New Orleans is sinking
Sep. 2nd, 2005 04:13 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ciroccojI've been slowly easing into reading about New Orleans, because... well, ouch. It's quite horrifying. We watched a bit of CNN at the cottage yesterday, but delayed really immersing ourselves in the news until we were back home. And now that we're unpacked and settling, I find that once again D.C. Simpson has stated my own feelings on the subject matter, over at
http://www.idrewthis.org/index.html
Most apt words I've read so far:
What we keep hearing, from the administration but also from people who should know better, is that this is not the time to "play politics" with the disaster.
Well, first of all, who's playing? I could not possibly be more serious.
And second, why do so many people have this idea that politics are a game? Some sort of popularity contest, unrelated to people's actual lives? I have news for you. Politics are the means by which we select the leaders who will, in turn, make policy. Policy affects your life. At times like these, policy can be the difference between life and death.
The incompetence of King George, September 1, 2005
The irony is enough to make you vomit.
Today, September 1, the Department of Homeland Security launched National Preparedness Month.
Preparedness for what? The display of unpreparedness going on in Louisiana is greatest human tragedy on American soil in my lifetime so far. How dare these people talk to us about preparedness. People are dying amidst disease, squalor and misery because of their unpreparedness.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. I'm sorry. I'm really angry.
What we keep hearing, from the administration but also from people who should know better, is that this is not the time to "play politics" with the disaster.
Well, first of all, who's playing? I could not possibly be more serious.
And second, why do so many people have this idea that politics are a game? Some sort of popularity contest, unrelated to people's actual lives? I have news for you. Politics are the means by which we select the leaders who will, in turn, make policy. Policy affects your life. At times like these, policy can be the difference between life and death.
Poll after poll shows that people agree with the Democrats on almost every major issue. We would be a liberal country if we voted for the leaders who would actually enact policies we agree with. But we don't vote that way for some reason. You saw it in the last election. It was all "I'm going to vote for Bush because you know where you stand with him." And "I'm voting for Bush because he makes me feel safe."
It is not the quality of a leader's Clint Eastwood impression that keeps you safe, people. It is the quality of his (or her) policies. And this administration's policies are terrible. Al Gore's would not have been. John Kerry's would not have been. You would have agreed more with their policies and priorities. They would not have been asleep at the switch. America, your nearsightedness in returning this man to power made this crisis worse. It made people die.
George W. Bush said on "Good Morning America" that no one anticipated that the levees might break. That is flat out false. In fact, many people anticipated it. FEMA, in 2001, identified a category 5 hurricane destroying the levees and flooding New Orleans as one of the three major disasters most likely to befall the United States. One of the others was a terrorist attack on New York.
Well, guess what? We've had both. Guess what Bush did to prepare? Nothing. Then the administration looked us straight in the eye, both times, and said no one could have anticipated that this would happen. Well, bullshit, George. It's bullshit and I don't think you care.
This one is even worse, because in 2003 and 2004, the Bush administration specifically cut the funds for strengthening those specific levees, because it needed the money for Iraq. It's ironic that we were told, ad nauseam, that we had to invade Iraq because it posed a real threat to our safety and we had to be proactive. So, in the name of that, the administration took away the funds that might have prevented a far more likely tragedy from claiming so many lives, as it is now in the process of doing.
And who normally deals with these tragedies? Well, the National Guard. That's why we have a National Guard. It isn't designed to fight wars. It's designed to deal with domestic disaster scenarios. But nearly half the Louisiana National Guard is in Iraq.
George's vanity war and his neo-imperialist fantasy of remaking the middle east and his obsessive desire to slash his friends' taxes all came before these people's lives. And now they're dying. Old people. Children. Sick people. Mostly poor people, who couldn't escape, and, when the hurricane was bearing down on them, got no governmental help in doing so. And now they're dying, George. Dying.
Playing politics? George, you've spent your whole presidency invoking 9/11. You've spent your whole presidency trying to claim anyone who doesn't support your policies doesn't care if 9/11 happens again. This despite the fact that the other side tried to stand with you right after that tragedy happened. They ignored your policy failures; the fact that Clinton's National Security Adviser, Sandy Berger, gave you specific warnings about bin Laden and plans for dealing with them; FEMA's warnings that such an attack would be a huge disaster; and the fact that Hart-Rudman warned explicitly in Spring 2001 that one was coming. And you did nothing, but the Democrats let it slide because no one thought it was the time to dwell on past failures.
