TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Washington Failed to Fund Levee Projects

Re: Washington Failed to Fund Levee Projects

Robert Bonomi (bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com)
Tue, 06 Sep 2005 18:54:57 -0000

In article <telecom24.405.12@telecom-digest.org>,
Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> wrote:

> In article <telecom24.404.4@telecom-digest.org>, latimes@telecom-
> digest.org says:

> http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-levee4sep04,0,6360838,full.story

>> 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.

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Monty Solomon: "Telecom Damage Tops $400 Million"
Go to Previous message: jmeissen@aracnet.com: "Re: Flood Relief Efforts - Unfair Criticism?"
May be in reply to: Serrano & Gaouette: "Washington Failed to Fund Levee Projects"
Next in thread: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com: "Re: Washington Failed to Fund Levee Projects"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page