Head of FEMA was fired from his last job (organizing horse shows)

A little digging has turned up some amazing dirt. The current head of FEMA, the astonishing Michael Brown, was fired from his previous job organizing horse shows. I'm not making this up; I only wish I were.

From the article:

The federal official in charge of the bungled New Orleans rescue was fired from his last private-sector job overseeing horse shows.

And before joining the Federal Emergency Management Agency as a deputy director in 2001, GOP activist Mike Brown had no significant experience that would have qualified him for the position.

The Oklahoman got the job through an old college friend who at the time was heading up FEMA.

The agency, run by Brown since 2003, is now at the center of a growing fury over the handling of the New Orleans disaster.

And then there's this:

Brown was forced out of the position after a spate of lawsuits over alleged supervision failures.

"He was asked to resign,'' Bill Pennington, president of the IAHA at the time, confirmed last night.

Soon after, Brown was invited to join the administration by his old Oklahoma college roommate Joseph Allbaugh, the previous head of FEMA until he quit in 2003 to work for the president's re-election campaign.

The implication would seem to be that a man who is incompetent to arrange horse shows will prove himself worthy in the most important disaster-response agency in the United States. Very interesting. Will he be awarded the Medal of Freedom? Or will our President finally nerve himself to get rid of an incompetent?

Care to place any bets?

I think im gonna cry :wall:

OH MY GOD!!!

Who in the hell ever thought someone like this should run FEMA? Surely this can't be true, I'm really wondering if this could be accurate because it seems incomprehensible. I'm so mad I can't even begin to express my outrage. Assuming this turns out to be true, the president and his administration must answer for this stupidity. I've had it with the excuses.

It's accurate. Brown is an estate lawyer, and a Republican activist and fund raiser. His appointment was purely a political payback, after his predecessor quit to go reap the war profits of the lucrative contract business in Iraq. ~D

This isn't the first time he's been under fire for mismanaging hurricane relief. Look back for articles in Sun-Sentinel in newspaper in Florida from back in January of this year, when Rep. Robert Wexler of Florida urged Bush to fire Brown for nearly $30 million in bogus payments to people in Miami for "damage" from hurricane Francis even though Miami was 100 miles away from Francis. FEMA finally admitted to only $12 million in overpayments, but refused to acknowledge that Miami was not a disaster area from Francis, claiming that the NOAA weather maps as proof. The NOAA then refuted the weather maps that FEMA claimed to have obtained from them.

Someone high up should be fired for this. It's one thing to let your friends make some money on the side, another to let them be in charge of the agency designed to protect millions of people.

These are the stories that make you love politics. Aren't they?

Apparently FEMA has been a favoured dumping ground for political appointees for some time. It seems to cut across political lines as both parties engage in it.

http://www.fff.org/freedom/0197f.asp

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/fea....franklin.html

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/l...rts/FEMA4.html

someone needs to get hit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDC

Someone high up should be fired for this. It's one thing to let your friends make some money on the side, another to let them be in charge of the agency designed to protect millions of people.

---

Yeah...Dubya. That's who would have selected him. This isn't some unimportant little agency, especially after 9/11. There is simply no excuse for a mistake of this magnitude. No more excuses for this incompetence.

Why aren't the major news agencies reporting this yet? Why hasn't Fox broken the story...oh, I forgot, they are in "circle the wagons" mode. Watched the "Stop the Blame Game" commentary this morning on Fox. They are still trying to blame this on the city. We still have tens of thousands of people stranded in the city and still many needing aid or outright rescue, and Fox still doesn't get it. "America's Challenge" they label it. I'm tired of their cutesy crap, their ALL SPIN ZONE. I want heads!

When we get these folks evacuated, fed, rehydrated, and in shelter, heads need to start rolling, starting at the top. These agencies need to be rebuilt, without amateurs and political appointees. This job needs to be done right. This is the biggest fiasco I've ever witnessed by the Federal govt. ~:angry: :furious2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sharrukin

Apparently FEMA has been a favoured dumping ground for political appointees for some time. It seems to cut across political lines as both parties engage in it.

http://www.fff.org/freedom/0197f.asp

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/fea....franklin.html

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/l...rts/FEMA4.html

---

Yes indeed - FEMA has been one of the most abused government agencies with political appoints for rewards. Hopefully one of the things coming out of this diaster is that FEMA gets a shake up and fixed. The Homeland Security gets a major slap in the head and a bunch of people fired for not doing thier jobs in providing adequate and timely response at the National Level.

And this knuckle head not only needs to be fired - he needs to be bumped down to simple clean-up worker and sent to New Orleans to help clean up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redleg

And this knuckle head not only needs to be fired - he needs to be bumped down to simple clean-up worker and sent to New Orleans to help clean up.

---

This may sound harsh but I would put him on with the crews removing bodies so he gets some idea what his bungling has cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sharrukin

This may sound harsh but I would put him on with the crews removing bodies so he gets some idea what his bungling has cost.

---

Agreed.

Why would someone accept that sort of job without the qualifications to fulfill it?

It appears that anyone who bet on a medal rather than a firing will win the prize. Our president is giving the failed horse-show organizer his full support:

Federal officials yesterday defended the government's actions, and Bush, Barbour and Alabama Governor Bob Riley today in turn singled out FEMA director Mike Brown for praise.

"Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job,'' Bush said.

Quote:

---

Yeah...Dubya. That's who would have selected him. This isn't some unimportant little agency, especially after 9/11. There is simply no excuse for a mistake of this magnitude. No more excuses for this incompetence.

---

The article does not back up your biased assertion. Sorry.

Quote:

---

Soon after, Brown was invited to join the administration by his old Oklahoma college roommate Joseph Allbaugh, the previous head of FEMA until he quit in 2003 to work for the president's re-election campaign.

---

Who would be better qualified to pick the next head of FEMA but the previous head. Thats usually how these things work, the people who run the agencies recommend replacements.

But dont let that stop you from demanding Bush's head, nothing else ever has. ~:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemurmania

It appears that anyone who bet on a medal rather than a firing will win the prize. Our president is giving the failed horse-show organizer his full support:

Federal officials yesterday defended the government's actions, and Bush, Barbour and Alabama Governor Bob Riley today in turn singled out FEMA director Mike Brown for praise.

"Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job,'' Bush said.

---

Yep, this has been a GOP self love fest. Blast the democratic officials, praise the GOP. DISGUSTING!!!

And of course, let's not mention that many Mississippians are also without help yet, while we are all patting ourselves on the back with a veritable "Mission Accomplished" sign for Mississippi. FEMA is setting up stations, but people can't reach them because their transport is gone. They are relying on *individuals* to ferry them supplies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

The article does not back up your biased assertion. Sorry.

Who would be better qualified to pick the next head of FEMA but the previous head.

---

My 3 year old perhaps? He could certainly do a better job.

Quote:

---

Thats usually how these things work, the people who run the agencies recommend replacements.

---

Seems to me that the Prez has to sign off on this. I don't think there is any chance that a Democratic fundraiser would have been allowed to stand.

Are you saying Dubya is unable to properly screen candidates for these high posts? I'm sure there was no need for this in light of 9/11 and our push for improved security and threat response. ~:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

But dont let that stop you from demanding Bush's head, nothing else ever has. ~:rolleyes:

---

I have always loathed incompetence. Worst president in recent memory = worst disaster response ever. No surprise there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

The article does not back up your biased assertion. Sorry.



Who would be better qualified to pick the next head of FEMA but the previous head. Thats usually how these things work, the people who run the agencies recommend replacements.

