neighbor with a block and tackle helped me get my fence up and straight, and we did the same for others. People went up on roofs and secured tarps. The wives made "ice runs" and we used our grills for cooking community meals and had block parties at night. One neighbor was a claims adjuster and went around preparing the documentation we'd need. A sham contractor showed up -- out of state tags, no proof of ins or bonding and didn't know where the permit office was -- and decided to leave when surrounded by people holding things like crowbars. On day 5, insurance claims were being filed, and within 2 weeks all the work needed contractors had been done -- by firms that had bonds and ins and had gotten the necessary permits, the the neighborhood looked pretty good.
So, I guess that the answer Rarango, and others who have asked that question, is "Until the 'victims' decide to support themselves."
Some of the "victims" are doing so. I was in NOLA in July. I noticed something "different." It took me a couple of days to figure out what it was. Basicly it was the smell. NOLA now smells like there's a River and swamps nearby -- the basic wet smell of a tropical town. It didn't reek of urine, vomit and filth. I also noticed that there was no longer trash on the streets. The people who have moved back, largely, are moving back to work and build, and are the sort of people who take pride in their town. Perhaps coincidentally I didn't meet anyone who lived there who said that they voted for Mayor Naguin. I also learned that one of the complaints about the federal money that has been made available is that much of it is being held by the State in its accounts and isn't being released.
I could continue -- facts like pre-Katrina, Texas had been holding Hurricane Response exercises for 20 years, while Louisiana had held 1 (which assumed that cell phones could be used for commuication -- neglecting to consider the effects of gale force winds on cell phone relay towers) and that LA National Guard equipment and personnel could mobilize before the storm hit at Jackson Barracks in St. Bernard -- which was surrounded by a 12 foot levee -- that's what was done, although the projected surge was 20 feet, which is what happened (a friend of mine in the LAARNG told me about riding out Katrina on the 3d floor of a building in Jackson Barracks, the 1st floor being completely under water and several feet of water being in the 2d floor -- the 5 ton trucks and other heavy equipment was destroyed, as were the computers and commo equipment in the flooded buildings); or that although NOAA and Pres. Bush called LA Gov. Blanco several times and asked that she authorize a federal response like the Govs. of Miss. and Ala. had done, and order an evacuation (at least the law was changed so that the Pres. no longer has to await the State's Gov. to ask for federal assistance), and while FEMA's actions in Miss. and Ala. were adequate (although flawed), since no federal response or assistance was authorized in LA until after Katrina had hit, FEMA, along with the State and NOLA local governmental responses all failed miserably; or that since Gov. Blanco didn't start talking about evacuating south LA until about 12 hours before land fall, there was no place for all the buses Mayor Naguin had collected to go (since his authority ends at the Parish/City line); or that in the post-Katrina damages survey, some 50,000 vehicles were found in NOLA to have been destroyed in the flooding (let's see, 100K to 150K people weren't evacuated. That works out to about 2 to 3 people per vehicle. But, if you wait to order an evacuation until 12 hours before land fall, no one who hasn't left is leaving). Still, I did enjoy the pictures of Gov. Blanco handing out a few ice bags while wearing a blue denim work shirt -- that was a photo op staged to show her concern and compassion. Yes, there are many other facts I could continue with. But, I think I've provided enough to support my conclusion that Prof. Brinkley's article is an essay on his political ideology that lacks substantial basis in reality -- as do many of the comments to this post.
While my house is not totally chocolate, we do have a tortie cat who is many shades of brown.
By the power of her fur color, and my own unwillingness to fix things myself: I order Bush to send my household $120 billion dollars.
I respect your compassion for others. Thank God for people like you. But two years is too long for people to keep blaming government and others. What did they do before Katrina?
