It was not just Brown but other top leaders in FEMA who had no previous experience in disaster situations.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/textonly/focus1.html
Quote:SPENCER HSU: The tale really is not a secret in Washington but one that perhaps has not been closely scrutinized. Five of top eight FEMA officials have had little experience -- had no experience, really, in emergency management prior to coming to the agency. The top three officials had connections to the Bush campaign or the Bush travel White House, two of the operational directors with disaster response responsibilities had backgrounds as a former lieutenant governor of Nebraska. Another man was an official with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
When you got to that next layer of the ten regional directors for FEMA, nine of ten were in acting capacities. Now the -- FEMA would say that that is because they went directly to career professionals and career professionals can't have a permanent position. But critics say this all goes to a lack of attention, a lack of emphasis and really a lack of seriousness or commitment to emergency preparedness within FEMA.
JEFFREY BROWN: And the key institutional change, of course for FEMA over the last few years is that it was put under the Department of Homeland Security. Now what kind of change has that caused for the agency?
SPENCER HSU: That's right. I mean, across the federal government right now you are seeing a demographic aging that is leading to retirements. But it was worsened at FEMA because after 9/11, the Department of Homeland Security was created in 2003. FEMA was taken from an independent cabinet- level agency folded into the department, and then it began losing clout. It began using funding; it began losing ability to make grants to state and local responders.
In the latest reorganization that homeland security Michael Chertoff proposed this summer, he was going to take -- or on the table-- the proposal was to take all emergency preparedness functions away from the agency, consolidated elsewhere in the department. A congressional study said that this was essentially dismantling the agency.
So many of the professionals and career managers that handled Hurricane Floyd, that handled the World Trade Center crisis and Pentagon attacks on 9/11 have left the agency; they are working as consultants or state managers. Morale is very low.
JEFFREY BROWN: And a change in focus from perhaps from these kinds of natural disasters more to terrorism?
SPENCER HSU: That's exactly right. There are a couple of things going on there. As recently as -- two weeks before Hurricane Katrina hit, state emergency managers met with Secretary Chertoff and his deputy, Michael Jackson and urged them to return a focus on to natural disasters, not just terrorisms and WMD that the Bush administration has been emphasizing. Their point is that natural disasters are known, proven quantities that are predictable. Where and when you can't say but you know they will happen. Another thing that is happening is within the department, again, FEMA losing a little bit of clout and a de-emphasis on emergency preparedness and a focus on sort of WMD hazards.
I think they aught to consider taking FEMA back out of the homeland security and putting people in who have some experience in disaster emerency situations.
Dragon49, thanks for the tip.
Here are links to two video clips that are instructive, and kudos to CNN for finally providing some balance in the news coverage:
Video #1
Video #2
QUESTION: Who took care of disasters before FEMA was first organized in the Carter administration?
wow. again i am surprised to see them lay much of blame on lousiana governor. they made her look bad on that one video when they asked her when she specifically asked for troops and she just stared at them.
Dragon
dragon49 wrote:wow. again i am surprised to see them lay much of blame on lousiana governor. they made her look bad on that one video when they asked her when she specifically asked for troops and she just stared at them.
I think Louisiana's governor is a doofus following in a long line of corrupt and incompetent governors.
BBB
It seems there is no single answer. But I found this history of FEMA on its website.
http://www.fema.gov/about/history.shtm
Quote:The Federal Emergency Management Agency - a former independent agency that became part of the new Department of Homeland Security in March 2003 - is tasked with responding to, planning for, recovering from and mitigating against disasters. FEMA can trace its beginnings to the Congressional Act of 1803. This act, generally considered the first piece of disaster legislation, provided assistance to a New Hampshire town following an extensive fire. In the century that followed, ad hoc legislation was passed more than 100 times in response to hurricanes, earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters.
By the 1930s, when the federal approach to problems became popular, the Reconstruction Finance Corporation was given authority to make disaster loans for repair and reconstruction of certain public facilities following an earthquake, and later, other types of disasters. In 1934, the Bureau of Public Roads was given authority to provide funding for highways and bridges damaged by natural disasters. The Flood Control Act, which gave the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers greater authority to implement flood control projects, was also passed. This piecemeal approach to disaster assistance was problematic and it prompted legislation that required greater cooperation between federal agencies and authorized the President to coordinate these activities.