But dont let that stop you from demanding Bush's head, nothing else ever has. ~:rolleyes:

---

PJ Bush has done good things but the way this has been handled is a disgrace people seemed more concerned with politcis back scraching and trying to pass the buck. people are still stranded infants, the elderly the mentally disabled and all Bush seems to care about is making sure his **** doesn't get his feelings hurt saddest thing I've ever seen this man do :embarassed:

We tend to think that hard work and intelligence, responsibility and ethics will allow people to rise through the system to a position of authority.

But under the Bush admin the idea of 'meritocracy', where individuals work their way to the top, is totally avoided. See, Bush was a C student who succeeded in life through connections, never by his own hard work. And he and most of the top leadership in the Republican party value loyalty over everything.

So you get guys like this running a lot of the important parts of government.

The sad thing is, there was a guy, who worked hard and long, who would have done a good job at FEMA, who was passed over so some party loyalist could get his ol buddy a job.

ichi :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sharrukin

Apparently FEMA has been a favoured dumping ground for political appointees for some time. It seems to cut across political lines as both parties engage in it.

---

Far be it from this lemur to deny that both parties have dumped their cronies in FEMA, but there was a marked and deliberate difference in how FEMA was organized and directed between the nineties and the 00's. A little background on FEMA's evolution:

FEMA was created by President Jimmy Carter in 1979 after criticism of the government's fragmented response to a series of disasters, including Hurricane Camille in 1969 and California earthquakes in 1971.

Hurricane Andrew, which struck South Florida in 1992, demonstrated that the federal government still had not sufficiently figured out how to respond smoothly, as thousands were initially left without shelter or water. The agency had a reputation for political patronage and pork barrel spending.

It was with the appointment in 1993 of James Lee Witt, from Arkansas, that the agency began to earn respect.

Mr. Clinton made FEMA a cabinet-level agency.

"Witt shaped it into an organization that was not only to respond to disaster but attempt to mitigate disaster by taking actions before they occurred," said Michael Greenberger, a domestic security expert at the University of Maryland and a former Justice Department official.

After severe flooding in the Midwest in 1993, FEMA under Mr. Witt, for example, bought more than 10,000 properties adjacent to rivers and relocated residents and businesses. In Grafton, Ill., where 403 residents and businesses applied for disaster aid after the 1993 flood, only 11 applied when the river overflowed again in 1995, FEMA said at the time.

The approach to disaster management changed with the arrival of President Bush, experts in emergency management say. Mr. Bush appointed Mr. Allbaugh, who was Mr. Bush's chief of staff when he was governor of Texas.

Testifying before Congress in 2001, Mr. Allbaugh said he was concerned that federal disaster assistance had become "an oversized entitlement program" and made it clear that the new administration wanted to curtail FEMA's mission.

His goal, he said, was to "restore the predominant role of state and local response to most disasters."

While Mr. Allbaugh was FEMA director, the Bush administration, with the backing of Congress, reversed the emphasis on preventing flooding, cutting the formula for such federal grants by half.

"It just does not make good sense," said Larry A. Larson, director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers.

From the FEMA website (http://www.fema.gov/about/bios/brown.shtm):

Quote:

---

Michael D. Brown was nominated by President George W. Bush as the first Under Secretary of Emergency Preparedness and Response in the newly created Department of Homeland Security in January 2003. As the head of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Under Secretary Brown leads federal disaster response and recovery operations and coordinates disaster activities with more than two dozen federal agencies and departments and the American Red Cross. He also oversees the National Flood Insurance Program and the U.S. Fire Administration, and initiates proactive mitigation activities.

---

[sarcasm on]Yep. Not Bush's problem at all. He didn't appoint this goober to be head of FEMA, did he? Despite the evidence. Nope. Nothing to see here. Move along. [/sarcasm off]

The head of FEMA isn't picked by the previous head, who was Joe Allbaugh. Allbaugh brought this little wonderboy along when Bush appointed him. Brown was Allbaugh's roommate in college. Old good buddies (remember the phrase? ~D ). Did Allbaugh appoint Brown to be his successor? No. He was put into FEMA by Allbaugh; but BUSH appointed Brown to head FEMA. No one else.

By the way, what was Joe Allbaugh's qualification to be head of FEMA? He was Bush's chief of staf as governor of Taxes, then he was National Campaign Manager for Bush-Cheney 2000. Allbaugh had no previous experience in disaster relief either. Purely political appointment. His education? Bachelor of Arts in Political Science (snicker) from Oklahoma State. No wonder he didn't know any better when he brought his college buddy along for the ride. When Allbaugh left to go make some tidy little war profits running a consulting firm that advises companies seeking to do business in Iraq, Brown was then appointed to head FEMA by Bush. Any other questions?

Sigh.. If Bush hadnt accepted the man the previous head of FEMA recomended - the usual crowd would be screaming about that.

If people actually took more time to look at how a response to a hurricane is usually set up, the scale of the disaster, and what has actually been done, they wouldnt be so righteously indignant.

But of course many feel their anger at the situation must be quantified in the form of someone... anyone. Thats the culture in America, someone is always to blame! And to many, Bush is always at fault for everything, much like the Jews are always at fault in other circles.

I have yet to see anyone actually state what the federal government has done wrong in this. It seems they attempted to respect the local and state governments, as would be expected, and then took over when they failed. That is the what the role of the federal government should be.

Quote:

---

But under the Bush admin the idea of 'meritocracy', where individuals work their way to the top, is totally avoided.

---

Oh please. Would you like to compare Bush's cabinet to Clintons? Talk about a bunch of losers. Bush is no different in this regard than most presidents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

I have yet to see anyone actually state what the federal government has done wrong in this. It seems they attempted to respect the local and state governments, as would be expected, and then took over when they failed. That is the what the role of the federal government should be.

---

Yes, the best thing they could ever do was to respect the failing attempts of the state governments until it was completely clear that they couldn´t help. :dizzy2:

It was just as good as the decision to take away the money that was meant to reinforce the dams in New Orleans and use it for more useful tasks like wars....... :furious3:

I find it funny in some way to hear that Bush invaded Iraq to make the USA more secure while taking away money for dams. Now what was the bigger threat? the non-existant WMDs in Iraq or the non-existant dams in NO?
I know that dams wouldn´t have saved everybody and every town, but they would at least have kept the water out of NO.

More fun with Michael Brown:

FEMA chief Brown: "We learned about that (Thursday), so I have directed that we have all available resources to get that convention center to make sure that they have the food and water and medical care that they need." [Sept. 1, 2005]

Brown: "Considering the dire circumstances that we have in New Orleans, virtually a city that has been destroyed, things are going relatively well." [Sept. 1, 2005]

Brown: "I've had no reports of unrest, if the connotation of the word unrest means that people are beginning to riot, or you know, they're banging on walls and screaming and hollering or burning tires or whatever. I've had no reports of that." [Sept. 1, 2005]

Brown: "I actually think the security is pretty darn good. There's some really bad people out there that are causing some problems, and it seems to me that every time a bad person wants to scream of cause a problem, there's somebody there with a camera to stick it in their face." [Sept. 1, 2005]

President George Bush: "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job." [Sept. 2, 2005]

This is how political parties work in just about every country that has them. The guy who patted you on the back gets a reward. Often it's just a seat on the board of some big company where you can lift hefty pay for voting exactly like the director. You don't do any harm there, but you are a parasite all the same.

Also, as long as we're discussing whether blame is being pointed in the right direction, here's some info from the Homeland Security web site:

In the event of a terrorist attack, natural disaster or other large-scale emergency, the Department of Homeland Security will assume primary responsibility for ensuring that emergency response professionals are prepared for any situation. This will entail providing a coordinated, comprehensive federal response to any large-scale crisis and mounting a swift and effective recovery effort.