As for me, I did get my life completely destroyed in 1996. I was living with a girl who was playing me to no end. I came home from work one night at 2:00 a.m. and found she left with everything. At about 8:00 the next morning the sheriff showed up to evict me. I had zero clue is was coming. I found out I was maxed out at over $60,000 in credit cards, had my bank accounts cleaned out, and was left with nothing. What did I do? I lived in a long-term hotel for 3 months and got my life back together within 6 months. (Without filing bankruptcy, I might add). Was I any less devestated than Katrina? Perhaps it wasn't as bad for me as it was them, yes, but I did something about my situation. Yes, I do feel sorry for the elderly and the children, but in the end I blame the social permission to whine and complain for years after.
"I'm not arguing for a massive giveaway,".....Billions of dollars wasted isn't a massive giveaway, particularly with little to show for other than some further enriched local politicians and leaches ? "but it is, in fact, "heartless" to hold the victims here responsible"... No, it is not. They have suffered the consequences of their actions and choices. Being poor, or a minority is irrelevent. Ones economic status is due in large part to lifestyle,education, and responsibilty choices. It is not forced on you, not over the long term. "when no other city or industry in a similar situation"....baloney, Florida recovered from Andrew. Repeatedly making excuses for those whom won't take responsibilty for themselves, their offspring ,and/or their choices does nothing other than fabricate a victim class. The aftermath of Katrina is a testament to that. It exposes the root cause of the failure of government largesse in ameliorating these kinds of situations.
The view of someone who works for a living looks considerably different than the world according to theory in academia.
Gov't boondoggles big and small. I'm not complaining about the next one, but I just got back from the Soc Sec Office. My youngest is disabled and we just got Soc Sec Disability Income established for him since he turned 18 -- my ex challenged my petitions for guardianship and conservatorship when he turned 18, and her attorney made it quite clear that if I didn't max the benefits available to him, I'd see her back in court. So, his step-mother and I applied for Soc Sec for him. The Notice of Award showed that his benefits were reduced because he wasn't being charged for room and board. I confirmed that this was the case with both the rep I spoke to on the 800 number and a rep at the local office. So, I charged him (by writing myself a check from his Guardianship account) what I thought was a reasonable amount (I have an accounting degree, so I wasn't totally pulling an amount out of the air) and appealed the deduction. I was wrong on the amount, by over 50% -- too low by over 50%. So, I just got back from getting that resolved -- by writing myself an additional check in front of the rep, who duly entered the info and provided me with the determination that in view of his now paying "rent" at a reasonable amount as determined by Soc Sec, his benefits will not be reduced by the amount of deemed income that Soc Sec had determined that my wife and I were providing him because we hadn't been forcing a disabled person (our child) to pay us rent to live with us. On a small scale, this is how entitlement programs work.
And you wonder why throwing money at NOLA isn't going to solve its problems?
Private vs Public Programs: Pre-Katrina the NOLA public schools and the schools of the Archdiocies (forgive the spelling, I'm not Catholic) had about the same number of students and employees. The Catholic schools had 9 people working in its central office, while the NOLA public schools had over 200 working in its central office. The teacher/student ratio in the Catholic schools was much better. The cost per child spent by the NOLA public schools was much higher -- about $3K more per child as I recall. The Catholic schools were uniformly considered to be both excellent and safe. In the public schools, there were armed guards who carried Glock Model 20s (10mm, for those unfamiliar with Glock Models -- it is a very formidable weapon -- and there were armed guards in all the NOLA public schools, not just in those in bad neighborhoods). In order to attract good teachers, the NOLA public schools paid a $5K signing bonus to teachers who were certified in the subject in which they were hired to teach. That was on top of an average of about paying about $7K per year more than the public schools of the surrounding parishes, and more than that greater than teachers in the Catholic schools (almost all of whom have both certifications and Master's degrees). The NOLA public schools still fell far short of attracting enough teachers with certifications for all of the slots. About 10 years ago the LA Dept of Education reviewed all of the public schools in the State and gave them grades -- of 167 schools found to be failing, 164 were in Orleans Parish. The NOLA public schools are so bad that post-Katrina the administration has been taken over directly by the LA State Dept of Ed. In the last school year, the Catholic schools' enrollment was at about 80% of what it was before Katrina. The NOLA public schools' enrollment was about 20%, despite the State having opened several Charter and Magnet schools.
