Hurricane tests country's greatness
My column today:
Hurricane Katrina has taught us many lessons about our country. ...
-- We're very vulnerable to natural disasters. Maybe New Orleans was the most susceptible of U.S. cities to the wrath of a powerful hurricane, but a similar storm could destroy any coastal city. And, can anyone doubt that a massive earthquake someday will rip apart Los Angeles?
-- We're not prepared. The aftermath of Katrina shatters the myth that the U.S. government can do anything, anywhere, anytime. Even in the richest country on earth, resources are limited. Even in a nation where government generally functions with high efficiency, poor planning and delays in execution leave people without the help they need for critical days.
-- Our system of government contributes to poor coordination. We set aside separate responsibilities for different layers of government -- local, state and federal. Leaders guard their turf jealously. But, when emergencies arise, it's necessary for all to work together. Who does what? Who's in charge? How do different agencies communicate with each other? It takes too long to sort all that out.
-- Civilization is fragile. New Orleans descended into chaos in a very short time. Looting began the very day that Katrina struck. While many people were simply foraging -- looking for food, water and other survival items -- others saw opportunities to plunder. They didn't seem to understand or care that their gains would be short-lived. They just gave in to criminal impulses normally kept in check by the threat of arrest and punishment. So sociopathic did some of this behavior become that rescue workers and police officers were shot at, hospitals were besieged, cold-blooded murder and other mayhem occurred with impunity. And officials, such as Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco, reacted harshly, issuing "shoot to kill" orders to security forces. Could all that happen here under similar circumstances?
-- Race and class resentments lie just below the surface of almost any crisis. Some people attributed the slow response to the disaster to the fact that most of the victims were poor or black. America just doesn't care about its underclass, critics alleged. Those accusations, of course, don't explain the unprecedented outpouring of assistance -- public and private -- flowing to assist those same victims.
-- Many, many Americans rise to the occasion. In the weeks ahead, we'll hear more stories of tremendous heroism and sacrifice -- of people giving their lives to save others, of people reaching to help even while losing hold of their own homes and families.
Furthermore, millions of Americans far removed from the scene of disaster are contributing money to relief efforts or preparing shelters in their own communities for refugees.
-- Yet, some Americans think of themselves first -- bemoaning the spike in gasoline prices, for example.
-- Others view the disaster as a chance to continue the political warfare that so bitterly divides the country. There may be plenty of blame to go around among federal, state and city officials, but helpful evaluations will take time and careful, fair-minded analysis.
This, much more so than the response to 9/11 -- which, apart from the shock, was a disaster of far less magnitude -- will test the greatness of the United States and the American people.
Everyone pulled together for a while after Sept. 11, 2001. Americans united against a common enemy and supported military action against a terrorist organization and a regime that harbored it. The unity frazzled when the war was expanded to Iraq.
No enemy attacked the United States last week, but the damage sustained was more terrible and widespread than anything terrorists could inflict short of detonating a nuclear bomb. Americans have begun to marshal a huge campaign of charity. Here in the Triad, it should make us proud to see city and county leaders, as well as private agencies, work so hard to make room for displaced people -- in addition to all that's being done to send assistance to the stricken areas.
But, how long will we sustain this momentum? Communities across the country have to come to terms with the likelihood that many evacuees will never go back. Some Texas officials already are suggesting they've absorbed all they can -- but the challenge is just beginning. They'll have to find permanent homes and jobs for the newcomers. They'll have to educate the children and provide a long list of social services. Determining who pays for all this will become a matter of contention among local, state and federal governments.
And that doesn't even get to the debate about how, and even if, destroyed cities and towns should be rebuilt. Those questions will prompt bitter disagreements.
The hurricane and its aftermath have revealed much about our nation -- its abilities and its limitations. What happens in the years ahead will tell much more. It will test its heart and soul.
Comments (9)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Mr Clark,
Great article.
The work as not even started yet.
You may be right, the people who do the work and giving, will lose steam.I for one, am damn tired of Jesse Jackson bashing the workers ,this will make people stop working and giving.Instead of sticking a mike in his face, they should stick a shovel in his hand.
Posted on September 7, 2005 5:46 AM
Good editorial.
A few points:
The U.S. (federal) government cannot do anything, anywhere, anytime, nor does it have an obligation to. I think the "myth" that it can is more wishful thinking by those that who desire that level of service.
On coordination, every community has a disaster plan in place. It appears New Orleans did not follow their plan, resulting in chaos, poor communication, etc. The problem was not the plan, but it's implementation.