If you would like to see how effectively Mr. Brown's agency is discharging its duties, please note that the Red Cross was forbidden to bring aid to the people in NOLA. From the Red Cross:

Acess to New Orleans is controlled by the National Guard and local authorities and while we are in constant contact with them, we simply cannot enter New Orleans against their orders.

The state Homeland Security Department had requested--and continues to request--that the American Red Cross not come back into New Orleans following the hurricane. Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city.

This lemur dares anyone in their right minds to defend the decision to prevent the Red Cross from entering NOLA. Homeland Security and FEMA are in dereliction of duty. And don't even get me started on the no-bid decision to hand over the reconstruction of New Orleans to Halliburton ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Sigh.. If Bush hadnt accepted the man the previous head of FEMA recomended - the usual crowd would be screaming about that.

If people actually took more time to look at how a response to a hurricane is usually set up, the scale of the disaster, and what has actually been done, they wouldnt be so righteously indignant.

But of course many feel their anger at the situation must be quantified in the form of someone... anyone. Thats the culture in America, someone is always to blame! And to many, Bush is always at fault for everything, much like the Jews are always at fault in other circles.

I have yet to see anyone actually state what the federal government has done wrong in this. It seems they attempted to respect the local and state governments, as would be expected, and then took over when they failed. That is the what the role of the federal government should be.

---

No, PJ, the people that didn't realize the scale are in the Administration. They are the very people now being lambasted for their inept, insufficient, and incompetent response, by both sides of the isle. The people being blamed are those very ones who are responsible for handling this disaster. It is their job, and they failed miserably. Who do you want to blame, Osama, WMD's, Saddam? There are folks who have these positions, yet clearly cannot fulfill the requirements of them. Let 'em go pick up corpses.

The real disaster here is the class A cluster**** that has been the relief response. Am I going to give Louisiana officials a pass, heck no! That does not in any way excuse the power vacuum at the Federal level. Waiting for the locals to be swamped shows no common sense. That might be the sort of leadership you've come to expect, but I won't stand for it. I don't care if it's Bush, Clinton, Snoop Doggy Dog, or Mickey Mouse in the White House, this is not acceptable. I want heads on pikes. I want examples made and most importantly: I don't ever want to see a Federal response to a major disaster this badly mishandled again, EVER. Cover this up like previous leadership failures of this Administration, and you will see the same thing happen again.

There are multitudes of reports both on TV and on the web showing what was wrong. They are blaming slow Federal response as well. If you can't see it or hear it, then it is because you aren't listening. The people on the ground in New Orleans (victims, officials, doctors, nurses, police, reporters, etc.) have ALL been asking where the help is. For days the only real aid was coming from the Coast Guard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemurmania

More fun with Michael Brown:

FEMA chief Brown: "We learned about that (Thursday), so I have directed that we have all available resources to get that convention center to make sure that they have the food and water and medical care that they need." [Sept. 1, 2005]

Brown: "Considering the dire circumstances that we have in New Orleans, virtually a city that has been destroyed, things are going relatively well." [Sept. 1, 2005]

Brown: "I've had no reports of unrest, if the connotation of the word unrest means that people are beginning to riot, or you know, they're banging on walls and screaming and hollering or burning tires or whatever. I've had no reports of that." [Sept. 1, 2005]

Brown: "I actually think the security is pretty darn good. There's some really bad people out there that are causing some problems, and it seems to me that every time a bad person wants to scream of cause a problem, there's somebody there with a camera to stick it in their face." [Sept. 1, 2005]

President George Bush: "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job." [Sept. 2, 2005]

---

I've heard all those too. You gotta wonder what sort of hallucinogens the clown is on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

I've heard all those too. You gotta wonder what sort of hallucinogens the clown is on.

---

Horse tranquilizers would be my guess, based on his prior experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Oh please. Would you like to compare Bush's cabinet to Clintons? Talk about a bunch of losers. Bush is no different in this regard than most presidents.

---

Gawain, I think all of us would like to hear how James Lee Witt (Clinton's head of FEMA) was a "loser." Please elaborate.

BTW, has the defense of this admin.'s handling of the NOLA disaster really descended to "everybody hires incompetents, so what's the big deal"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Oh please. Would you like to compare Bush's cabinet to Clintons? Talk about a bunch of losers. Bush is no different in this regard than most presidents.

---

Probably. But he still should be punished. Everyone else is doing it shouldn't cut it. If everyone else is doing it, punish them as they do stupid things. But it has to start somewhere. Next Democrat appoints a friend and he screws up, I'll support the Democrat's getting in trouble. But now Bush is in charge, and he appointed a moron.

And I'm gonna sound like an ass, but what is FEMA? Obviously it's an Emergency something or other, but what does it do exactly? Or what should it be doing?

Oh, and how hard is it to run a horse race? Horses are nice, they aren't mean. You feed them, and their happy. Doesn't sound particularly challenging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steppe Merc

And I'm gonna sound like an ass, but what is FEMA? Obviously it's an Emergency something or other, but what does it do exactly? Or what should it be doing?

---

Federal Emergency Management Agency (F.E.M.A.) Agency of the US government tasked with Disaster relief, Preparedness, Response and Recovery planning. The scope of FEMA's work includes everything from floods to earthquakes to the transport of hazardous substances.

Thanks. I figured it was something like that, but I wasn't sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Oh please. Would you like to compare Bush's cabinet to Clintons? Talk about a bunch of losers. Bush is no different in this regard than most presidents.

---

I really don't see how Clinton has anything to do with this disaster, ~:rolleyes: but I think his admin would stack up favorably compared with Dubya's. I wasn't thrilled with some of Clinton's appointments. I haven't seen Dubya's perform better, and in notable cases I've seen them perform far worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steppe Merc

Oh, and how hard is it to run a horse race?

---

Races might be fun, but Mr. Brown was in charge of horse shows. Think of the Westminster Kennel Club show, that sort of thing. Not nearly so hard as organizing a race. We're talking about as un-taxing of an administrative job as anyone could have. And he was fired for incompetence.

Do any of our illustrious Conservative Club brethren believe that anyone should be held responsible for this debacle? Besides Clinton, of course. We all know that Clinton is to blame for anything that happens between now and 2050, that's just a given.

Come on, conservatives. I thought personal responsibility was supposed to be one of your values. Just this once, let's see someone in Washington take the heat they deserve. Just this once.

Damn. A horse show? That's nothing. You just let all those horse people walk around on their horses. I've been to them, they aren't particullary difficult looking to manage.

Quote:

---

No, PJ, the people that didn't realize the scale are in the Administration. They are the very people now being lambasted for their inept, insufficient, and incompetent response, by both sides of the isle. The people being blamed are those very ones who are responsible for handling this disaster. It is their job, and they failed miserably. Who do you want to blame, Osama, WMD's, Saddam? There are folks who have these positions, yet clearly cannot fulfill the requirements of them. Let 'em go pick up corpses.

The real disaster here is the class A cluster**** that has been the relief response. Am I going to give Louisiana officials a pass, heck no! That does not in any way excuse the power vacuum at the Federal level. Waiting for the locals to be swamped shows no common sense. That might be the sort of leadership you've come to expect, but I won't stand for it. I don't care if it's Bush, Clinton, Snoop Doggy Dog, or Mickey Mouse in the White House, this is not acceptable. I want heads on pikes. I want examples made and most importantly: I don't ever want to see a Federal response to a major disaster this badly mishandled again, EVER. Cover this up like previous leadership failures of this Administration, and you will see the same thing happen again.

There are multitudes of reports both on TV and on the web showing what was wrong. They are blaming slow Federal response as well. If you can't see it or hear it, then it is because you aren't listening. The people on the ground in New Orleans (victims, officials, doctors, nurses, police, reporters, etc.) have ALL been asking where the help is. For days the only real aid was coming from the Coast Guard.

