Reply With Quote
blah, blah.. blah......
When the levee breaks
It appears that the money has been moved in the president’s budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that’s the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can’t be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us.
-- Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; New Orleans Times-Picayune, June 8, 2004.
This picture is an aerial view of New Orleans today, more than 14 months later. Even though Hurricane Katrina has moved well north of the city and the sun is out, the waters continue to rise in New Orleans as we write this. That's because Lake Pontchartrain continues to pour through a two-block-long break in the main levee, near the city's 17th Street Canal. With much of the Crescent City some 10 feet below sea level, the rising tide may not stop until until it's level with the massive lake.
There have been numerous reports of bodies floating in the poorest neighborhoods of this poverty-plagued city, but the truth is that the death toll may not be known for days, because the conditions continue to frustrate rescue efforts.
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.
Washington knew that this day could come at any time, and it knew the things that needed to be done to protect the citizens of New Orleans. But in the tradition of the riverboat gambler, the Bush administration decided to roll the dice on its fool's errand in Iraq, and on a tax cut that mainly benefitted the rich.
And now Bush has lost that gamble, big time. We hope that Congress will investigate what went wrong here.
The president told us that we needed to fight in Iraq to save lives here at home, and yet -- after moving billions of domestic dollars to the Persian Gulf -- there are bodies floating through the streets of Louisiana. What does George W. Bush have to say for himself now?
__________________________________________________ ____
Bush and his administration should be held accountable for this disaster, and the only way he can partially redeem himself to get us the out of Iraq and start rebuilding the South instead of a country that hates our guts.
We as a country should demand complete and total withdrawal from Iraq.
We do not have the money to pour into another country any more when we have to spend billions and billions to get our own problems solved.
If any of you still think we need to stay in Iraq now, you are the dumbest s I have ever seen.l
blah, blah.. blah......
you, you piece of . Just go stick your head in the sand and pretend that there are no problems just so you can pretend that Bush is not a total idiot.
This is an example of how politics has sent this country into the ter.
I have been a Republican my whole life and voted for Ford through Bush, but since I have a brain, I know when I see wrong and I see wrong in this administration big time. Bush will go down as one of the worst Presidents in US history, because he is forsaking everything just to keep his little war going despite everything that is wrong with it.
They've known about this for at least 20 years, Jim. What the else are you planning on nailing on Bush? You're starting to sound like Boutons.
blah, blah, blah... there will be enough blame to go around after the is over.. but smoke on this for a while..
he levee system around New Orleans --
Mic e Malkin has a definitive deconstruction of the "underfunded levee construction" theory, which yesterday seemed like the left's most promising line of attack. The Army Corps of Engineers says the "underfunding" theory is bogus:
Quote:
Originally Posted by The article
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.
In a telephone interview with reporters, corps officials said that although portions of the flood-protection levees remain incomplete, the levees near Lake Pontchartrain that gave way--inundating much of the city--were completed and in good condition before the hurricane.
However, they noted that the levees were designed for a Category 3 hurricane and couldn't handle the ferocious winds and raging waters from Hurricane Katrina, which was a Category 4 storm when it hit the coastline. The decision to build levees for a Category 3 hurricane was made decades ago based on a cost-benefit analysis.
Maybe the left will have to go back to global warming. Yeah, yeah, I know...they already are.
So, again, How is this all President Bush's fault and none of the State of Louisiana's?
Read the article. This was reported on CNN on Thursday and the funding was in place to start the repairs, the Army Corp of Engineers had the plans and were ready to get the job done, but Bush pulled them out and sent them to Iraq instead.They've known about this for at least 20 years, Jim. What the else are you planning on nailing on Bush? You're starting to sound like Boutons.
Can you please tell me why we are building Iraq when we need to rebuild Miss and La.????
Can any person still in good conscience, still say that our country's expanding deficit( 8 trillion and counting) can still support this war and rebuild these two states????
Do you realize how important New Orleans' and Gulfport's ports are to this country??? Do you know what kind of shortages we are going to be up against because these two ports are destroyed????
Well, just wait till you see the prices of imported goods and foods that we will be staring at in the next 2 yrs. New Orleans was not just a party city, it was the most important port city in the country.
SW, please don't tell me that you still think we need to stay in Iraq now....
Now that is bull .
The corps already had the plans in place to strengthen the levees and because they were left alone and in a decaying state, New Orleans is now a 50 billion dollar swamp.
OMG, Global warming??? I suppose you think that is a hoax????
My party is full of idiots...I am so ashamed of my voting with these total idiots for the past 28 yrs.
Makes you wonder why we spend so much to prevent terrorist attacks. Natural disasters are far more common. But I guess a bunch of dark skinned people are scarier than a hurricane, or a tornado.
I don't like to blame but it is clear to many that the WMD (Weather of Mass Destruction) Bush should have been more concerned about was in our own back yard.
Why won't Bush lovers concede any mistakes he's made?