Rhetoric, finger pointing, and name calling will not get the job done.
Posted on September 7, 2005 10:16 AM
Great column, Doug.
Posted on September 7, 2005 1:25 PM
Thanks for the comments.
John, it will take a federal government of greatly expanded authority and resources to be able to deliver the kind of response people expected.
The great Mississippi flood of 1927 was the first time that the federal government became involved in disaster relief on a large scale. That led directly to its expansion into other areas of American life, particularly after the election of Franklin Roosevelt in 1932. I wonder if this disaster will launch a further escalation. Certainly, if Washington ultimately commits $150 billion or more to disaster relief and rebuilding, it will seek greater authority over rebuilding decisions that normally would be made by state and local governments.
Posted on September 7, 2005 3:10 PM
Mr. Clark, I think there's too much reliance on the federal government in many aspects of our lives. I feel local governments bear the reponsbility of most decisions in their area. Sometimes it seem that when someone is dissatisfied with local decisions or actions they immediately look to the federal government as the next step of resolution. Sort of like wanting to take your traffic ticket case to the US Supreme Court if you lose.
The feds have a role in the overall coordination of relief efforts, provision of resources, etc. But, they are not first responders; you don't call FEMA when you see a traffic accident at the corner, you call the local police.
Unfortunately, big responses necessitate big logistics problems.
If FEMA or the federal government piled millions and millions of dollars in personnel, materials, and other resources near every probable site of a hurricane and nothing happened, how long would the public tolerate the massive spending to do this?
Sorry, I might have gotten off topic here, but my point is that the federal government does not have the responsibility to take care of everything that happens, and huge logistical problems exist when you have huge disasters.
Posted on September 7, 2005 5:00 PM
Well said Doug.
Posted on September 7, 2005 9:44 PM
"The U.S. (federal) government cannot do anything, anywhere, anytime, nor does it have an obligation to."
That is completely incorrect. On Saturday August 27 the governor of Louisiana asked Bush to declare a Federal Disaster Area, which he did the following day. Once that happened, by law the federal government was in control and had total authority over the situation. FEMA is an agency that exists specifically to coordinate all federal, state, and local officials once a state of emergency has been declared. Unfortunately, FEMA was extremely late on arriving at the scene.
Also by the rules governing the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA can even spring into action without requests from the states in a serious situation. Given these facts, there is no reason that Michael Brown should have waited until the Monday the storm hit to request that FEMA personel go to the disaster area, and then give them 48 hours to do so.
Posted on September 8, 2005 9:27 AM
Once that happened, by law the federal government was in control and had total authority over the situation.
Every thing except the National Guard which was or should have been prepared to move in and do the work that the NOLA police could not do and were not prepared to do. The National Guard is the arm of the state that is to be prepared in such cases as this to intervene until federal agencies can be brought into place.
Which by the way is still under the control of the Governor and she is still at odds with both the city and the Federal Government.
Blame the Feds all day Andrew but even as slow as they were, the fact remains that it is the duty of the local and state govenments to be the first responders in any disaster. 9/11 was a perfect example. City and state agencies were first on the scene and then followed by the feds. Of course it did not take the feds as long then but remember also the area covered was only a few blocks and not an area the size of New Zealand.
There are many to blame and enough blame to go around for all. To use a disaster for political gain is nothing short of a disaster within itself.
Posted on September 8, 2005 10:28 AM
"To use a disaster for political gain is nothing short of a disaster within itself."
From the Washington Post, January 18, 2002:
"President Bush's top political adviser said today that Republicans will make the president's handling of the war on terrorism the centerpiece of their strategy to win back the Senate and keep control of the House in this year's midterm elections."
If it was fair for Bush to use his handling of a disaster for political gain, then it is fair to use his handling of this disaster to hurt him politically. The Bush Administration seems unwilling to play by their own rules when it may hurt them. Finding out who is accountable for what and figuring out how to do things better is the only way to make sure the next disaster is handled more effectively.
As for state and local governments, the first responders were there almost immediately. The problem was that they were overwhelmed. State and local governments do not have the resources to handle these type of disasters, particularly when a third of their National Guard (and half of its equipment) is in Iraq. Of course the evacuation and preparation should have been done better, and hopefully state and local officials will be held accountable by their consituents. The rest of us should be concerned with the incompetance of our government in Washington.
Posted on September 8, 2005 3:48 PM