And you wonder why federal and state programs don't seem to be making much headway in bringing back NOLA to its pre-Katrina status? Maybe the relevant questions are whether you want to bring it back to its pre-Katrina status? -- And, should you allow only those who live and work there to vote, and so determine what they want its post-Katrina status to be?
Florida recovered from Andrew.
So did south Louisiana. Andrew crossed south Florida as a Cat 5, and was still a Cat 5 when it made land fall south of Morgan City, LA, and proceeded north through Lafayette and passed not far north of Baton Rouge. However, NOLA suffered no effects from Andrew. No one from south Louisiana was appearing on CNN to whine 2 years later, Spike Lee didn't show up to make a documentary for HBO about how south Louisiana was doing 2 years later, and there were no WaPo articles about how tough it was in south Louisiana 2 years later.
Amazing. I wouldn't believe someone could write that, if I hadn't actually seen it.
Once again: giving your own money is compassion. Spending someone else's money isn't compassion.
Okay, so how's this: those whose compassion for Saddam's victims led them to think the Iraq War was a splendid idea, THEY can pay for it.
Isn't that an effective way to conduct a great nation's business?
One could make an argument that NOLA needs more Federal intervention, an intevention that would override the parochial political concerns and incompetence that hampered past efforts to build levees and floodgates, and to provide a comprehensive and multifaceted flood control plan that would be immune to the politico-economic pressures that such projects suffered from in the past. Of course it won't happen. We lack the political will to do so.
I shudder to think that many of the people who post here will have a voice in deciding how to repair and upgrade this country's infrastructure, which is now 20-70 years old and feeling the strain.
Two comments then, which I do not expect to be welcome. It is awfully from here difficult not to link the ineffective response to the tragedy in the poorer, blacker, parts of New Orleans to an assessment that these are the sort of people who do not deserve the whole hearted support of their fellow-citizens. And with that a hubris of the law-bloggers, mainly from their secure academic and professional locations. NO is not the only fragile environment bequeathed to the 21st century by history. California, the sun belt, Florida, tornado alley, the Mississippi basin, are all irrational, hostile locations for human occupation, and particularly for intense population, and all as fragile in their own way as the gulf coast. In the words of Evita, don't cry for me, Pasadena (or Berkeley, or Atlanta, or ...). I live right by the Thames in the City of London, and can see the tide level every day: it's a useful reminder that we all live on a fragile planet, that **** happens, and that we are always lucky that it wasn't us this time.
So, in order to "save" New Orleans, it is necessary to stop all of the dredging of ship channels which result in the loss of sediments to the wetlands and saltwater intrusion that kills off the freshwater plants that hold the soil in place; then, the wetlands which protected New Orleans can have a chance to rebuild, a process which only took 3,000 years the first time around. Of course, if Louisiana takes the steps necessary to save the wetlands, the shipping industry which supports a substantial portion of New Orleans economic life will be crippled. Conclusion -- New Orleans is already dead, it just won't admit it.
So, you posters who will accuse me of a complete lack of compassion, perhaps you can suggest a way to prevent this death without killing New Orleans' shipping industry? Maybe ship a few trillion tons of dirt to Southeast Louisiana to dump it in shallow areas of the Gulf to rebuild New Orleans' natural seawall? Or should we spend another $120 Billion just to make the death as comfortable as possible for those residents of New Orleans who refuse to face reality?
That's not to say you don't identify another, major problem with rebuilding NOLA. Sooner or later a strong hurricame will sweep over the NOLA area from the south. Actually, the problem you identify is a more serious threat to the NOLA area.
The major cause of the subsidence and coastal wetlands loss is not the canals dredged in the wetlands. That is a minor cause, since the canals allow saltwater intrusion which kills the wetlands vegetation. If the canals were the major cause, then the solution would be the simple and easy one of blocking and re-filling the canals and stopping the saltwater intrusion.