Well, we're really stuck there now, but this is one of the potential consequences I don't think many people gave full consideration on the eve of that war.please don't tell me that you still think we need to stay in Iraq now.
It is a fact that funds have been diverted to the Iraq War and if it is to help our military then I'm for it and the govt new damn well that the military was stretched thin and we would not be properly prepared to handle a situation here in the US.
But as Rumsfeld stated...you work with what you have.
Okay, here's the problem with getting pissed with this.
1. They've known about this for a long time and not done anything about it (even the Democratic governor and senators couldn't be bothered to worry about funding0.
2. The Army Corps of Engineers said this shoring up project, whenver commenced, would take 8 years.
So, do some math, even if they got the money in 2003, they wouldn't have started to '04 and they sure wouldn't be done.
Keeping NO unsafe has been government policy for some time now, and judging by the latest highway and energy bills, getting pork for your state or district is more important than shoring up critical infrastructure. I hope that when you hear your congresscritters crow about all the pork barrel projects that they have brought home, that you vote against them. Otherwise, you can count yourself as part of the problem.
STFU!!!! these levees were built 40years ago and now it is bush's fault? it is bush's fault because a bunch of dumbasses CHOOSE to live below sea level and are going to rebuild below sea level again. that.. that is why i won't give one ing penny to this .
N.O. wasn't always below sea level. A series of dikes and levies upstream, built in this century, are robbing the delta of it's natural re-silting, and causing the city to sink. The state, as a whole, is losing tremendous amounts of land per year. Estimates are that N.O will be exposed directly to the Gulf within 100 years.it is bush's fault because a bunch of dumbasses CHOOSE to live below sea level and are going to rebuild below sea level again.
I'm sure that's what you tell yourself, but the real reason is that you are a hard, cold, ty human being.that.. that is why i won't give one ing penny to this .
Well, it is because of selfish bitter people like you that I had to give a $500 check to the Salvation Army this morning at WalMart and donate over $400 worth of toothbrushes and toothpaste to a few local churches who are housing 300 displaced neighbors of ours.
If everyone would donate just $20, we could pay for this thing without having to burden our already tremendous Nation Debt.
But no, we have people like you who have no heart or compassion....people who vote Republican without thinking about the consequences, like myself.
Jim im not commending your statements just cuz i agree with them, but you never cease to impress me man.
To actually just flat out say the things you say, you're awesome man.
The Army Corps of Engineers has already debunked this crap.
The levee system was designed 30 years ago for a Cat 3 Hurricane based on a cost/benefit analysis done at the time. The portions of the levee that broke were in optimum repair for their design. The portions of the levee that were yet to be updated and strengthened (to Cat 3 levels) are still standing because they didn't get stressed.
In other words, the ACOE worked in the parts of levee system that were most prone to failure and, if the Hurricane had been a Cat 3 or below, they would have probably held.
Funding had nothing to do with the tragedy except where politicians made an unfortunate decision 30 some odd years ago.
You do not deserve to live in this country. Scratch that. You do not deserve to live. You are a fundamentally evil person.
you.
your entire family.
I hope you die a slow and painful death, indigent and alone.
I shun you.
EOM
I doubt that not going to war in Iraq equates to New Orleans not being hit by Katrina.
global warming.. I thought clinton had fixed it .. but I guess he didn't..
The United States, although a signatory to the protocol, has neither ratified nor withdrawn from the protocol. The protocol is non-binding over the United States unless ratified.
On June 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was to be negotiated, the U.S. Senate passed by a 95-0 vote the Byrd-Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98), which stated the sense of the Senate was that the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as well as industrialized nations or "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States". On November 12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the protocol. Aware of the Senate's view of the protocol, the Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol for ratification.
The Clinton Administration released an economic analysis in July 1998, prepared by the Council of Economic Advisors, which concluded that with emissions trading among the Annex B/Annex I countries, and participation of key developing countries in the "Clean Development Mechanism" — which grants the latter business-as-usual emissions rates through 2012 — the costs of implementing the Kyoto Protocol could be reduced as much as 60% from many estimates. Other economic analyses, however, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office and the Department of Energy Energy Information Administration (EIA), and others, demonstrated a potentially large decline in GDP from implementing the Protocol.
The current President, George W. Bush, has indicated that he does not intend to submit the treaty for ratification, not because he does not support the general idea, but because of the strain he believes the treaty would put on the economy; he emphasises the uncertainties he asserts are present in the climate change issue [6]. Furthermore, he is not happy with the details of the treaty. For example, he does not support the split between Annex I countries and others. Bush said of the treaty:
so, in 100 years they will be crying again. help us, help us.. they should just not build there. or require all buildings to built a certain strength/height. i have friends with places along rivers. they can't get any home loans unless they agree to build like 12-14 feet above the ground bc of the floods that hit the area a few years ago.
are you the dentist? i thought you guys got all that tootbrush and toothpaste for free?
and believe me, i will pay my fair share of this economically.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
