Katrina's aftermath

What can they do? There's no airports available. The ports are all a mess. The roads are in pieces.

>Why are there hundreds or thousands of people just walking the highways with no other way to evacuate and nowhere to go? <

Some are poor. Some people's cars are ruined. Some never had them to begin with. Even if there were cars or buses or whatever, they may not be able to make it through the roads.

>Why can't vehicles be sent in to transport them somewhere?<

See above.

>Why aren't there more makeshift shelters in non-affected areas (or are there?) <

I'm sure there's tons of shelters. But they're just that. Shelters. They're already beginning on building refugee camps in Texas for the million or so displaced in Louisiana alone. There's simply not that many places to go.

>And why wasn't there a better evacuation plan in place to begin with
with all our homeland security-preparedness at whatnot? <

Evacuation orders were given with what, Sunday evening? If you waited till then to get out, well, it was only about 15 hours until the hurricane hit. For 1.3 million people. On only a couple freeways. There's just not going to be any easy way to get that many people out of one area to, say, 60 miles away. Its impossible to come up with one.

>And do we really not have enough troops to go in because of Iraq or is that not true.<

Not true. Pretty much every state in the Southeast, and soon enough, the US, is sending troops in. There will be more than enough.

Obviously, there's all sorts of issues, like how the levee upgrades were being managed. But almost anything like that isn't pushed ahead sans political gridlock and BS in this country unless people see bodies. I'm sure it will be convienent to blame George Bush for all this, and I'm no great fan of him, but this has always, always been an issue in New Orleans. Now, then, 10 years ago, 100 years ago, etc.

Will it? How? How is blaming anyone for this convenient?

Well, look already. People are posting pictures of him playing guitar. Do I think that was a smart photo op to take? Hell no. Is there a whole lot that George Bush can do at this point to fix issues in New Orleans? No. Is it solely the fault of George Bush that the levees weren't improved to the point where they were flood and hurricane proof (and who knows if the new levees even would be?)? No. So what's the point in blaming him solely (after all, where's the pictures of Louisiana's governor?) for what's happening? Well, you tell me.

nice to see people are reaching out and offering to let total strangers into their home:

http://photos24.flickr.com/38773217_1c7c38d560_o.jpg

Big Guitar
No, but I saw it on TV. My wife said it was the Hard Rock Casino in Gulfport. Most of the stuff they show, she seems to be able to identify from memory.

this is the guy who cut short a vacation to go sign a fucking useless terri schaivo related bill. made a rather large show of it. one person. already essentially dead. what is he or his advisors thinking to do that today? no blame for a hurricane hitting a city built below sea level, but c'mon... utterly moronic.

xposts

OK.

No.

http://photos32.flickr.com/38736100_688097b767_o.jpg

Again, its a stupid thing to do not to be in Washington or New Orleans. I entirely agree. He should at least look like he's doing something, rather than all of us watching WWL see the anchors and officials there say "gee, I hope the President comes soon". That's not the point. We're already discussing whether or not its the result of global warming, which, while perhaps there are climate changes that make hurricanes more likely now (though no one actually knows one way or the other), really doesn't matter because there's been hurricanes as long as time itself has been recorded.

What the hell? How could that possibly still be upright and in one piece?

New Orleans had long known it was highly vulnerable to flooding and a direct hit from a hurricane. In fact, the federal government has been working with state and local officials in the region since the late 1960s on major hurricane and flood relief efforts. When flooding from a massive rainstorm in May 1995 killed six people, Congress authorized the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, or SELA.

Over the next 10 years, the Army Corps of Engineers, tasked with carrying out SELA, spent $430 million on shoring up levees and building pumping stations, with $50 million in local aid. But at least $250 million in crucial projects remained, even as hurricane activity in the Atlantic Basin increased dramatically and the levees surrounding New Orleans continued to subside.

Yet after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars. (Much of the research here is from Nexis, which is why some articles aren't linked.)

In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, 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:

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."