Well, now we're in it again, and in a lot of ways this one is even worse, and you not only did nothing to prepare, you impeded others' ability to do so. And again we're being told this isn't the time. Well, when is the time? How many times do you have to get people killed before we're allowed to talk about it? How many dead babies do we have to see on TV before criticizing the people who let it happen stops being "shrill"? I've had enough.
America, to you I say, this is proof that your policymakers should be people who are competent and whose policies you actually support. If you install a government because, gosh, they look likable and macho on television, you're going to get lousy policy, and people will suffer and die. It is not a game, it is not an abstraction, and you need to stop treating it so casually.
George, to you I say, we are not playing politics. You're the one who's playing. Playing golf, playing guitar in photo ops, acting like nothing was wrong the day after Katrina hit, the day the levees broke and New Orleans started to disappear. Giving speeches comparing yourself to FDR while lives were being washed into the Gulf of Mexico. You're the unserious party here. You don't get to base your whole career on playing politics, then urge others not to do so the moment politics becomes inconvenient.
People are dead because of your policies. If you really do talk to God, I hope he gives you an earful for this one.
In Simpson's rant, he links to the following, which kinda chilled me to the bone:
KEEPING ITS HEAD ABOVE WATER
New Orleans faces doomsday scenario
By ERIC BERGER
Copyright 2001 Houston Chronicle Science Writer
New Orleans is sinking.
And its main buffer from a hurricane, the protective Mississippi River delta, is quickly eroding away, leaving the historic city perilously close to disaster.
So vulnerable, in fact, that earlier this year the Federal Emergency Management Agency ranked the potential damage to New Orleans as among the three likeliest, most castastrophic disasters facing this country.
The other two? A massive earthquake in San Francisco, and, almost prophetically, a terrorist attack on New York City.
The New Orleans hurricane scenario may be the deadliest of all.
In the face of an approaching storm, scientists say, the city's less-than-adequate evacuation routes would strand 250,000 people or more, and probably kill one of 10 left behind as the city drowned under 20 feet of water. Thousands of refugees could land in Houston.
Economically, the toll would be shattering.
Southern Louisiana produces one-third of the country's seafood, one-fifth of its oil and one-quarter of its natural gas. The city's tourism, lifeblood of the French Quarter, would cease to exist. The Big Easy might never recover.
And, given New Orleans' precarious perch, some academics wonder if it should be rebuilt at all.
It's been 36 years since Hurricane Betsy buried New Orleans 8 feet deep. Since then a deteriorating ecosystem and increased development have left the city in an ever more precarious position. Yet the problem went unaddressed for decades by a laissez-faire government, experts said.
"To some extent, I think we've been lulled to sleep," said Marc Levitan, director of Louisiana State University's hurricane center.
Hurricane season ended Friday, and for the second straight year no hurricanes hit the United States. But the season nonetheless continued a long-term trend of more active seasons, forecasters said. Tropical Storm Allison became this country's most destructive tropical storm ever.
Yet despite the damage Allison wrought upon Houston, dropping more than 3 feet of water in some areas, a few days later much of the city returned to normal as bloated bayous drained into the Gulf of Mexico.
The same storm dumped a mere 5 inches on New Orleans, nearly overwhelming the city's pump system. If an Allison-type storm were to strike New Orleans, or a Category 3 storm or greater with at least 111 mph winds, the results would be cataclysmic, New Orleans planners said.
"Any significant water that comes into this city is a dangerous threat," Walter Maestri, Jefferson Parish emergency management director, told Scientific American for an October article.
"Even though I have to plan for it, I don't even want to think about the loss of life a huge hurricane would cause."
New Orleans is essentially a bowl ringed by levees that protect the city from the Mississippi River to its south and Lake Pontchartrain to the north. The bottom of the bowl is 14 feet below sea level, and efforts to keep it dry are only digging a deeper hole.
During routine rainfalls the city's dozens of pumps push water uphill into the lake. This, in turn, draws water from the ground, further drying the ground and sinking it deeper, a problem known as subsidence.
This problem also faces Houston as water wells have sucked the ground dry. Houston's solution is a plan to convert to surface drinking water. For New Orleans, eliminating pumping during a rainfall is not an option, so the city continues to sink.
A big storm, scientists said, would likely block four of five evacuation routes long before it hit. Those left behind would have no power or transportation, and little food or medicine, and no prospects for a return to normal any time soon.
