Bush's Response to Katrina sub-par compared to other presidents
From Springer on the Radio:
President: Nixon
Danger: Category-5 Hurricane Camille (August, 1969)
Area: About the same area as that affected by KatrinaResponse: Nixon prepared the National Guard in advance, ordering rescue ships from Tampa, FL and Houston, TX to stand waiting along with over a thousand regular military, 24 helicopters to assist the Coast Guard and National Guard out as soon as the hurricane passed.
President: Bush 41
Danger: Category-5 Hurricane Andrew (August, 1992)
Area: FloridaResponse: In the middle of a re-election campaign, Bush ceased campaigning the day before the hurricane, went to Washington, and assembled one of the largest military forces ever mustered on U.S. soil. Seven thousand National Guard and 22,000 regular military were sent in with the necessary equipment shortly after the hurricane passed through.
President: Clinton
Danger: Category-3 Hurricane Floyd (September, 1999)
Area: Virginia and CarolinasResponse: Meeting with China's president Jiang in New Zealand, Clinton immediately declared the hurricane-affected areas as federal disasters, allowing the military and National Guard to move in and help. Clinton flew home immediately, one day before the hurricane hit, to help coordinate the rescue.
President: Bush 43
Danger: Category-5 Hurricane Katrina (August, 2005)
Area: Gulf CoastResponse: National Guard troops are down about 8,000 members because they are in Iraq with much of the necessary rescue equipment needed. Bush was on vacation, riding his bike for two hours the day before the hurricane lands. On the day Katrina landed, Bush attended a birthday party for Arizona Sen. John McCain. The levees began to crack. While emergency 1.5-ton sandbags were ready to be placed to steady the levee and absorb water, there were insufficient numbers of helicopters and pilots to set them before the levees break. Nagin, the mayor of New Orleans, pleaded for federal-level assistance and got none. Bush went to San Diego to play guitar with a country singer and end his vacation early -- but not until the next day, because he had tickets to a San Diego Padres game.


Lacking both information and depth one wonders how this can be considered anything near a critical take on the response.
Posted by: matt smith | September 26, 2005 at 06:06 PM
Jason:
Thank you - this is excellent! I wish this was better known. This is a good reminder that there are elected officials - even Republicans - who can empathize with those who do not benefit from substantive tax cuts.
E. Michael Harrington
Posted by: E. Michael Harrington | September 26, 2005 at 07:35 PM
Jason: Perhaps if the President read newspapers, had turned on the TV or radio, or by any other way kept aware of what was happening in New Orleans, or even cared cared, the plight of these American citizens would have been lessened. The fate of the 5th largest seaport in the United States, even less than the lifes of citizens, should have raised a red flag.
Posted by: Salvador G. Garza, Jr. | September 27, 2005 at 07:57 AM
Bush declared the states disaster areas days beforehand. You say that "the mayor of New Orleans, pleaded for federal-level assistance and got none". Jason: we have a constition; we have laws. One cannot plead for federal assistance and say "send me all you got". A formal request must be made and must be passed up from local to state officials with the power to make the formal request. Unfortunately the Gov of Louis didn't have the playbook and it was Wednesday before a lawful, formal, request was made for the military to come in. What bothers me is that people forget that government doesn't mean the feds and government does not happen from the top down. It starts locally and when a situation requires federal assistance one must escalate it. Responses and thinking like is present in this article reminds me of watching the windbags in the Senate and is why the Democrats hold no power. Somewhere in the timeline it seems that Dems lost the ability to assess a situation objectively and critically. It really is amazing.
Posted by: Matt Smith again | September 27, 2005 at 11:25 AM
Perhaps if Bush could turn on the TV or read the actual news without hearing a bunch of commentary about what a piece of crap he is by every idiot with a microphone, he might actually want to listen to these folks.
If people called me a peice of s**t every time I took a breath I'd stop listening to them, too. Even when they might occasionally have something valid to say.
Posted by: wayne | September 27, 2005 at 01:43 PM
to Matt Smith again:
Once W. declared the states disaster areas, the legal mechanisms were already in place for the Federal government to move in. No further formal request need to have been made. (And Jason, oh venerable Law Geek, if you could back me up with the relevant federal legislation, I'd be eternally grateful, or at least I'd think that was really cool.)
Apologist for Bush like to say the reason he didn't do act sooner is he didn't want to be perceived as a male Republican usurping the authority of a female Democratic governor. This is simply not credible. Bush was so ill informed about the state of the disaster that was befalling New Orleans that his own staffers finally resorted to compiling a DVD with news highlights to try to bring him up to speed. (See Newsweek's "How Bush Blew It".) Bush doesn't like to watch the news. He doesn't like to read newspapers. He's surrounded by sycophants who are terrified to give him bad news. And frankly (borrowing from Kanye), George W. Bush does not care about poor people, none of them vote for him anyway.
And none of the foregoing even addresses the dramatic reduction in the budget by the Bush Regime for maintaining New Orleans levees prior to the hurricane.
Who could have foreseen the failing of the levees? Just about everyone, including FEMA, who listed a catastrophic hurricane hitting New Orleans as one of the three most plausible disasters to befall America.
The Federal Government failure in Katrina was monumental, and in my personal opinion, criminal. Thousands died, and many of these deaths could have been prevented.
Posted by: Diane | September 27, 2005 at 07:41 PM
Well, first off, you spelled "presidents" wrong, so that got me in a bad mood at the very start.
Second, directed at the people who commented on this, what do you suppose Mr. Bush does during the day? When do you think he has time to sit around and watch the news and chill out? I'd think he'd be a bit busy. I don't know why, though... Oh, maybe because he's running a country? But hey, that's just my guess.
Lay the hell off the man. He's got a lot on his plate. His job isn't to watch the news. That's the job of FEMA or his advisors. Stop being so skeptical and think for once. Please.
Posted by: Amanda | February 06, 2006 at 08:08 PM
Why wasn't Andrew listed under Clinton? 1.3 million people were affected in southern florida and FEMA appeared to live up to the description once given to it by South Carolina Sen. Ernest Hollings: "the sorriest bunch of bureaucratic jackasses I've ever known." So what is the difference? People didn't die because of Bush - they died because LA Gov refused to force evacuation and because the means to evacuate were left in a flood zone by the mayor. Why is it FEMA new the levees would breach but the Gov did not?
Posted by: paul | August 29, 2006 at 06:07 AM