Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Bush cut New Orleans flood funding 44% to pay for Iraq

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>
Author
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Bush cut New Orleans flood funding 44% to pay for Iraq
    Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 10:09

FORMER CLINTON ADVISOR:

"No One Can Say they Didn't See it Coming"

By Sidney Blumenthal

In 2001, FEMA warned that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely disasters in the U.S. But the Bush administration cut New Orleans flood control funding by 44 percent to pay for the Iraq war.

< =text/>
An aerial view of the New Orleans airport underwater.
Zoom
REUTERS
An aerial view of the New Orleans airport underwater.

Biblical in its uncontrolled rage and scope, Hurricane Katrina has left millions of Americans to scavenge for food and shelter and hundreds to thousands reportedly dead. With its main levee broken, the evacuated city of New Orleans has become part of the Gulf of Mexico. But the damage wrought by the hurricane may not entirely be the result of an act of nature.

A year ago the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed to study how New Orleans could be protected from a catastrophic hurricane, but the Bush administration ordered that the research not be undertaken. After a flood killed six people in 1995, Congress created the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, in which the Corps of Engineers strengthened and renovated levees and pumping stations. In early 2001, the Federal Emergency Management Agency issued a report stating that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely disasters in the U.S., including a terrorist attack on New York City. But by 2003 the federal funding for the flood control project essentially dried up as it was drained into the Iraq war. In 2004, the Bush administration cut funding requested by the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for holding back the waters of Lake Pontchartrain by more than 80 percent. Additional cuts at the beginning of this year (for a total reduction in funding of 44.2 percent since 2001) forced the New Orleans district of the Corps to impose a hiring freeze. The Senate had debated adding funds for fixing New Orleans' levees, but it was too late.

The New Orleans Times-Picayune, which before the hurricane published a series on the federal funding problem, and whose presses are now underwater, reported online: "No one can say they didn't see it coming ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious questions are being asked about the lack of preparation."

The Bush administration's policy of turning over wetlands to developers almost certainly also contributed to the heightened level of the storm surge. In 1990, a federal task force began restoring lost wetlands surrounding New Orleans. Every two miles of wetland between the Crescent City and the Gulf reduces a surge by half a foot. Bush had promised "no net loss" of wetlands, a policy launched by his father's administration and bolstered by President Clinton. But he reversed his approach in 2003, unleashing the developers. The Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency then announced they could no longer protect wetlands unless they were somehow related to interstate commerce.

In response to this potential crisis, four leading environmental groups conducted a joint expert study, concluding in 2004 that without wetlands protection New Orleans could be devastated by an ordinary, much less a Category 4 or 5, hurricane. "There's no way to describe how mindless a policy that is when it comes to wetlands protection," said one of the report's authors. The chairman of the White House's Council on Environmental Quality dismissed the study as "highly questionable," and boasted, "Everybody loves what we're doing."

"My administration's climate change policy will be science based," President Bush declared in June 2001. But in 2002, when the Environmental Protection Agency submitted a study on global warming to the United Nations reflecting its expert research, Bush derided it as "a report put out by a bureaucracy," and excised the climate change assessment from the agency's annual report. The next year, when the EPA issued its first comprehensive "Report on the Environment," stating, "Climate change has global consequences for human health and the environment," the White House simply demanded removal of the line and all similar conclusions. At the G-8 meeting in Scotland this year, Bush successfully stymied any common action on global warming. Scientists, meanwhile, have continued to accumulate impressive data on the rising temperature of the oceans, which has produced more severe hurricanes.

In February 2004, 60 of the nation's leading scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates, warned in a statement, "Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policymaking": "Successful application of science has played a large part in the policies that have made the United States of America the world's most powerful nation and its citizens increasingly prosperous and healthy ... Indeed, this principle has long been adhered to by presidents and administrations of both parties in forming and implementing policies. The administration of George W. Bush has, however, disregarded this principle ... The distortion of scientific knowledge for partisan political ends must cease." Bush completely ignored this statement.

In the two weeks preceding the storm in the Gulf, the trumping of science by ideology and expertise by special interests accelerated. The Federal Drug Administration announced that it was postponing sale of the morning-after contraceptive pill, despite overwhelming scientific evidence of its safety and its approval by the FDA's scientific advisory board. The United Nations special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa accused the Bush administration of responsibility for a condom shortage in Uganda -- the result of the administration's evangelical Christian agenda of "abstinence." When the chief of the Bureau of Justice Statistics in the Justice Department was ordered by the White House to delete its study that African-Americans and other minorities are subject to racial profiling in police traffic stops and he refused to buckle under, he was forced out of his job. When the Army Corps of Engineers' chief contracting oversight analyst objected to a $7 billion no-bid contract awarded for work in Iraq to Halliburton (the firm at which Vice President Cheney was formerly CEO), she was demoted despite her superior professional ratings. At the National Park Service, a former Cheney aide, a political appointee lacking professional background, drew up a plan to overturn past environmental practices and prohibit any mention of evolution while allowing sale of religious materials through the Park Service.