"The bowl would be full," Levitan said. "There's simply no place for the water to drain."
Estimates for pumping the city dry after a huge storm vary from six to 16 weeks. Hundreds of thousands would be homeless, their residences destroyed.
The only solution, scientists, politicians and other Louisiana officials agree, is to take large-scale steps to minimize the risks, such as rebuilding the protective delta.
Every two miles of marsh between New Orleans and the Gulf reduces a storm surge -- which in some cases is 20 feet or higher -- by half a foot.
In 1990, the Breaux Act, named for its author, Sen. John Breaux, D-La., created a task force of several federal agencies to address the severe wetlands loss in coastal Louisiana. The act has brought about $40 million a year for wetland restoration projects, but it hasn't been enough.
"It's kind of been like trying to give aspirin to a cancer patient," said Len Bahr, director of Louisiana Gov. Mike Foster's coastal activities office.
The state loses about 25 square miles of land a year, the equivalent of about one football field every 15 minutes. The fishing industry, without marshes, swamps and fertile wetlands, could lose a projected $37 billion by the year 2050.
University of New Orleans researchers studied the impact of Breaux Act projects on the vanishing wetlands and estimated that only 2 percent of the loss has been averted. Clearly, Bahr said, there is a need for something much bigger. There is some evidence this finally may be happening.
A consortium of local, state and federal agencies is studying a $2 billion to $3 billion plan to divert sediment from the Mississippi River back into the delta. Because the river is leveed all the way to the Gulf, where sediment is dumped into deep water, nothing is left to replenish the receding delta.
Other possible projects include restoration of barrier reefs and perhaps a large gate to prevent Lake Pontchartrain from overflowing and drowning the city.
All are multibillion-dollar projects. A plan to restore the Florida Everglades attracted $4 billion in federal funding, but the state had to match it dollar for dollar. In Louisiana, so far, there's only been a willingness to match 15 or 25 cents.
"Our state still looks for a 100 percent federal bailout, but that's just not going to happen," said University of New Orleans geologist Shea Penland, a delta expert.
"We have an image and credibility problem. We have to convince our country that they need to take us seriously, that they can trust us to do a science-based restoration program."
Here's a link to the site: http://www.hurricane.lsu.edu/_in_the_news/houston.htm
http://www.idrewthis.org/index.html
Most apt words I've read so far:
What we keep hearing, from the administration but also from people who should know better, is that this is not the time to "play politics" with the disaster.
Well, first of all, who's playing? I could not possibly be more serious.
And second, why do so many people have this idea that politics are a game? Some sort of popularity contest, unrelated to people's actual lives? I have news for you. Politics are the means by which we select the leaders who will, in turn, make policy. Policy affects your life. At times like these, policy can be the difference between life and death.
The incompetence of King George, September 1, 2005
The irony is enough to make you vomit.
Today, September 1, the Department of Homeland Security launched National Preparedness Month.
Preparedness for what? The display of unpreparedness going on in Louisiana is greatest human tragedy on American soil in my lifetime so far. How dare these people talk to us about preparedness. People are dying amidst disease, squalor and misery because of their unpreparedness.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. I'm sorry. I'm really angry.
What we keep hearing, from the administration but also from people who should know better, is that this is not the time to "play politics" with the disaster.
Well, first of all, who's playing? I could not possibly be more serious.
And second, why do so many people have this idea that politics are a game? Some sort of popularity contest, unrelated to people's actual lives? I have news for you. Politics are the means by which we select the leaders who will, in turn, make policy. Policy affects your life. At times like these, policy can be the difference between life and death.
Poll after poll shows that people agree with the Democrats on almost every major issue. We would be a liberal country if we voted for the leaders who would actually enact policies we agree with. But we don't vote that way for some reason. You saw it in the last election. It was all "I'm going to vote for Bush because you know where you stand with him." And "I'm voting for Bush because he makes me feel safe."
It is not the quality of a leader's Clint Eastwood impression that keeps you safe, people. It is the quality of his (or her) policies. And this administration's policies are terrible. Al Gore's would not have been. John Kerry's would not have been. You would have agreed more with their policies and priorities. They would not have been asleep at the switch. America, your nearsightedness in returning this man to power made this crisis worse. It made people die.
George W. Bush said on "Good Morning America" that no one anticipated that the levees might break. That is flat out false. In fact, many people anticipated it. FEMA, in 2001, identified a category 5 hurricane destroying the levees and flooding New Orleans as one of the three major disasters most likely to befall the United States. One of the others was a terrorist attack on New York.
