You confuse a FEMA mission statement with operational procedures.
“Reducing the likelihood or severity of possible disasters” is a very broad statement that represents the over arching philosophy of the organization. It is not meant to be operational guidance as to specific local actions.
oh. i see. it's just bullshit business-ese. it doesn't actually MEAN anything. they're not really supposed to work to achieve that mission...
You use the term “responsible” as if that covers all meanings and contexts for its use. Day to day operations of the levee system is performed by the Orleans levee district. The Corps of Engineers are involved in longer range projects not included in routine day to day operations.
and fema, as part of that over-arching philosophy, is supposed to make sure that they are stable.
The decisions made in 1996 to reinforce the levee system to Cat 3 at a cost of $750 million was made by the levee board and the Corps of Engineers, (COE).
i hate to break this to you, but the levee system was DESIGNED to withstand a cat3 in the first place. back in the 30's it was a cat3 that flooded nola the height of the lake that prompted them to build the levees in the first place.
if they were being reinforced, it was probably repairs.
FEMA was not directly involved in making those decisions.
they should have been. that's the point.
Many organizations knew that a Cat 4 or 5 hitting NOLA was only a matter of time. The levee board knew, the COE knew and FEMA knew. But so what? Everyone knew a Cat 3 improvement would not suffice, but they all bowed to the political reality that Cat 5 protections would be prohibitively expensive.
that's called "bad economics." what do you think it's going to cost to repair the levees now? what do you think it's going to cost to drain the city? to rebuild it? to jump-start industry? to pay families to help replace their losses?
if they knew that it was only a matter of time, and they knew what the repair would cost, then cutting corners was an economically retarded decision. saving a few dollars here to have to pay billions in "only a matter of time" is not smart any way you look at it.
and we're talking strict economics here. nevermind the HUMAN cost.
Should FEMA have taken up the drumbeat and put reinforcement of the levee system in NOLA at a cost of approximately $14 billlion above all other funding priorities?
in retrospect, honestly, what do you think?
FEMA’s budget is around $7 Billion. Are they supposed to spend 2 years worth of their annual budget on one project in south Louisiana? Of course not. Or for that matter, should DHS with an annual budget of $40 Billion spend 35% of that on one project in south Louisiana? Of course not.
care to tell me what else they're doing? at this point it's like paying for life insurance that's only valid for as long as you live. should the dhs spend some of that 40 billion? yes. they should. that's their job. that's why they have a 40 billion dollar budget. to protect against threats to the homeland security -- like hurricanes.
In hindsight, should they have spent that money? Yes they should have, but only in hindsight.
i'm glad you partially agree. maybe you fully agree, and you just don't realize it: you just said that "Many organizations knew that a Cat 4 or 5 hitting NOLA was only a matter of time." in otherwords, they had FOREsight too.
It's a cold hard fact, we simply cannot prepare for them all.
no, you can't. i'm not asking for a miracle here. i'm just asking for a good set of plans. i'm just asking for them not to take a week to get off their asses and do something.
And you make the false assumption that my current address in Kansas has been the same since my birth. I’m a relatively recent transplant to Kansas having lived the first 20 years of my life in Louisiana. I’ve been through 4 hurricanes including living through the eye of Betsy in 1965. My sister and her family are homeless due to Katrina.
I’ve lived through the madhouse you describe and I am intimately familiar with New Orleans, so yes, I do understand exactly what you are speaking of. I understand it more so than you do.
thn you should be familiar with why fema needs to be there BEFORE a storm of a certain magnitude, if only to keep public order.
I'm not defending FEMA. They were negligent in being too late responding after it was apparent local officals couldn't handle the situation. I've called for Michael Brown to be fired.
The difference is between prevention and reaction. I don't hold FEMA responsible for prevention, (specifically the NOLA soup bowl). I do hold them responsible for their delayed reaction.
i hold them responsible for both, because their mission statement says they are responsibel for both. so is the dhs, btw. and yes, michael brown should step down, if only for such ignorant and nasty remarks as blaming the victims. that's absolutely uncalled for.
אָרַח
™ Version 4.2