That June, with the 2004 hurricane seasion starting, the Corps' Naomi went before a local agency, the East Jefferson Levee Authority, and essentially begged for $2 million for urgent work that Washington was now unable to pay for. From the June 18, 2004 Times-Picayune:

"The system is in great shape, but the levees are sinking. Everything is sinking, and if we don’t get the money fast enough to raise them, then we can’t stay ahead of the settlement," he said. "The problem that we have isn’t that the levee is low, but that the federal funds have dried up so that we can’t raise them."

The panel authorized that money, and on July 1, 2004, it had to pony up another $250,000 when it learned that stretches of the levee in Metairie had sunk by four feet. The agency had to pay for the work with higher property taxes. The levee board noted in October 2004 that the feds were also now not paying for a hoped-for $15 million project to better shore up the banks of Lake Pontchartrain.

The 2004 hurricane season, as you probably recall, was the worst in decades. In spite of that, the federal government came back this spring with the steepest reduction in hurricane- and flood-control funding for New Orleans in history. Because of the proposed cuts, the Corps office there imposed a hiring freeze. Officials said that money targeted for the SELA project -- $10.4 million, down from $36.5 million -- was not enough to start any new jobs. According to New Orleans CityBusiness this June 5:

The district has identified $35 million in projects to build and improve levees, floodwalls and pumping stations in St. Bernard, Orleans, Jefferson and St. Charles parishes. Those projects are included in a Corps line item called Lake Pontchartrain, where funding is scheduled to be cut from $5.7 million this year to $2.9 million in 2006. Naomi said it's enough to pay salaries but little else.

"We'll do some design work. We'll design the contracts and get them ready to go if we get the money. But we don't have the money to put the work in the field, and that's the problem," Naomi said.

There was, at the same time, a growing recognition that more research was needed to see what New Orleans must do to protect itself from a Category 4 or 5 hurricane. But once again, the money was not there. As the Times-Picayune reported last Sept. 22:

That second study would take about four years to complete and would cost about $4 million, said Army Corps of Engineers project manager Al Naomi. About $300,000 in federal money was proposed for the 2005 fiscal-year budget, and the state had agreed to match that amount.

But the cost of the Iraq war forced the Bush administration to order the New Orleans district office not to begin any new studies, and the 2005 budget no longer includes the needed money, he said.

The Senate was seeking to restore some of the SELA funding cuts for 2006. But now it's too late. One project that a contractor had been racing to finish this summer was a bridge and levee job right at the 17th Street Canal, site of the main breach. The levee failure appears to be causing a human tragedy of epic proportions:

"We probably have 80 percent of our city under water; with some sections of our city the water is as deep as 20 feet. Both airports are underwater," Mayor Ray Nagin told a radio interviewer.

i am not as well-versed as i'd like to be in the biohistory of the basin but i'd imagine that it's a problem that's existed as long as the army corps of engineers, morelike.

Louisiana could have tried to raise the money itself, but instead argued with the government over funding until it was too late.

SELA was a government program that, voila, became an under-funded mandate (like many programs during the bush administration). nor do i think it is necessarily "fair" to claim that louisiana should carry the burden alone considering the federal government as far as i can tell, thru the corps of engineers, was responsible for maintaining the canal and pump system.

Hell, the work could have been done a decade or more ago; everyone was aware of the problem then, and nothing was done.

SELA was started 10 years ago. something was done.

The only thing it proves is that politicians will argue as the world falls apart around them, and probably afterwards too.

not quite what i'm inferring but to each his own.

xpost - alan there's a topicality and urgency that was present to it after recent hurricane seasons, even drudge had a 'nola endangered' hed that he's trumping now, and despite this bush still ignored reality, still cut funding, still persisted in his attempts to dismantle fema, still continued chipping away at this country's readiness and security. his fuckups here are merely a small part of a much larger pattern.

But they chose to spend their money elsewhere as well. Who built the Superdome? There's some sense of self responsibility as well here, seeing as they live there.