Well, guess what? We've had both. Guess what Bush did to prepare? Nothing. Then the administration looked us straight in the eye, both times, and said no one could have anticipated that this would happen. Well, bullshit, George. It's bullshit and I don't think you care.
This one is even worse, because in 2003 and 2004, the Bush administration specifically cut the funds for strengthening those specific levees, because it needed the money for Iraq. It's ironic that we were told, ad nauseam, that we had to invade Iraq because it posed a real threat to our safety and we had to be proactive. So, in the name of that, the administration took away the funds that might have prevented a far more likely tragedy from claiming so many lives, as it is now in the process of doing.
And who normally deals with these tragedies? Well, the National Guard. That's why we have a National Guard. It isn't designed to fight wars. It's designed to deal with domestic disaster scenarios. But nearly half the Louisiana National Guard is in Iraq.
George's vanity war and his neo-imperialist fantasy of remaking the middle east and his obsessive desire to slash his friends' taxes all came before these people's lives. And now they're dying. Old people. Children. Sick people. Mostly poor people, who couldn't escape, and, when the hurricane was bearing down on them, got no governmental help in doing so. And now they're dying, George. Dying.
Playing politics? George, you've spent your whole presidency invoking 9/11. You've spent your whole presidency trying to claim anyone who doesn't support your policies doesn't care if 9/11 happens again. This despite the fact that the other side tried to stand with you right after that tragedy happened. They ignored your policy failures; the fact that Clinton's National Security Adviser, Sandy Berger, gave you specific warnings about bin Laden and plans for dealing with them; FEMA's warnings that such an attack would be a huge disaster; and the fact that Hart-Rudman warned explicitly in Spring 2001 that one was coming. And you did nothing, but the Democrats let it slide because no one thought it was the time to dwell on past failures.
Well, now we're in it again, and in a lot of ways this one is even worse, and you not only did nothing to prepare, you impeded others' ability to do so. And again we're being told this isn't the time. Well, when is the time? How many times do you have to get people killed before we're allowed to talk about it? How many dead babies do we have to see on TV before criticizing the people who let it happen stops being "shrill"? I've had enough.
America, to you I say, this is proof that your policymakers should be people who are competent and whose policies you actually support. If you install a government because, gosh, they look likable and macho on television, you're going to get lousy policy, and people will suffer and die. It is not a game, it is not an abstraction, and you need to stop treating it so casually.
George, to you I say, we are not playing politics. You're the one who's playing. Playing golf, playing guitar in photo ops, acting like nothing was wrong the day after Katrina hit, the day the levees broke and New Orleans started to disappear. Giving speeches comparing yourself to FDR while lives were being washed into the Gulf of Mexico. You're the unserious party here. You don't get to base your whole career on playing politics, then urge others not to do so the moment politics becomes inconvenient.
People are dead because of your policies. If you really do talk to God, I hope he gives you an earful for this one.
In Simpson's rant, he links to the following, which kinda chilled me to the bone:
KEEPING ITS HEAD ABOVE WATER
New Orleans faces doomsday scenario
By ERIC BERGER
Copyright 2001 Houston Chronicle Science Writer
New Orleans is sinking.
And its main buffer from a hurricane, the protective Mississippi River delta, is quickly eroding away, leaving the historic city perilously close to disaster.
So vulnerable, in fact, that earlier this year the Federal Emergency Management Agency ranked the potential damage to New Orleans as among the three likeliest, most castastrophic disasters facing this country.
The other two? A massive earthquake in San Francisco, and, almost prophetically, a terrorist attack on New York City.
The New Orleans hurricane scenario may be the deadliest of all.
In the face of an approaching storm, scientists say, the city's less-than-adequate evacuation routes would strand 250,000 people or more, and probably kill one of 10 left behind as the city drowned under 20 feet of water. Thousands of refugees could land in Houston.
Economically, the toll would be shattering.
Southern Louisiana produces one-third of the country's seafood, one-fifth of its oil and one-quarter of its natural gas. The city's tourism, lifeblood of the French Quarter, would cease to exist. The Big Easy might never recover.
And, given New Orleans' precarious perch, some academics wonder if it should be rebuilt at all.
It's been 36 years since Hurricane Betsy buried New Orleans 8 feet deep. Since then a deteriorating ecosystem and increased development have left the city in an ever more precarious position. Yet the problem went unaddressed for decades by a laissez-faire government, experts said.
