Re: Washington Failed to Fund Levee Projects

formatting link

> By Richard A. Serrano and Nicole Gaouette LA Times Writers >> KATRINA'S AFTERMATH >> Despite Warnings, Washington Failed to Fund Levee Projects. To cut >> spending, officials gambled that the worst-case scenario would not >> come to be. >> September 4, 2005 >> WASHINGTON - For years, Washington had been warned that doom lurked >> just beyond the levees. And for years, the White House and Congress >> had dickered over how much money to put into shoring up century-old >> dikes and carrying out newer flood control projects to protect the >> city of New Orleans. > >> As recently as three months ago, the alarms were sounding -- and being >> brushed aside. > Why don't we cast the blame where it belongs? I love how media is now > trying to spin this as Clinton's fault, etc. > You have to remember that during most of Clinton's term he had to > contend with a Republican controlled congress. And now we've got > Republican control in all three branches. > So tell me what the real problem is.

Yeah, do tell. *WHY* is such an issue the Federal Government's problem in the first place?

Protecting New Orleans from the inevitable acts of nature is _NEW_ORLEANS'_ problem. Why wasn't New Orleans city government, and/or Parish government, and/or Louisiana state government

*doing*something*?? Why were they burying their head in the sand, and waiting for the Feds to 'solve' *their* problem?

Didn't the _locals_ *know* the risks when they moved or built there?

Didn't they *know* they were living in the floodwater basin?

Who's fault is it that _4_out_of_5_ residents/businesses in that KNOWN TO BE VULNERABLE TO FLOODING area do *NOT* have flood insurance? (it was published somewhere recently that only approximately 21% of the properties in the flooded areas were covered by flood insurance).

That _Federally_sponsored_ program has been in place for nearly *40* years.

Bush isn't to blame. Clinton isn't to blame. Congress isn't to blame.

The fools who live there and _didn't_buy_insurance_ against a KNOWN hazard, are reaping the "benefits" of their bad judgement.

*THEY* didn't buy flood insurance.

*THEY* didn't fund (*locally*) the upgrading of the protection for _their_ property.

Yes, what has happened *is* a disaster.

Yes, government, including the Feds, should pitch in to: 1) save lives; 2) evacuate (*forcibly*, if necessary) everyone from the 'un-liveable' areas; 3) alleviate the public health hazards posed by dead bodies (whether human or animal); 4) work on restoring 'essential services'.

That is a *big* job. A VERY VERY big job. To put it in perspective, the area of devastation is somewhat larger than _all_ of Great Britain.