>SELA was started 10 years ago. something was done.<

"started". So no one realized until 1995 that maybe, just maybe, a big city filled with people all under the sea level that existed solely because there were pumps and levees might be in trouble in case it has a hurricane?

Well, Mr. Smugly, I couldn't find any pictures of her playing a guitar.

And it's good to see those kind of Craigslistings. The only ones I saw were the NIGGERS QUIT LOOTING messages.

the superdome is much older than SELA.

"started". So no one realized until 1995 that maybe, just maybe, a big city filled with people all under the sea level that existed solely because there were pumps and levees might be in trouble in case it has a hurricane?

they realized it for sure, try READING my post next time: In fact, the federal government has been working with state and local officials in the region since the late 1960s on major hurricane and flood relief efforts.

But this part of it is all bullshit. I didn't vote for the man, I have no love for him, etc, but its BS. Its people trying desperately to find any possible failing the man had to drag him through the mud with. You've basically got a state who didn't want to fund the program, the federal government who was but also didn't want to, and they argued for the last couple years over who should until it was to late. People just want to villify George as the villian because its convienent to them. Take that article: " even as hurricane activity in the Atlantic Basin increased dramatically"...well, it had. Over a two year period. That's not much to look at realistically, but if you write it a certain way, it makes it look like it was blatantly obvious to anyone that 2005 was a surefire busy year for hurricanes.

also, this from Marketwatch:
While most storms have only a regional impact, Katrina could be the rare beast that has national or even international consequences.

"There is a real sense of foreboding about the economy now that Katrina has struck with full force," said Bernard Baumohl, executive director of Economic Outlook Group. "The Louisiana and Mississippi Gulf region represent the soft underbelly of the U.S. energy industry."

Katrina took aim at a vulnerable chokepoint for U.S. energy markets. The region not only produces a large percentage of domestic oil and gas, it is also a transportation hub for both imported and domestic production.

And much of the petroleum that Americans use is refined at facilities along the ravaged Gulf coast.

Less supply of energy means less production and consumption.

In addition, New Orleans and other Gulf ports handle $150 billion in cargo each year, accounting for about a fifth of U.S. imports and exports. The cities hardest hit account for about 7% of U.S. trade.

Major exports include grain, poultry, paper, rice and chemicals. Major imports, aside from petroleum, include steel, rubber, plywood and coffee.

The magnitude of the storm's destructive swath is only gradually becoming clear. A complete assessment of the damage to the region's economy could take months or even years, said John Norris, chief economist for Morgan Trust Management.

Even in the best-case scenario, production of crude petroleum, natural gas and refined gasoline are likely to be severely stunted for at least several weeks as Gulf production and refineries go back on line.

Last year, Hurricane Ivan, which tracked further east than Katrina, knocked out about 10% of U.S. energy production for about four months.

About 22% of Gulf oil and 5% of Gulf natural gas production can be expected to be disrupted for more than a month from Katrina, according to a Kinetic Analysis Corp., which has developed a computer model for hurricane assessment. About a quarter of all U.S. domestic oil and gas is produced in the Gulf.

About 50% of oil and 28% of gas production in the Gulf can be expected to be disrupted for 10 to 30 days, the company said.

The storm likely caused $24.3 billion in damages, said Chuck Watson, director of research for Kinetic Analysis. If the breaks in the levees in New Orleans are not repaired within the next six hours or so, damages would increase by $8 billion to $10 billion, he said.

Just before the storm hit, Kinetic Analysis was estimating the storm could cost $50 billion, but the storm weakened slightly and shifted to the east.

If disruptions in Gulf energy supplies are limited, retail gasoline prices could top $3 a gallon for a couple of months, said Nariman Behravesh, chief economist for Global Insight. High energy prices would likely cut consumption and knock 0.3 to 0.5 percentage points off U.S. gross domestic product.

"We are not at the worst-case scenario," Behravesh told MarketWatch. "But we are moving in that direction" as companies assess the damage to their facilities.