The major cause of the subsidence is the water diversion into the Mississippi River channel at the Old River Control Structure north of Baton Rouge. If you google "Old River Control Structure" and "Mississippi River diversion" you'll find several articles describing why the Old River Control Structure was built and its effects -- including the unanticpated ones of subsidence and coastal wetlands loss. A small quote from one of the articles summarizes the issues:
"The Old River Control Structure
As time progressed, it became increasingly apparent that the Mississippi was diverting more and more of its flow down the Atchafalaya River. In the 1950’s, engineers observed that the Mississippi would soon cease to inhabit its current channel as the mainstream, and instead migrate to the Atchafalaya River Basin. The path by which the Mississippi would migrate was a small stretch of water, named the “Old River”, that connected the Mississippi to the Red River. Old River was formed when Captain Henry Shreve dug a shortcut across the the neck of Turnbull’s Bend in 1831. The Mississippi abandoned its old course and took the shortcut provided by Old River. As a result, the Atchafalaya River received more and more discharge from the Mississippi."
Simply put, had the Mississippi River was cutting a new outlet to the Gulf and left unchecked, the Atchafalaya River would have become the mouth of the Mississippi River. This would have made some place near Morgan City, LA, the mouth of the Mississippi River. It also would have left NOLA, Baton Rouge, and all of the petrochemical plants between them situated along a long, silting up lake. The corridor from NOLA to Baton Rouge is sometimes called American's Ruhr Valley. It's contribution to Louisiana's and the US's economies is immense.
The Old River Control Structure has proven very effective in preventing the Mississippi River from periodically flooding the coastal wetlands, such as occurred in the Great Flood of 1927. However, the consequence is that the River's silt no longer replenishes those wetlands. As the soil there compacts, subsidence occurs and the wetlands sink below sea level. The same subsidence also occurs under the urban areas around NOLA.
If you can devise a method that prevents the Mississippi River from changing its channel so that NOLA, Baton Rouge and the industrial corridor are not cut off, while at the same time providing for periodic flooding of the coastal wetlands so that silt will replenish them and off-set the effects of the subsidence, you will become a very wealthy person.
Enjoyed your essay. Regarding the levees my comments were based on articles in the Times Picayune linked to by the contributor Paul on the wizbangblog website.
The relevant information is at this link. The Final Nail in the Corps Of Engineers' Coffinand Bold emphasis is mine. I have not followed the Corps of Engineers (COE) situation since then so some of the earlier reporting may have changed as more information came available.
But if the original reporting stands the COE failure to modify their designs to take into account the test results appears to be a pretty clear cut case of engineering malpractice.
1. On what do you base your opinion that government response was a function of race? Was the black mayor's inaction a function of race? Would he have behaved differently if his constituents were white? If so, why?
2. Do you think we have an obligation to rebuild in areas that are below sea level? Why? Who do you think will be employing the people who move back there?
If you want to play God, or anticipate the next two decades' storms, and declare parts of NO unsafe for human habitation, and not fit for rebuilding then the moral hazard is in not providing adequately elsewhere for the displaced. That calls for planning and expenditure too, upstate in LA or in another state, maybe as much as rebuilding in the flooded zones. If the current relationship between city, state and federal administrations is broken, then fix it, but don't wait to respond to the innocent.
The US can afford to do it if it wants: cost is not the issue, willingness to respond is. I won't ask you to compare the monthly costs of Iraq with the challenge of fixing the problems of the NO displaced; that would be cheap. But this is chump change in terms of the accumulated budgetary expenditure of the USA and its component parts. In this century the superpower should be morally above turning its back on the victims of its wet dustbowl.
How are we supposed to fix a dysfunctional new orleans city government? Send in the national guard?
And one other thing it would be nice if some of your empathy was extended to the areas and states east of new orleans who who were hit by the strongest parts of the storm.
Many communities were erased down to the foundations yet you in particular and the media in general have ignored the hardship those folks experienced.
That starts to get a little bit aggravating.
Do the various government levels in the US have a responsiblity to replace whatever someone loses in a storm? Does the government owe me a new roof because mine was damaged in a hail storm several years ago? Does the government owe new houses to all the people whose houses were lost in Florida during hurricane Andrew? Is this the case in the UK? EU?