"To some extent, I think we've been lulled to sleep," said Marc Levitan, director of Louisiana State University's hurricane center.
Hurricane season ended Friday, and for the second straight year no hurricanes hit the United States. But the season nonetheless continued a long-term trend of more active seasons, forecasters said. Tropical Storm Allison became this country's most destructive tropical storm ever.
Yet despite the damage Allison wrought upon Houston, dropping more than 3 feet of water in some areas, a few days later much of the city returned to normal as bloated bayous drained into the Gulf of Mexico.
The same storm dumped a mere 5 inches on New Orleans, nearly overwhelming the city's pump system. If an Allison-type storm were to strike New Orleans, or a Category 3 storm or greater with at least 111 mph winds, the results would be cataclysmic, New Orleans planners said.
"Any significant water that comes into this city is a dangerous threat," Walter Maestri, Jefferson Parish emergency management director, told Scientific American for an October article.
"Even though I have to plan for it, I don't even want to think about the loss of life a huge hurricane would cause."
New Orleans is essentially a bowl ringed by levees that protect the city from the Mississippi River to its south and Lake Pontchartrain to the north. The bottom of the bowl is 14 feet below sea level, and efforts to keep it dry are only digging a deeper hole.
During routine rainfalls the city's dozens of pumps push water uphill into the lake. This, in turn, draws water from the ground, further drying the ground and sinking it deeper, a problem known as subsidence.
This problem also faces Houston as water wells have sucked the ground dry. Houston's solution is a plan to convert to surface drinking water. For New Orleans, eliminating pumping during a rainfall is not an option, so the city continues to sink.
A big storm, scientists said, would likely block four of five evacuation routes long before it hit. Those left behind would have no power or transportation, and little food or medicine, and no prospects for a return to normal any time soon.
"The bowl would be full," Levitan said. "There's simply no place for the water to drain."
Estimates for pumping the city dry after a huge storm vary from six to 16 weeks. Hundreds of thousands would be homeless, their residences destroyed.
The only solution, scientists, politicians and other Louisiana officials agree, is to take large-scale steps to minimize the risks, such as rebuilding the protective delta.
Every two miles of marsh between New Orleans and the Gulf reduces a storm surge -- which in some cases is 20 feet or higher -- by half a foot.
In 1990, the Breaux Act, named for its author, Sen. John Breaux, D-La., created a task force of several federal agencies to address the severe wetlands loss in coastal Louisiana. The act has brought about $40 million a year for wetland restoration projects, but it hasn't been enough.
"It's kind of been like trying to give aspirin to a cancer patient," said Len Bahr, director of Louisiana Gov. Mike Foster's coastal activities office.
The state loses about 25 square miles of land a year, the equivalent of about one football field every 15 minutes. The fishing industry, without marshes, swamps and fertile wetlands, could lose a projected $37 billion by the year 2050.
University of New Orleans researchers studied the impact of Breaux Act projects on the vanishing wetlands and estimated that only 2 percent of the loss has been averted. Clearly, Bahr said, there is a need for something much bigger. There is some evidence this finally may be happening.
A consortium of local, state and federal agencies is studying a $2 billion to $3 billion plan to divert sediment from the Mississippi River back into the delta. Because the river is leveed all the way to the Gulf, where sediment is dumped into deep water, nothing is left to replenish the receding delta.
Other possible projects include restoration of barrier reefs and perhaps a large gate to prevent Lake Pontchartrain from overflowing and drowning the city.
All are multibillion-dollar projects. A plan to restore the Florida Everglades attracted $4 billion in federal funding, but the state had to match it dollar for dollar. In Louisiana, so far, there's only been a willingness to match 15 or 25 cents.
"Our state still looks for a 100 percent federal bailout, but that's just not going to happen," said University of New Orleans geologist Shea Penland, a delta expert.
"We have an image and credibility problem. We have to convince our country that they need to take us seriously, that they can trust us to do a science-based restoration program."
Here's a link to the site: http://www.hurricane.lsu.edu/_in_the_news/houston.htm
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-09-02 11:18 pm (UTC)Thanks for posting.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-03 02:28 am (UTC)Thanks. Am reposting on my journal.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-03 04:41 am (UTC)Yeah, that's what I was thinking as I read it. Particularly where he points out that his opponents did stand behind Bush after 9/11, and ignored his policy failures, "because no one thought it was the time to dwell on past failures". And how you just can't play that card forever.