On the day the levees burst in New Orleans, Bush delivered a speech in Colorado comparing the Iraq war to World War II and himself to Franklin D. Roosevelt: "And he knew that the best way to bring peace and stability to the region was by bringing freedom to Japan." Bush had boarded his very own "Streetcar Named Desire."

Sidney Blumenthal, a former assistant and senior advisor to President Clinton and the author of "The Clinton Wars," is writing a column for Salon and the Guardian of London.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,372455, 00.html

Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 10:45
Originally posted by Zagros

FORMER CLINTON ADVISOR:

"No One Can Say they Didn't See it Coming"

By Sidney Blumenthal

In 2001, FEMA warned that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely disasters in the U.S. But the Bush administration cut New Orleans flood control funding by 44 percent to pay for the Iraq war.

< =text/>
An aerial view of the New Orleans airport underwater.
Zoom
REUTERS
An aerial view of the New Orleans airport underwater.

Biblical in its uncontrolled rage and scope, Hurricane Katrina has left millions of Americans to scavenge for food and shelter and hundreds to thousands reportedly dead. With its main levee broken, the evacuated city of New Orleans has become part of the Gulf of Mexico. But the damage wrought by the hurricane may not entirely be the result of an act of nature.

A year ago the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed to study how New Orleans could be protected from a catastrophic hurricane, but the Bush administration ordered that the research not be undertaken. After a flood killed six people in 1995, Congress created the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, in which the Corps of Engineers strengthened and renovated levees and pumping stations. In early 2001, the Federal Emergency Management Agency issued a report stating that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely disasters in the U.S., including a terrorist attack on New York City. But by 2003 the federal funding for the flood control project essentially dried up as it was drained into the Iraq war. In 2004, the Bush administration cut funding requested by the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for holding back the waters of Lake Pontchartrain by more than 80 percent. Additional cuts at the beginning of this year (for a total reduction in funding of 44.2 percent since 2001) forced the New Orleans district of the Corps to impose a hiring freeze. The Senate had debated adding funds for fixing New Orleans' levees, but it was too late.

The New Orleans Times-Picayune, which before the hurricane published a series on the federal funding problem, and whose presses are now underwater, reported online: "No one can say they didn't see it coming ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious questions are being asked about the lack of preparation."

The Bush administration's policy of turning over wetlands to developers almost certainly also contributed to the heightened level of the storm surge. In 1990, a federal task force began restoring lost wetlands surrounding New Orleans. Every two miles of wetland between the Crescent City and the Gulf reduces a surge by half a foot. Bush had promised "no net loss" of wetlands, a policy launched by his father's administration and bolstered by President Clinton. But he reversed his approach in 2003, unleashing the developers. The Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency then announced they could no longer protect wetlands unless they were somehow related to interstate commerce.

In response to this potential crisis, four leading environmental groups conducted a joint expert study, concluding in 2004 that without wetlands protection New Orleans could be devastated by an ordinary, much less a Category 4 or 5, hurricane. "There's no way to describe how mindless a policy that is when it comes to wetlands protection," said one of the report's authors. The chairman of the White House's Council on Environmental Quality dismissed the study as "highly questionable," and boasted, "Everybody loves what we're doing."

"My administration's climate change policy will be science based," President Bush declared in June 2001. But in 2002, when the Environmental Protection Agency submitted a study on global warming to the United Nations reflecting its expert research, Bush derided it as "a report put out by a bureaucracy," and excised the climate change assessment from the agency's annual report. The next year, when the EPA issued its first comprehensive "Report on the Environment," stating, "Climate change has global consequences for human health and the environment," the White House simply demanded removal of the line and all similar conclusions. At the G-8 meeting in Scotland this year, Bush successfully stymied any common action on global warming. Scientists, meanwhile, have continued to accumulate impressive data on the rising temperature of the oceans, which has produced more severe hurricanes.