---

What is the mishandling Red? I dont see it. I see people doing the best they can to save people in a huge disaster area.

Youre acting as if tens of thousands of people in tens of thousands of flooded houses could have been evacuated in a matter of minutes, yet Bush just decided not to. Youre acting as if this has all been done before, but Bush somehow did it wrong. You seem to have some sort of crystal ball that tells you when things should have been done that were not. None of us can put a timescale on such a huge response.

It takes some time to organize a relief effort this huge. I dont know if you realize the scale of what is having to be done.

You have done nothing but complain about Bush and the federal government, who have been the only ones to do anything right!

It was the local authorities who didnt force people to leave. It was the local authorities that told people to go into a superdome that couldnt sustain them. The feds have done nothing but fix messes this entire week.

As Ive said before, the hurricane response system has always been based on the federal aiding the local. This time they had to assume all control. All of this takes time. Maybe putting such emphasis on the separation of powers and such is not a good idea, but its been that way since long before the Bush Admin took over.

Now of course you want someone to blame, and for you the big boogeyman has always been Bush, but you just arent focusing your justified rage in the right place. This is a natural disaster, and everyone is doing the best they can to fix a bad situation. Must we always play the blame game everytime something bad happens instead of focusing on fixing it?

Quote:

---

Do any of our illustrious Conservative Club brethren believe that anyone should be held responsible for this debacle?

---

This was a natural disaster Lemur. I know people feel they must blame someone, theres so much rage out there for what has been done to people, but these things just happen sometimes.

Bush, of course, is the cause of all the worlds problems in some people's minds, but he cannot control the weather. Were all mad about what happened, but although blaming Bush might make you feel better, it wont make those people in NO feel better. :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

This was a natural disaster Lemur. I know people feel they must blame someone, theres so much rage out there for what has been done to people, but these things just happen sometimes.

Bush, of course, is the cause of all the worlds problems in some people's minds, but he cannot control the weather. Were all mad about what happened, but although blaming Bush might make you feel better, it wont make those people in NO feel better. :shrug:

---

aid was faster to get to the areas that the tsunami hit in december than to get to a town in your own country....

you think that is normal?....you think that the people responsible for the organization of the situation aren´t responsible for that?

and if you think it´s normal...hey...fine with me....it´s not like it´s my country or anything.....you on the other hand might want to think about it.

Quote:

---

aid was faster to get to the areas that the tsunami hit in december than to get to a town in your own country....

you think that is normal?....

---

I cannot answer a question based on a false assertion.

It would be like me saying "Well we all know you're stupid, but can you do algebra?"

Reconsider your facts and the time table for the Tsunami relief. It was months before some areas were even reached by the outside world.

PJ, the fact that Bush put a moron who can't run a horse show in charge of such an important post needs to be adressed. Sure Bush didn't cause the tornadoe, but he appointed an nincompoop, and isn't doing anything about it. That's wrong, IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

I cannot answer a question based on a false assertion.

It would be like me saying "Well we all know you're stupid, but can you do algebra?"

Reconsider your facts and the time table for the Tsunami relief. It was months before some areas were even reached by the outside world.

---

yes....some areas were not reached for weeks i believe(not months)....but major population centers that were hit got shipments of international help in the 24/48 following hours to the incident(and these were isolated areas on the other side of the world from were the majority of aid was comming from....it wasn´t the next state over like in New Orleans)........so the question stands....do you think the time taken in New orleans is normal?...and is no one responsible?

Ronin you are completely wrong about that. Even moths after the tsunami some areas had not seen a hint of aid. Then again of course there was no central authority to direct the aid nor transport and infratructure to shift it.

I would suggest that the appointment of political buddies to run emergency agencies despite their poor previous performance is short-sighted at best. Cronyism is an unfortunate trend in politicians.

Quote:

---

yes....some areas were not reached for weeks i believe(not months)....but major population centers that were hit got shipments of international help in the 24/48 following hours to the incident(and these were isolated areas on the other side of the world from were the majority of aid was comming from....it wasn´t the next state over like in New Orleans)........so the question stands....do you think the time taken in New orleans is normal?...and is no one responsible?

---

That simply isnt true.

If you want to say that the relief response was not what it could have been, then go ahead - you'll have plenty of company. However, dont just make things up to make the administration look bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

This was a natural disaster Lemur. I know people feel they must blame someone, theres so much rage out there for what has been done to people, but these things just happen sometimes.

---

PJ, are you asserting that the aid and rescue efforts following the natural disaster were adequate? Appropriate to a first-world nation?

Quote:

---

PJ, are you asserting that the aid and rescue efforts following the natural disaster were adequate? Appropriate to a first-world nation?

---

Hell yes I am.

More than three major metropolitan statistical areas(one of them being under the major designation) and several other smaller urban areas were destroyed and then submerged in permanent water in an area that is bigger than Britain. This is unprecidented.

Do you realize how hard it is to get aid to a populace that is spread out in an area that big? Do you know how many buildings that area contains? The task is almost unfathomable.

A week out - Id say we are doing pretty well. Mistakes have been made, but hardly on the scale of a "debacle", and most of them were made on a local level.

Now nobody likes to see Geroldo Rivera on a bridge with a crying baby, but youve got to have at least a little perspective. It doesnt matter how a country stacks up on the 1st through 3rd world ratings, a disaster this big takes time to respond to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

More than three major metropolitan statistical areas(one of them being under the major designation) and several other smaller urban areas were destroyed and then submerged in permanent water in an area that is bigger than Britain.

---

Last I heard, the "larger than Great Britain" thing was a stretch. The areas that were submerged don't even come close to equaling Wales, much less the U.K. It's a quibble, but it needs to be said.

Quote:

---

Do you realize how hard it is to get aid to a populace that is spread out in an area that big? Do you know how many buildings that area contains? The task is almost unfathomable.

---

So your assertion seems to be that since there are victims spread out all over the Gulf Coast, it's understandable that tens of thousands of people were left without food, water, security or sanitation for upwards of four days? Even though any fool turning on the news could see what was happening? It's acceptable that the head of FEMA discounted all news reports and declared that until he had official statements, there was little he could do? This seems to gloss over the response problem.

Quote:

---

A week out - Id say we are doing pretty well. Mistakes have been made, but hardly on the scale of a "debacle", and most of them were made on a local level.

---

Nobody is disputing the local screw-ups. The mayor should have used those 250+ buses, agreed. The state's reaction was pathetic, agreed. What leaves this lemur scratching his head is the Federal response. Homeland Security is supposed to take charge of large disasters. It's in their charter. It's on their website. They're supposed to provide coordination and leadership. Instead there have been a series of inexplicable decisions, especially pertaining to the people in the dome and the convention center.

Some of those decisions are so ... outrageous, insane, counter to all rational thought, I can't think of a more polite way to put it, that I'm at a complete loss to even hypothesize how they were made. Why erect a barricade to prevent those healthy enough to attempt escape from NOLA? Why bar the Red Cross from entering the site to distribute food and water? Why could journalists enter and move through NOLA when the combined might of the Homeland Security Agency couldn't? Why did cops on the ground report that they hadn't heard a peep from FEMA by the end of day three?

All three levels of government screwed up, agreed. This was a known and likely danger, and everybody got caught with their pants down. But I find the Federal response mystifying, and shaming.

Quote:

---

Now nobody likes to see Geroldo Rivera on a bridge with a crying baby, but youve got to have at least a little perspective.

---

To quote Shep Smith from the exact video clip you're referencing: "This is perspective! This is all the perspective you need!"

Well the reaction time seems to be the main point of contention.

For the scale of the disaster, and the "spread out" nature of the populace they are trying to get relief to, I feel there has been no major incompetence.