The 1960s and early 1970s brought massive disasters requiring major federal response and recovery operations by the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration, established within the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Hurricane Carla struck in 1962, Hurricane Betsy in 1965, Hurricane Camille in 1969 and Hurricane Agnes in 1972. The Alaskan Earthquake hit in 1964 and the San Fernando Earthquake rocked Southern California in 1971. These events served to focus attention on the issue of natural disasters and brought about increased legislation. In 1968, the National Flood Insurance Act offered new flood protection to homeowners, and in 1974 the Disaster Relief Act firmly established the process of Presidential disaster declarations.
However, emergency and disaster activities were still fragmented. When hazards associated with nuclear power plants and the transportation of hazardous substances were added to natural disasters, more than 100 federal agencies were involved in some aspect of disasters, hazards and emergencies. Many parallel programs and policies existed at the state and local level, compounding the complexity of federal disaster relief efforts. The National Governor's Association sought to decrease the many agencies with whom state and local governments were forced work. They asked President Jimmy Carter to centralize federal emergency functions.
President Carter's 1979 executive order merged many of the separate disaster-related responsibilities into a new Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Among other agencies, FEMA absorbed: the Federal Insurance Administration, the National Fire Prevention and Control Administration, the National Weather Service Community Preparedness Program, the Federal Preparedness Agency of the General Services Administration and the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration activities from HUD. Civil defense responsibilities were also transferred to the new agency from the Defense Department's Defense Civil Preparedness Agency.
She screwed up Dragon. She isn't a bad person. She hadn't faced this particular situation before either. And she, like all politicians, is trying to put the best face on some bad decisions. She is on record this week as saying she does not blame President Bush for the problems in Louisiana. I give her very high marks for that. I don't think she should lose her job over it, but she did make some bad judgments. She is owning up to it. That is also commendable.
And all the errors in judgment will need to factor into the final assessment so everybody does it better next time.
Foxfyre wrote:QUESTION: Who took care of disasters before FEMA was first organized in the Carter administration?
I suppose, the best answer is on the
FEMA website
Thanks for that post FD. The reason I asked is just looking over some histories of New Orleans, it seems the French had the good sense to build their part of the settlement on high ground. (You can't imagine how much I hate giving any credit to the French.) This was when people had to use good sense because there was no government agency to make up losses they incurred.
Now it seems that it has been mostly since the government started bailing people out financially after major disasters, that many more people started building below sea level, on flood plains, in fire prone canyons, on unstable hillsides, and on major fault lines. It is something to think about.
Well, I don't quite buy that people build their houses on a flood plain because they expect the government to bail them out. That kind of thinking would lead someone to drive more recklessly just because they have insurance, which isn't usually the case. Most people would rather just have their house than have government money. Most would rather have a job than government cheese. The state of Florida would have never stayed settled if it was only federal bail outs that made people settle in dangerous places.
If I had to guess, I would say that at the time the French settled, there was no Army Corps of Engineers to build levees and damns to hold the waters at bay. There were also a lot fewer people living there and requiring housing.
I would also wager that land in a flood plain costs significantly less than land on a stable hill.
Foxfyre wrote:...the French had the good sense to build their part of the settlement on high ground.
Some of the first levees ware built by the German settlers in 1743 along the "Cote des Allemands" ('German coast').
[Since they came otigianally from the upper Rhine valley, which has always been flooded heavily, they knew how to built them.]
Well I never knew that.
By the way, a levee is basically a naturally-occurring feature.
Although you can heighten them and strengthen them.
BBB
The people I would blame for people unwisely living in flood plains would be city and country (parishes) building departments. City officials approve developer proposals to build houses on land that should not have residential housing, be it severe flood plains, sides of hills on unstable ground, etc. They do it because they want the tax benefits, for the campaign contributions, and developer greed. I consider it criminal corruption to issue building permits on land that should not be developed.
BBB
My point, however, that absent federal government backup, I bet fewer towns would plat out subdivisions on a flood plain, or if they did, they would ensure that strong levees were in place and would assume responsibility for their maintenance. And homeowners also might think twice if there was no insurance for unusually high risk areas. No private insurance company will write a flood policy that is not backed by the federal government. And you can't get a home loan for a high risk flood area without having flood insurance.
I'm just wondering if some of our 'no fault' government protections don't create as many problems as they solve?
It's a flood plain, by the way. Plain.
At least it is in the good old UK.
Thanks, I'm bad about propogating spelling errors.
BBB
I was wondering what kind of plane Foxfyre flies in that would get wet from a flood in a flood plain.
BBB
Oh, I'm busted too. I just went back and corrected mine.
Me too. My fingers don't always type what I'm thinkng. And as many times as I've had to say: "The rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain" too.