In February 2004, 60 of the nation's leading scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates, warned in a statement, "Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policymaking": "Successful application of science has played a large part in the policies that have made the United States of America the world's most powerful nation and its citizens increasingly prosperous and healthy ... Indeed, this principle has long been adhered to by presidents and administrations of both parties in forming and implementing policies. The administration of George W. Bush has, however, disregarded this principle ... The distortion of scientific knowledge for partisan political ends must cease." Bush completely ignored this statement.

In the two weeks preceding the storm in the Gulf, the trumping of science by ideology and expertise by special interests accelerated. The Federal Drug Administration announced that it was postponing sale of the morning-after contraceptive pill, despite overwhelming scientific evidence of its safety and its approval by the FDA's scientific advisory board. The United Nations special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa accused the Bush administration of responsibility for a condom shortage in Uganda -- the result of the administration's evangelical Christian agenda of "abstinence." When the chief of the Bureau of Justice Statistics in the Justice Department was ordered by the White House to delete its study that African-Americans and other minorities are subject to racial profiling in police traffic stops and he refused to buckle under, he was forced out of his job. When the Army Corps of Engineers' chief contracting oversight analyst objected to a $7 billion no-bid contract awarded for work in Iraq to Halliburton (the firm at which Vice President Cheney was formerly CEO), she was demoted despite her superior professional ratings. At the National Park Service, a former Cheney aide, a political appointee lacking professional background, drew up a plan to overturn past environmental practices and prohibit any mention of evolution while allowing sale of religious materials through the Park Service.

On the day the levees burst in New Orleans, Bush delivered a speech in Colorado comparing the Iraq war to World War II and himself to Franklin D. Roosevelt: "And he knew that the best way to bring peace and stability to the region was by bringing freedom to Japan." Bush had boarded his very own "Streetcar Named Desire."

Sidney Blumenthal, a former assistant and senior advisor to President Clinton and the author of "The Clinton Wars," is writing a column for Salon and the Guardian of London.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,372455, 00.html

Points here are all valid, but the scale of this storm and where it hit make them moot.  If the funding had been available, it still would be in the pipeline.  Also, none of that would have helped what has been the virtual destruction of the entire coastline of Mississippi.

This has been a disaster in the making for two centuries.

Now, of course the blame game will begin...politics as usual. 

Back to Top
hugoestr View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 13-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3987
  Quote hugoestr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 10:51
Man, the claims of this column are so horrible that even I don't want to believe that Bush could be so careless and incompetent.

Let's see if other news sources confirm the claims about New Orleans
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 10:55
I thought it would be a more appropriate medium to debate the subject than the Katrina thread.
Back to Top
hugoestr View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 13-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3987
  Quote hugoestr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 11:00
Originally posted by Zagros

I thought it would be a more appropriate medium to debate the subject than the Katrina thread.

As always, you display good judgement in your decisions. The Katrina thread would not be appropriate.
Back to Top
Iranban View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28-Aug-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 225
  Quote Iranban Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 11:40

lol, this forum seems more like a leftist mouthpiece than a history forum  or maybe it's just me?

Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 11:51

It's just you.

This is one of a couple of sections where politics are discussed, as is patently obvious from the section title. You are free to discuss history anywhere you like, like on one of the other two dozen or so fora available.

If you call the highlighting of political mistakes and blunders "leftist", then well... that is your issue.



Edited by Zagros
Back to Top
Iranban View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 28-Aug-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 225
  Quote Iranban Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 12:04
are azizam
Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 13:18
In another topic someone was blaming the French for building a city under sea level... Yet, it's obvious that when the French build that city, the coasts were more protected by natural means (marshes) and while probably flooding wasn't 100% preventable it would have been less dangerous. The uncontrolled growth of such strategical city has caused much more risks than those that existed three centuries ago. Actually the French Quarter has been one of the last to be inundated, if I don't recall badly.

Apart of that, am I the only one to feel disgust seeing President Bush smiling optimistically when he makes vague promises of aid is arriving in his press releases? It seems he's thiking in how much money will he make through rising oil prices or something... I just can't bear him, what a lack of seriousness for a Chief of State in the midst of a crisis!

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Emperor Barbarossa View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Jul-2005
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Emperor Barbarossa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 15:26
One thing is for sure, I do not think anyone can trust George W. Bush after all he has done in his 4 and a half years as our president.

Back to Top
ill_teknique View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jun-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 636
  Quote ill_teknique Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 17:58
It's not his fault hes a puppet he takes orders on his cellphone
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 18:00
Back to Top
Vamun Tianshu View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 15-Dec-2004
Location: Japan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 418
  Quote Vamun Tianshu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 19:28
George Bush is really a fool,now isn't he?Of course,Katrina is one of the biggest Hurricanes and deadliest in a century(last major Hurricane killed 8000-10,000 people in Texas,and it was only Level 4 Hurricane).He really is one of the most ambitious(for the wrong reasons)presidents in US History,and,I might add,one of the most costliest(in terms of him and money),but,he is probably the only president who saw 6 disasterous Hurricanes in the course of only one year.

