That's the tune Brownie is now singing up on the Hill, to the evident fury of his former bosses. Not the first ex-administration official to question the relationship between his former bosses and reality (see Powell, Colin; and O'Neil, Paul).
Testifying before a Senate committee, Mr. Brown said he notified a senior White House official — who he said was probably Joe Hagin, the deputy White House chief of staff, but might have been Andrew H. Card Jr., the chief of staff — on the day the hurricane hit to report that it had turned into his "worst nightmare" and that New Orleans was flooding.
It was the first public identification of any White House official who was said to have directly received reports of extensive flooding on Monday, Aug. 29, the day Hurricane Katrina hit.
In the aftermath of the storm, administration officials said they were caught by surprise when they were told of the levee breach on Tuesday, Aug. 30. Mr. Hagin was the senior staff member with President Bush on the day the hurricane hit, when Mr. Bush was traveling in California.
6 comments:
Tom: Please correct or confirm my impression about Katrina:
1. In Katrina and all previous responses:
- The feds appeared 7 days after disaster struck.
- The feds conducted themselves less efficiently than local and private agencies.
- The feds hampered the efforts of more efficient, local organizations.
2. One difference between Katrina and all previous FEMA responses: A major city perminantly flooded (as opposed to a flood that rises then recedes).
3. Local citizens failed for 50 years to ensure that their city had adequate flood protection.
4. The US govt does not guarantee, and assumes no responsibility for protecting, against the flooding of New York City, Chicago, Boston, Los Angeles, Detroit, Seatle, Austin, Charleston, San Diego, Houston, Portland, or any other water-fronted city.
5. The US govt plays no role in protecting California against earthquakes.
Although at this point I understand Bush's FEMA response to have merely equaled that of his predicessors, I had expected better from a free marketeer who officially despises big beurocracies.
Actually, the Federal Gov't and Fema performed dramatically well during 9/11. It was only after that the administration and Guiliani began lying about the toxic residues in the air.
Tom: Please address my questions. Responding to an international attack surely fits under the proper role of the federal govt. Protecting Hilldale, MO from flooding, or responding to a flood there, does not.
Are you aware of the massive fraud that attends FEMA resposes, in the form of local residents claiming (successfully!) phantom damages?
As far as I know, FEMA doesn't stand for Federal Foreign Attack Management Association. The E stands for emergency. Hell, Cheney's Secretary Service Agents didn't stand around when their boss shot his friend and say, "Look, if he had shot you, we'd be all over this. You shot him. You deal with it. It's not in our job description." No. They responded to an emergency. Back to New Orleans. Before Bush gutted FEMA, tapped an unqualified crony to head it, and stuck it under the Homeland Security bureaucracy, it existed to respond to emergencies. Surely the levees bursting, allowing a large city to flood, constitutes an emergency?
Sounds like Bush had a similar reaction to yours. He hears that a huge disaster has struck a major U.S. city and figures, well, since it wasn't terrorists, I suppose they'll have to sort it out themselves. Now that I've stuck FEMA under Homeland Security, I wouldn't even know what agency to send in there. Oh well, time to say my prayers and go to sleep.
Tom: You're wrong on all counts here.
1. I didn't suggest that "FEMA" should respond to the attacks on US soil by international terrorists. I said that it made sense for the federal govt to do so.
2. I maintain that's illogical and inefficient for people to depend on the federal government to protect against and respond to natural disasters. What is the federal government doing to protect you guys near Boone, NC from earthquackes, floods, and avalanches? When one strikes, what role do you deem proper for the federal govt? Now multiply your answers by the millions of US locales.
3. You have yet to demonstrate that Bush's FEMA responded less quickly than it did to any previous hurricane, or to any hurricanes under Clinton. As far as I can tell, as I stated in the post, 7 days after disaster strikes, FEMA arrives, then preposterous (and predictable) inefficiency and fraud begin. As best I can tell -- and neither you nor Nadir have shown me otherwise -- the only thing special about Katrina is that it involved stagnant flooding of a major city, and that Bush was the first president under which such an even occured.
You may speculate that Clinton would have acted in a special way to this special circumstance, but what would you base this speculation upon?
I have faulted Bush for failing to have a quicker and more efficient FEMA than Clinton, for placing it under (and creating) the stupid Homeland Security mess, and for hiring unqualified cronies. In other words, I've criticized him for behaving like a liberal democrat.
Post a Comment