Im not saying that the feds did things perfectly, or that the appointment of Brown was a positive, but the response can hardly be described as a "debacle" and calls for Bush's "head on a pike" are hardly helpful.

We'll have to agree to disagree, and wait a little while for the full facts to come to light. If it comes out that Bush heard about the lootings and said "Ahh, lets give it a few days to play itself out", then I will join the chorus. Somehow though, I feel everyone is doing the very best they can to fix this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

What is the mishandling Red? I dont see it. I see people doing the best they can to save people in a huge disaster area.

Youre acting as if tens of thousands of people in tens of thousands of flooded houses could have been evacuated in a matter of minutes, yet Bush just decided not to. Youre acting as if this has all been done before, but Bush somehow did it wrong. You seem to have some sort of crystal ball that tells you when things should have been done that were not. None of us can put a timescale on such a huge response.

---

No, I'm not. Stabilizing the situation didn't require immediate evacuation, but it did require early effort NOT EMPTY GESTURES. I realize evacuation will take time. But it is ironic that you think 42,000 in 5 days is good with concerted effort of the nation, while perhaps 350,000 in about 24-36 hours by local authorities is not??? More importantly, unlike these so called Admin planners, I recognized that the most important things are establishing security and bringing in water. You can sustain things for awhile if you have those two things. Dehydration was and is a key enemy and should have been a primary concern WITHIN 48 hours. And without security, evacuation becomes impossible. Folks who have worked in similar situations elsewhere have been commenting on these aspects in the media. As they have said, as soon as a security, supply, evacuation presence arrived, things were stabilized.

The Homeland Security folks assumed a levee breech was not a big deal! Chertoff himself says they dismissed it. They ignored what the locals had been saying. Since when is overflowing a levee likely to result in an easily repaired breech? I've seen levies go on my own ponds when the flow exceeds the overflow capacity. It cut right through in a short time. I've seen the same in various floods.

Quote:

---

It takes some time to organize a relief effort this huge. I dont know if you realize the scale of what is having to be done.

---

I seem to realize it far better than you, or at least better comprehend where the limits will be. You still seem to think locals could manage it for a week or so on their own, which is insane. It's like giving a gunshot victim a tourniquet and telling him to hang on for a week while we figure out how to move him. I also realize how little was done for nearly a week. Yes, I'm counting back to when the Federal/State/Local planning should have been kicking into high gear. Not post storm, and not 3 days later when the Feds finally started doing something tangible.

Quote:

---

You have done nothing but complain about Bush and the federal government, who have been the only ones to do anything right!

---

And what would that be exactly? The Lt. Gen. on the ground finally got things rolling Thursday night. This needed to be a Fed operation from the start. Sitting around in Crawford/Oval office with your thumb up your butt for 5 days is hardly an acceptable performance if you are commander in chief.

Quote:

---

It was the local authorities who didnt force people to leave. It was the local authorities that told people to go into a superdome that couldnt sustain them. The feds have done nothing but fix messes this entire week.

---

None of that is factually correct:
1. The evacuation was mandatory. There is only so much that the Police on the ground could do to enforce it in limited time.
2. The Superdome plan was the best that they could hope for short term, it was meant as a shelter from the wind and water awaiting OUTSIDE help. It served its purpose.
3. The Feds did not arrive in a timely fashion. The Superdome should have been emptied or at least supplied within 48 hours of landfall.

Quote:

---

Must we always play the blame game everytime something bad happens instead of focusing on fixing it?

---

Must we always excuse the incompetence of Dubya? This event is the biggest presidential screw up I've ever seen. He's always got some sort of excuse for not getting anything right. Oops on 9/11...it was Clinton's fault. Oops about WMD's...it was an intelligence mistake. Oops on the budget...it was 9/11, recession, Iraq. Oops on Abu Ghraib...it was Lindy's fault. Oops on Iraq in general...we'll figure that one out later, blame it on Sheehan for now. Oops on oil/energy policy...it must be India/China's fault or those fools that think we should conserve. Oops on North Korea preparing to go nuclear...we were too engaged elsewhere. Oops on Osama getting away...we weren't ready to actually find him when we went into Afghanistan. Oops on Mullah Omar...ditto.

What does this guy have to do before folks remove the blinders and see him for what he really is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Now nobody likes to see Geroldo Rivera on a bridge with a crying baby

---

I don't like seeing Geraldo, period. ~D Why the heck is that clown still on the air?

Would you rather have him putting his hands in your food working as a preparer at the local fast food joint? I feel much safer with him doing something out in the open where we can keep an eye on him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Hell yes I am.

More than three major metropolitan statistical areas(one of them being under the major designation) and several other smaller urban areas were destroyed and then submerged in permanent water in an area that is bigger than Britain. This is unprecidented.

Do you realize how hard it is to get aid to a populace that is spread out in an area that big? Do you know how many buildings that area contains? The task is almost unfathomable.

A week out - Id say we are doing pretty well. Mistakes have been made, but hardly on the scale of a "debacle", and most of them were made on a local level.

---

There is no logic in what you have just said. You're saying it is massive and unprecedented, so the locals should have been able to handle it, but the Feds, with three times as many days should not? Forgive me if I can't follow that sort of excuse. You are saying we can't martial our forces as a nation to help one city even evacuate after a disaster? Not to mention there are still serious problems in Mississippi, etc.

After 9/11 this sort of nightmare scenario is EXACTLY what the Dept. of Homeland Security should have been preparing for. It is now clear that they have not and are not. That does not fulfill their mandate in the eyes of this nation.

I see ZERO indication that we are prepared for ANY regional, large metropolitan evacuation or disaster. None. That might be acceptable to someone, but it shows me an Administration asleep at the helm.

The truth is the President had the authority to get things done early on. He didn't act on it.

In 2003 President Bush cut funding to SELA (Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project) which was an Army Corps of Engineers run project to repair and expand the New Orleans Leeves. In a side note the reason for cuts in funding to SELA (according to the ACE), the Iraq War, incresed funding for Homeland Security, and tax cuts.

Further, in early 2004 President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to this Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness:

Quote:

---

The $750 million Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane Protection project is another major Corps project, which remains about 20% incomplete due to lack of funds, said Al Naomi, project manager. That project consists of building up levees and protection for pumping stations on the east bank of the Mississippi River in Orleans, St. Bernard, St. Charles and Jefferson parishes.

The Lake Pontchartrain project is slated to receive $3.9 million in the president's 2005 budget. Naomi said about $20 million is needed.

"The longer we wait without funding, the more we sink," he said. "I've got at least six levee construction contracts that need to be done to raise the levee protection back to where it should be (because of settling). Right now I owe my contractors about $5 million. And we're going to have to pay them interest."

---

FEMA also failed to bus out people who couldn't afford to leave New Orleans before Katrina hit, if you couldn't for pay your way out you had to stay in New Orleans in "refuges of last restort" like the Super Dome. Now that they are busing people out (mostly to Houston), after leaving them there in the face of one of worst disasters in US history, House Speaker Dennis Hastert's comment on the situation was "I hope we in Houston aren't busing in New Orleans' problems."

Again, youre playing monday morning quarterback. Its easy to swagger around after the fact calling for heads to roll, but the people in charge were not blessed with power of hindsight.

The federal response has actually been quite good if you take emotion out of the equation. There were if fact supplies on the ground and rescues being conducted the day after the storm. You dont seem to be willing to face the fact that evacuating tens of thousands of people from tens of thousands of different locations takes time, no matter how fast one responds or how many resources one has. Mobilizing troops, organizing a response, and coordination in an area with no working utilities takes time.

I have yet to see any negligence on the part of the federal government. They are doing the best they can in a bad situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Again, youre playing monday morning quarterback.

---

Nope, I was concerned about this two days before the storm hit.

