Politics: NYT Can't-Do Government

The New York Times has a scathing Op-Ed on the government's handling of Katrina.
Before 9/11 the Federal Emergency Management Agency listed the three most likely catastrophic disasters facing America: a terrorist attack on New York, a major earthquake in San Francisco and a hurricane strike on New Orleans. "The New Orleans hurricane scenario," The Houston Chronicle wrote in December 2001, "may be the deadliest of all." It described a potential catastrophe very much like the one now happening.
First question: Why have aid and security taken so long to arrive? Katrina hit five days ago - and it was already clear by last Friday that Katrina could do immense damage along the Gulf Coast. Yet the response you'd expect from an advanced country never happened. Thousands of Americans are dead or dying, not because they refused to evacuate, but because they were too poor or too sick to get out without help - and help wasn't provided. Many have yet to receive any help at all. (article is from Sept. 2nd)
And as is typical for Bush's administration, to fire those that disagree:
In 2002 the corps' chief resigned, reportedly under threat of being fired, after he criticized the administration's proposed cuts in the corps' budget, including flood-control spending.


United We Lay said…
Excellent post. There are many quesions involved with this disaster. Often, Americans stop demanding answers after a week or so. Hopefully this time longevity will prevail and we'll actually find out how this disaster was allowed to happen.

Popular posts from this blog

Shortest Sudoku solver in Python

Seven Segment Display in Inkscape

Comparing ICV to EVs to cellphones