In a worst-case scenario, the storm could shut down deliveries of as much as 25% of U.S. energy needs for several months.

In that case, gasoline prices would average $3.50 a gallon for the next four to six months, Behravesh said, cutting U.S. growth to zero in the fourth quarter.

You're missing my point. Its not as if they can't come up with funding for public works projects in some way. They just chose to spend it elsewhere and depend on the federal government instead. When the federal government decided not to spend the money, the Louisiana state government decided to fight about it (big shock, given the disinterest in federal highway funds all those years).

>they realized it for sure, try READING my post next time: In fact, the federal government has been working with state and local officials in the region since the late 1960s on major hurricane and flood relief efforts.<

So then why wasn't more done from a state level? Oh, that's right, they were too busy fighting with the federal government over funding. Now we get to watch the blame game. Well, here's where the blame should go: all the leaders in Louisiana state and pretty much everyone in Congress or the Presidency over that time who decided to put off building the necessary levees until the last decade.

ok so since 1995 is much later than 1695 when the first frenchman put his boot in the swamp (or whenever), everything is just too late anyway?

incidentally, how many mayors survive the loss of a sports team? i mean yeah stadiums are profiligacy defined but you know damn well the political pressures surrounding them, in any city; that money is always "better" spent.

but fuck it, this "well they were below sea level, and right on the coast!" is a fucking nasty look-what-she-was-wearing argument. the city had been saying for YEARS "we're vulnerable down here, send $$" and now that hell and highwater have come, the realists reply with "well look how vulnerable you were"

well let's imagine how well life would work if no one, anywhere was permitted to live w/in 100 miles of a coastline, 75 miles of a major faultline, 50 miles of a major river, or in any region affected by seasonal violent meteorology... they're just asking for it otherwise! isn't that the logical extension of that argument?

Is that any different than saying "Lets point fingers just to point fingers"? I mean, Bush is as much at fault as any other president over the last 50 years, as much as any US Congress, as much as his advisors who probably told him that they could cut funding there, as much as the various people in Louisiana's government who passed on finishing the projects and left it up to the federal government to take care of at some time far in the future, etc. Its a huge, horrible tragedy, and its fallacy to put it in the lap of any one man, no matter how unliked.

So therefore, its okay for states to ignore issues within themselves and demand federal dollars, even as they spend state funds on less urgent needs (eg, football stadiums)? The Saints, btw, never would have left: they were an expansion team. New Orleans did lose the Jazz, however, to Utah after being financially unsuccessful.

talking about it now is probably a bit useless and ugly while people are still swimming to safety, so I apologize for reposting the picture (though it is seriously going down in history next to 'my pet goat').

my thoughts are utterly with New Orleans right now, though I can't pretend I can even begin to imagine what it must be like there. I've heard from my friends at Tulane, they're all safe, just dazed and wondering what happens next.

xpost alan the saints are frequently mentioned as a team likely to move already with the superdome. considering how much of nola industry is tied into the tourist dollar and how much that status is due to the sugar bowl and 'the super bowl should be in new orleans every year' cw i'm not sure the superdome isn't the rare case of a stadium being slightly justified under the usual 'good for business' logic.

Its because A) The Superdome is old B) The Saints aren't all that profitable. Its a small population base for a NFL city, and a poor one at that.

>considering how much of nola industry is tied into the tourist dollar and how much that status is due to the sugar bowl and 'the super bowl should be in new orleans every year' cw i'm not sure the superdome isn't the rare case of a stadium being slightly justified under the usual 'good for business' logic.<

Well, the Superbowl being around for a week every 5 years or so is tough justification for it, given the costs involved. I'm sure the Kingdome in Seattle did its fair share of business...but it was mired in debt when imploded. Olympic Stadium in Montreal is much the same. Besides, I don't know that the Super Bowl being in New Orleans every few years some how made New Orleans more of a tourist destination. I'd love to see the numbers on it, but I can't imagine so.

"Oh, Katrina, tra-la-la" (etc.)