In Honor
Back to Top
Emperor Barbarossa View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Jul-2005
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Emperor Barbarossa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 20:22
One thing I will not say is "It's a sign from God." Then when something happens around them it is not a sign from God. Is it just me or are most of the people who say that blindly religious and blindly nationalistic?

Back to Top
Vamun Tianshu View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 15-Dec-2004
Location: Japan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 418
  Quote Vamun Tianshu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 20:27
I think they're blindly religious,and very unsentimental,and have no real understanding in the value of life,and why would 'God" have justice in killing those people,who untimely met something far more realistic than a biblical god of some sort.To say it is a sign or justification from god is to be a fool,it was a natural disaster,and how would we,as humans,identify with someone so holy who lives high and supreme up in the heavens,and watches those down here suffer and die an unexpected death?I ask people this...

In Honor
Back to Top
Byzantine Emperor View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Kastrophylax kai Tzaousios

Joined: 24-May-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1800
  Quote Byzantine Emperor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 20:28

Ha!  The author is Sidney Blumenthal, "former Clinton advisor."  I am surprised the idiots at CNN didn't pick this one up and run with it. 

Just a little side comment: The journalists on CNN are like a pack of jackals, rubbing their hands together in anticipation of more death and destruction to report.  It has nothing to do with informing the public about the hurricane disaster, but it has all to do with trying to tie any negative news that happens to the Bush administration.  Every little comment they make about the situation in Louisiana and Mississippi is an attempt to point the finger at Bush and to politicize this disaster.  While I definitely am disgusted with the way the President has handled the relief effort (I think he first should have flown to one of the sites and made a broadcast there about using all the resources neccessary for relief), I am even more disgusted by the ghoulish news media, who seem to be feeding off of people's misery.

Back to Top
Thegeneral View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 05-Mar-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1117
  Quote Thegeneral Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 20:31

C'mon, blaming this on Bush is like saying what the Taliban are saying, it was a "wrath of God" from fighting them.  It is a NATURAL disaster.  Natural meaning it is part of nature and therefor uncontrolable.

Bush always has that look of constipation.  It's not like he's happy.  But he should be proud.  Proud of the progress being made there so far.

And Vamun, may I ask what you mean it was "only" a level 4?  Katrina was "only" a four when it hit land too, but look what it did.

Back to Top
Vamun Tianshu View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 15-Dec-2004
Location: Japan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 418
  Quote Vamun Tianshu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 20:38
I forgot at what status these Hurricanes can be,but at the coastlines,Level Fours can seem like Level Fives.I really didn't mean anything by the "only",only to emphasize on the destruction a level four can do,as opposed to a Level Five.Charlie was level three at landfall,but its maximum winds were at 140 mph,with 145 mph in the south,while I think Katrina was more in the lines of 150-160,with Ivan being at 140-145 mph,but sustained winds can cause a great deal of influence on these storms.Andrew I think was a 155-160 mph storm,and he hit Florida,a state literally at mercy with the sea level,and he did some destruction,but the flooding was not half as bad as Katrina.What I'm trying to say is,never take a storm lightly,which is why news media heightens things up and likes to scare people,but they're doing it with the best of intentions.The one that hit Galveston Texas at the turn of the 20th Century was the most disasterous Hurricane in the US,however,we cannot confirm its status as number one until Katrina's death toll has been tallied.Really,the disaster has been exploited by the media,and of course,oil,which I think isn't as important as people might think.

In Honor
Back to Top
Emperor Barbarossa View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Jul-2005
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Emperor Barbarossa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 20:40
Nobody is blaming Bush for the hurricane, we are just saying that some of the aid could be better if he would not have shifted the funds over to Iraq.

Back to Top
Vamun Tianshu View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 15-Dec-2004
Location: Japan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 418
  Quote Vamun Tianshu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 20:49
No one can ever blame a human on these natural disasters,they happen all on their own.Now,to environmental issues,thats a different story.With Bush's decision to fund 44% to Iraq,he is abandoning his own fellow Americans,whom at first,he sought to protect,but now,paying in billions to a country far on the other side of the world,and leaving us in the dust,especially in the wake of a mjor Hurricane,thats really idiotic for him to do so.

In Honor
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.113 seconds.