Quote:

---

Its easy to swagger around after the fact calling for heads to roll, but the people in charge were not blessed with power of hindsight.

---

Nor the power of foresight it would seem. Or perhaps even sight if you followed the disconnect from what they said they had done and what was actually happening.

Quote:

---

The federal response has actually been quite good if you take emotion out of the equation.

---

Nope, I'm going by numbers. The fact that the Superdome couldn't even be emptied until today clearly says otherwise.

Quote:

---

There were if fact supplies on the ground and rescues being conducted the day after the storm. You dont seem to be willing to face the fact that evacuating tens of thousands of people from tens of thousands of different locations takes time, no matter how fast one responds or how many resources one has.

---

But of course it is easy for locals to do it with 1/10th or 1/100th as many in their organizations, and several times as many folks to evacuate...right...

If there were supplies on the ground from the Feds, they were well hidden. Only the Coast Guard was in action, and they did do good work.

Quote:

---

Mobilizing troops, organizing a response, and coordination in an area with no working utilities takes time.

---

Yes, time that was clearly wasted ahead of the storm and after it.

Quote:

---

I have yet to see any negligence on the part of the federal government. They are doing the best they can in a bad situation.

---

I've seen little but negligence in their inaction in the first 3 days after the storm. While the General is there now, taking charge and getting things done as I expected, he wasn't sent in nearly soon enough, making a bad situation far worse than it should have been. Dubya and his appointees didn't seem to feel much urgency early on, and the response clearly shows it.

The Bush administration was too slow and poorly led in this disaster IMO, but the flood control situation is something both Republican and Democrats are responsible for.

This type of disaster was predicted for decades, and not just by the latest boob at FEMA. You cannot blame the present administration for what should have been done decades ago. Clinton, Bush, even Reagan :bigcry: share the blame.

The Department of Homeland Security clearly has not improved the security situation and that is not good news.

Ok Red, I think we've both covered our respective points several times over. At any rate, it will be interesting to see what information comes to light in the weeks ahead.

Do you expect a commission to be formed to investigate the mistakes made here, like with the 9/11 commission?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

The article does not back up your biased assertion. Sorry.



Who would be better qualified to pick the next head of FEMA but the previous head. Thats usually how these things work, the people who run the agencies recommend replacements.

But dont let that stop you from demanding Bush's head, nothing else ever has. ~:rolleyes:

---

Sorry, stopped here at this statement. Nothing personal PJ, but Bush43 doesnot walk on water. Truth is this is the man that erased his NG files, and was rewarded for his loyalty by being given this position. It is not the first time Bush has rewarded incompetence, nor will it be his last.

Son, be fair to yourself and look beyond the desire to respect someone; versus forcing them to earn your respect. If Bush has truely earned yours - then maybe take the time to list why. Then, list why these things really were a positive thing for the nation (unless of course you are a multimillionaire - in which case get down on your knees before or behind him and kiss what ever). This guy is a fruitcake - he's no more a leader than Curley was (3 stooges - which pretty much sums up W, Rummy and Cheney).

Just because a name is labeled on to someone or an organization does not make it wrong - actions speak louder than words. Bush's actions speak very loudly that he is incompetent, unable to lead, and inable to understand that he is the leader of a nation and not an agenda.
PJ, you're a smart man for your age - for once think without your heart interfering - or, your prejudices. Bush is a loser, he's an image, he's a fubar, the magnum of all cluster f's.
[steps of soapbox] :bow:

OK, read it all. My conclusion; some will always argue for a side out of the misguided ascertion that the other side is always wrong. Even if the other side has nothing to do with the arguement. [no pot and kettle crap, plz]

It is like argueing to a dog about why it chases its tail - it does it because it thinks that it is a threat; but, the dog answers, "because if I don't do it now, who will?". Maybe the dog knows something the rest of us don't? Or, maybe the dog just doesn't know - maybe, it doesn't realize it is its tail. Regardless, it is this type of reasoning we have come to expect from those that are willing to support this administration, forgive its incompetence - but, were unwilling to forgive his predicessors (you know, the one that left us a $300Billion a year surplus, etc, etc, etc).

In the weeks to come, few will be standing up for the way things were handled - after all the 2006 Senatorial and Representative electorals are upon us, and this is not going to go away like the Rove's fubar (and others). For anyone in political life (that is up for re-election) to compliment this cluster F' as a "valiant" effort? Well, it will be political suicide. After all, the whole world was watching. Ya know? The whole world was watching!

:balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

But of course it is easy for locals to do it with 1/10th or 1/100th as many in their organizations, and several times as many folks to evacuate...right...

---

Well, the locals did have several things in their favor at the time.... like roads- those make evacuations easier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kongamato

Do you expect a commission to be formed to investigate the mistakes made here, like with the 9/11 commission?

---

Yes, this MUST happen. Our whole approach to national emergency response must be reconsidered and reworked, I don't see how we can do this without taking a very critical look back at what failed and why. We mistakenly thought that some of the 9/11 changes better prepared us. Clearly they have not. Our national response appeared paralyzed in the two days preceeding landfall, and for 3 days afterwards.

This is not something that is going to be cured if it is not under a spotlight. Without a commission we'll be looking at the same sort of response next time. You cannot rely on the governmental authorities to review this internally. It has to be external and independent.

As Redleg, myself, and others see it there are some legal/mission hurdles that need to be addressed. Fairly broad executive powers can overcome them, but the legislative firewalls cause confusion and artificially restrict situations. These are the sort of things I believe the commission should be reviewing as well--in fact I would consider it one of the primary missions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Well, the locals did have several things in their favor at the time.... like roads- those make evacuations easier.

---

90 west was still available, and from what the anchors were saying for days it was not being utilized much. Problem was the authorities along it were working to prevent folks from getting in. I would have driven in with a truck full of bottled water myself, but that was not being allowed according to what anchors and others were saying. Nor was the Red Cross allowed in. It wasn't until the military convoys of Thursday that anything substantial happened.

Why wasn't help brought in? There was not sufficient security, nor was there supply. Security wasn't ready. There was not a rapid reaction force to stabilize the situation. It takes the military because the folks sent in must be able to feed/water/shelter themselves with the prospect of being unsupported for days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX

In 2003 President Bush cut funding to SELA (Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project) which was an Army Corps of Engineers run project to repair and expand the New Orleans Leeves. In a side note the reason for cuts in funding to SELA (according to the ACE), the Iraq War, incresed funding for Homeland Security, and tax cuts.

Further, in early 2004 President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to this Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness:

---

One must note that the budget process in the United States government follows a five year planning process. While this information is correct - one must then go back to see the actual impact on the projects for that year.

Quote:

---

FEMA also failed to bus out people who couldn't afford to leave New Orleans before Katrina hit, if you couldn't for pay your way out you had to stay in New Orleans in "refuges of last restort" like the Super Dome. Now that they are busing people out (mostly to Houston), after leaving them there in the face of one of worst disasters in US history, House Speaker Dennis Hastert's comment on the situation was "I hope we in Houston aren't busing in New Orleans' problems."

---

Again one must understand how the agency of FEMA works. It comes into play once a diaster has occured and when the state and local resources have been exhausted. Does the system and agency need to be revamp - yes it does, but it has been needing revamping since the mid 1980's and several adminstrations have ignored FEMA only using it as a reactionary agency to support local efforts in recovering from a diaster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

Yes, this MUST happen. Our whole approach to national emergency response must be reconsidered and reworked, I don't see how we can do this without taking a very critical look back at what failed and why. We mistakenly thought that some of the 9/11 changes better prepared us. Clearly they have not. Our national response appeared paralyzed in the two days preceeding landfall, and for 3 days afterwards.

---

Agree completely with the statement and the intent behind it. The system is flawed because it is designed for the Federal Govenment and its agencies only to become involved after the occurance of the emergancy.

Quote:

---

This is not something that is going to be cured if it is not under a spotlight. Without a commission we'll be looking at the same sort of response next time. You cannot rely on the governmental authorities to review this internally. It has to be external and independent.

As Redleg, myself, and others see it there are some legal/mission hurdles that need to be addressed. Fairly broad executive powers can overcome them, but the legislative firewalls cause confusion and artificially restrict situations. These are the sort of things I believe the commission should be reviewing as well--in fact I would consider it one of the primary missions.

---

Agreed completely. It needs to be reviewed, people held accountable for thier failures, the system as designed needs to be held accountable for its failures and changes made. Congress must review its role in national diasters and take responsibility for its role in governing the nation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

Why wasn't help brought in? There was not sufficient security, nor was there supply.

---

The UK newspaper Sunday Times speculates that help was not brought in quickly enough because initially the authorities wanted people to evacuate. They did not want them to think they could stay and be supplied with food and water, as the city was so devastated it had to be cleared.

But what seems curious to me is that more was not done to facillitate an evacuation - it seems many of the people still in the city did not have the means of getting out. Moreover, they had been directed to congregate in the convention centre etc by police/National Guard on the ground, who assumed that they would be taken care of.

I keep thinking of AdrianII's question - where were the buses? He asked this of the evacuation before the hurricane, but it seems germane for a large part of last week too.

Personally, I think a disaster of this magnitude - effectively the loss of an entire city - has to be the responsibility first and foremost of the national government. It's no use leaving it up the Mayor - he's lost the city he's governing and presumably much of his resources. The State does not seem big enough to handle it either - hence moving the refugees to Houston, bringing in the marines etc. The new Department for Homeland Security - national, high profile, with the President's ear - would seem to be the ideal body to take charge, but seems to have been in denial for much of last week.

From the perspective of a citizen of the rather centralised British state, the management of this disaster seems to be case of federalism and local decentralisation taken too far. [I could say the same of a laissez-faire approach to government, but don't want to infuriate the conservatives here...] This kind of problem seems to be exactly the sort of situation where you do want big government and the army stepping in. They may not be able to run economies, or even pacify a foreign country, but evacuating a home city is one job they could do.

Simon,

I agree with the comments. FEMA's own test scenario had shown that there were tens of thousands who could not evacuate on their own ahead of a major storm. That was something they were supposed to be trying to address--an action item. The local officials in New Orleans made a reasonable response, but they lacked the resources to do more. Could they have been better prepared long term, you bet! However, I don't think you will find other cities much better prepared either, based on my travels around the country and living in different areas for job assignments and the like. To say, "that wouldn't happen here" is foolhardy.

This is a national issue, it is more than a state can handle, and right now, the evacuees are more than even Texas can handle, despite only having a portion of them. We have at least a quarter of a million here now and the state is now trying to move some of them to other states. Our facilities and such are swamped with those in need.

Major issues:
1. There was a failure to do a coordinated national transportation response before and after. We need a mechanism to commandeer as much of the private/public mass transport as is needed. Folks will do this voluntarily if a system is in place. Americans will gladly help each other in need, but we need a mechanism so that we can do it. An example of one effecting major businesses: airlift capabilities like this for Europe were a key part of NATO planning.
2. There is a need for many more uniformed military/police with very robust communications gear on the ground ASAP. You can't do a forced evacuation for example unless you have a large pool of manpower to make it happen. That is beyond what the state guard can muster in 24 hours. It is many times what a city can muster while it is also trying to coordinate its own evacauation.
3. We need to set some very hard goals, like water and security to be provided to all major collections (convention center, shelters, Superdome, etc.) of populace in the zone withing 48 hours after an event. If it is an event which continues to grow worse with fires/floods/eruptions, etc. then evacuation of major collections should be well underway in 48 hours and mostly complete in 72 hours. You can't hope to get all those spread around so quickly, but this at least provides enough coverage to take care of the most the quickest--and it allows people to move towards the nearest collection point if they see activity. No matter how hard it looks or what transport routes are unavailable, this should be the goal, because otherwise the situation will become much worse. The deadline is not how long we think it will take, but how long people can be expected to hang on. Emphasizing the "dead" in deadline.
4. The shelter in surrounding regions should be worked out ahead of time. We are winging it! We should have concentric rings of facilities already identified, so that we can pick routes for evacuation--both before, and after.

We've got some glaring holes in our disaster planning. There has been a lot of effort toward early identification and containment, but that is primarily for terrorist attack or discrete focus problems.

I will respond to this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redleg

Again one must understand how the agency of FEMA works. It comes into play once a diaster has occured and when the state and local resources have been exhausted. Does the system and agency need to be revamp - yes it does, but it has been needing revamping since the mid 1980's and several adminstrations have ignored FEMA only using it as a reactionary agency to support local efforts in recovering from a diaster.

---

with this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

I agree with the comments. FEMA's own test scenario had shown that there were tens of thousands who could not evacuate on their own ahead of a major storm. That was something they were supposed to be trying to address--an action item.

---

And this,

FEMA has responsibilities in what it defines as four domains of emergency management:

* Mitigation: Reducing the severity or likelihood of the hazard.
* Preparedness: Ensuring you have the capability to respond to the hazard.
* Response: Immediate actions taken to save lives, property, the
environment, and the economy.
* Recovery: Subsequent actions taken to restore property, jobs, and
services.

And a nifty graphic and caption from the FEMA website:

http://www.fema.gov/graphics/about/what.gif

"And at every stage of this cycle you see FEMA -- the federal agency charged with building and supporting the nation's emergency management system."

FEMA's job starts long before the a disaster occurs, saying otherwise contradicts not only FEMA's official stance, but also public expectations, and common sense.

Has it been neglected? Yes. By a series of administrations? Yes. Is it only a reaction agency? Ask FEMA.

well i dont really have time (or the knowledge-- though i guess thats true of most people posting here... simply going by what media reports are saying) to make much of a post. however i am fairly familiar with political appointments and such here in canada, and i dont suppose its much different in the US. as much as we may hate to admit it a very large number of people appointed to heads of government organiztions are there as a politcal favours and not because it is their area of expertise. more often than not it's the lower echelons of the organizations who actually do the work. the political appointee is simply a figurehead. while im not saying this is good or that it doesn't need to change. you scratch my back and i'll scratch yours is unfortunately a common thing in politics. (the Waterton E. Coli case in ontario is a good (small scale) example of this)

0ct

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX

Has it been neglected? Yes. By a series of administrations? Yes. Is it only a reaction agency? Ask FEMA.

---

Oh I have back in 1999 - and it was a reactionary agency back then - and from I have seen from the news reports now - it remains exactly the same. Lip service to the prepare and mitigate - concentrates on the response and the reaction to the diaster. Hell it was even establish by President Carter as an reaction to a previous hurricane.

The toll on local officials: New Orleans Officers stressed

Let's not forget those who are being relied upon to maintain 24 hour security for 48 hours prior to and 72 hours after landfall also had families in the area. Several have committed suicide and a number either couldn't get to work, or decided to quit.

New Orleans has had problems with its police for decades. They had major corruption issues, but I think I had heard that some of that had been cleaned up in the past few years. (I don't know for sure of the outcome, as I'm not a New Orleans resident.) Good cop or bad cop, this would be hell on most folks and with only 1600 max police at their disposal, they never stood a chance left to themselves for very long.

We rightfully applauded the efforts of New York police and fire on 9/11 (which was far shorter in duration although incredibly dangerous and deadly for them.) Let's not forget what those officers in New Orleans (and elsewhere) have faced as a result of Katrina. It takes big brass ones to continue to go out and face the elements and odds that these folks had to endure for the first 72 hours or more. :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemurmania

A little digging has turned up some amazing dirt. The current head of FEMA, the astonishing Michael Brown, was fired from his previous job organizing horse shows. I'm not making this up; I only wish I were.

---

In a sense you are making this up. Apparently Mr Brown did have experience in FEMA before he was appointed Director:

Previously, Mr. Brown served as FEMA's Deputy Director and the agency's General Counsel. Shortly after the September 11th terrorist attacks, Mr. Brown served on the President's Consequence Management Principal's Committee, which acted as the White House's policy coordination group for the federal domestic response to the attacks. Later, the President asked him to head the Consequence Management Working Group to identify and resolve key issues regarding the federal response plan. In August 2002, President Bush appointed him to the Transition Planning Office for the new Department of Homeland Security, serving as the transition leader for the EP&R Division.

link

By the way these international horse shows are as corrupt a business as any other on this earth, so Mr Brown's resignation says very little about Mr Brown and his capabilities. For all we know, he may have been forced out of that job because he had detected corruption, since his previous job was that of special prosecutor for police disciplinary matters with the Oklahoma Supreme Court.

Of course, these days he is fair game and nobody cares.

Point taken, Adrian. Please note that his FEMA CV omits all reference to his horsie time, even though he spent years at it.

As for "making it up," well, that seems a little strong. He was forced to resign from his last private sector job, and then went directly into FEMA, based on the recommendation of a college roommate. I don't think any of that is in dispute.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemurmania

Point taken, Adrian. Please note that his FEMA CV omits all reference to his horsie time, even though he spent years at it.

As for "making it up," well, that seems a little strong. He was forced to resign from his last private sector job, and then went directly into FEMA, based on the recommendation of a college roommate. I don't think any of that is in dispute.

---

Brown was indeed sacked, but it isn't clear at all that he was sacked because of his own failures -- they may have been other peoples' failures. The suggestion that he went straight to the top job at FEMA after a failed career of 11 years is a bit rich. His work at the Oklahoma Supreme Court prepared him for the sort of work he was initially given in FEMA. Nonetheless his promotion to Director may have been a huge mistake -- correction, was a huge mistake with hindsight.

Your point is taken as well, and you of course realise I am playing devil's advocate (or rather, loser's advocate) on this one. The reason is (if I may be so patronising) that I think Americans may never get to the bottom of this whole horrific episode if they concentrate on a couple of figure heads. You know, there are organisations that function flawlessly despite having total nincompoops at the helm.

EDIT
I guess part of the definition of a good organisation would have to be that it is capable of functioning despite the interference of its (possibly incompetent) leadership.

Despite being a simple American (and yes, like all of us I'm easily distracted by shiny things), I've never believed that the unpardonable conduct of the initial recovery was any single person's -- much less department's -- fault. However, I have this feeling that the city of NOLA and the state of LA will come in for an appropriate level of scrutiny, while the Feds will more or less walk away whistling. So I'm probably guilty of over-attacking the Feds.

But just you watch -- over the next few weeks you're going to see everything possible dumped as low on the totem pole as possible, despite the fact that this was a massive, multi-state disaster.

Don't forget, the Backroom of the Org has its own scorched-earth atmosphere, full of charm and cinders. If you want to single-handedly bring perspective and balance to the room, then you're on a mission from God, as the Blues Brothers would say.

My personal take on the tagedy would be best summed up by Andrew Sullivan's latest column.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemurmania

Despite being a simple American (..)

---

Alright, enough - you and me never played dem games in the past, cowboy, and I'm not gonna start playing 'em now.

But even as an outsider I can't help feeling involved and using what limited brains I have to make some sense of it all and communicate that to others. I do realise that is a far cry from providing help on the ground amid sounds of crying, gunfire and crashing helicopters.

The governor of Louisiana has brought in Clinton's man in FEMA, James Lee Witt as an advisor. While no reporter has yet managed to get Witt to blame Brown, he has been very careful to specifically praise "the career" FEMA employees for their dedication in the face massive problems. Career people meaning, of course, the opposite of a political appointee like Brown. Witt has also stated more than once today and yesterday in interviews that it was a mistake to downgrade FEMA from cabinet-level agency and roll it into the Department of Homeland Security, suggesting that doing so changed FEMA's focus too much to terrorist-caused disasters and away from natural disaster preparation and mitigation. He said that he created a special department of preparedness and mitigation during his tenure which was entirely dismantled due to budget cuts when FEMA was combined with Homeland Security.

Several Congressmen have said they will introduce legislation on Tuesday to separate FEMA from the Department of Homeland Security and make it a cabinet level position again.

And Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff spent the day playing CYA (cover your ass for those not familiar with the term) by making statements like this:

"Chertoff said FEMA is not equipped to send large numbers of people to help during a disaster."

Chertoff said federal authorities "moved as rapidly as we could," and added that he, too, was frustrated that the pace of the response was not quicker.

Interesting stuff.

And here's an interesting article:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/09/04....ap/index.html

Bureaucratic red tape? That's the kind of thing that is supposed to be handled by FEMA. Organization and coordination and getting people to where they are supposed to be. But apparently, no one is in charge. Even though that is supposed to be Brown's job. Maybe he's off learning t play the guitar with Bush. There's a pretty picture. Bush playing guitar while people drown. Remind you of anyone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

In a sense you are making this up. Apparently Mr Brown did have experience in FEMA before he was appointed Director:

---

He was a political appointee THEN as well. So no, he wasn't making it up.

The problems with FEMA as I understand them are:
1. Waaaayyyy too many political appointees. Career folks have no chance in such an atmosphere. Incompetent pandering to political whims will be rewarded over merit. Sticking your neck out to do a good job will get you fired.
2. The agency ironically lacks the sense of urgency that is needed. My wife has complained about FEMA in her dealings with them in the past, and she is doing so again now, because they take too damned long to make obvious decisions. That is a leadership problem. Hopefully tomorrow they will have the answers/procedures/paperwork they promised to provide by afternoon of last Friday. ~:rolleyes:
3. Historically, some smaller govt types have wanted to minimize its role. It was submerged in Homeland security partly for this reason. If you search through old articles (pre-9/11) you will find some major efforts to undermine the agency. It was being called a "free political candy" device for Clinton in 1997 for example.
4. It's role is a political football. One president wants to increase it, one wants to minimize it, another wants to alter it. Personally, I think it should be used mainly to handle the long term stuff, paying the bills, organizing the paper work, coordinating development of regional plans. The rapid response needs to be handled by some other group (such as the Pentagon, etc.) who has the logistical and organizational assets to manage it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

He was a political appointee THEN as well. So no, he wasn't making it up.

---

Yes, he was: Brown has done more than direct those horse shows and it is not clear why he was fired from that job anyway. He should be fired now, even a silly Dutchman can see that.

So, you would want to give FEMA full cabinet status again, but delegate most of the practicalities to the Army, National Health, etcetera?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

So, you would want to give FEMA full cabinet status again, but delegate most of the practicalities to the Army, National Health, etcetera?

---

I'm not certain of how best to organize it. There are two basic missions: short term rapid response and longer term management, paying the bills, helping the displaced, as well as longer term planning. This *might* be done under one agency, but if so it will still need two different structures, because they are very different critters, the fast one requiring much streamlining and very clear authority.

Rather than trying to say "this is how it should be" I would like to see an independent commission evaluate this with some clear guidance about what sort of answers we are seeking: in a nutshell what will give us the best response, what needs to change to make that possible? I don't have the full answers, but I can easily see elements of the problem and make logical guesses about what the answers will be. Folks with more expertise should be able to do a better job of assessing the limitations and what is needed.