Nation’s ‘leaders’ need to get priorities straight
By BRAD WARTHEN
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR
If everyone in Washington had been as determined to rush help to Louisiana as they now profess to be about investigating how the Hurricane Katrina response failed, the disaster might not have been so bad.
— Detroit Free Press
AN ANALYSIS in Wednesday’s Washington Post notes the stark contrast in the political reactions to 9/11 and Katrina.
“When terrorists struck on Sept. 11, 2001, Americans came together in grief and resolve, rallying behind President Bush in an extraordinary show of national unity,” the piece by Dan Balz begins. “But when Hurricane Katrina hit last week, the opposite occurred, with Americans dividing along sharply partisan lines…. This gaping divide has left the president with no reservoir of good will among his political opponents at a critical moment of national need….”
Yeah, I noticed.
But it’s not just about Katrina. And for that matter, it’s not just about partisanship.
The Congress is still in the control of Republicans, and Congress is about to shove other matters aside to hold hearings on FEMA’s response to the disaster. Why? Because GOP leaders aren’t about to get on the wrong side of the rising demand for somebody (besides Mother Nature) to blame. They don’t want it to be them. Meanwhile, the president wants to have his own investigation for the same reason. Republicans are harrumphing defensively, while Democrats do so with relish.
Hearings. Now. When (and if you’re squeamish, don’t click on this next link) bodies are still floating through the streets of New Orleans, and thousands upon thousands of others are in desperate need of immediate help. And all they can think of to do is hold hearings.
Well, I can think of something better: Let’s march them out of their hearing rooms, take them to the Gulf Coast and put them to work filling sandbags. Or manning pumps. Or picking up bodies. Or, more urgently, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, housing the homeless and ministering to the sick. (Bill Frist at least had the right idea on that.)
Maybe they could use their golden tongues to persuade those who still refuse to evacuate. Or do something useful.
Basically, I’m sick of the petty political nonsense — mostly, but not entirely, of a partisan nature — that keeps getting in the way of the serious, important, legitimate (and in the case of Katrina, critically urgent) functions of government.
Consider the small matter of choosing two members of the Supreme Court. Advice and consent on this matter is one of the Senate’s most solemn and sober duties — or should be.
So why do I keep reading that the recent decline in George W. Bush’s popularity means Democrats are going to be tougher on whomever he chooses for the second vacancy — and on John Roberts, too. The long knives are out, and anyone associated with Caesar had best not stand anywhere near Pompey’s statue. But the knives in this case aren’t aimed at preserving the Republic, but at destroying its civil base.
Are we really this far gone? Why should the president — this one or any other — being in a “weakened position” be a valid reason for political opponents to beat up on his next nominee?
Oh, I understand why, if we’re talking the law of the jungle. But our civilization, to the extent that we still have one, is supposed to be based on the rule of law, and we’re talking about a person who will have a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest court. The relative heat of that person’s grilling should depend upon his or her qualities as a candidate, not upon the political weather. Senators should be tough on a weak nominee even if the president has a 90 percent approval rating — and respect a good choice even if the president is a pariah.
Is it really too much to expect elected representatives to think about how to help the victims of Katrina rather than point fingers? Or consider the actual merit of nominees, rather than what the situation offers in the way of advantage for them and their parties (or the professional ideologues in the private sector)?
Was the federal government’s response to Katrina inadequate? Yes, it was, and we’ve been here before. Remember the complaints about FEMA after Hurricane Hugo? I do. There are two big differences, of course. Hugo wasn’t nearly as bad as Katrina. And the local and state responses in Charleston and South Carolina were far more effective.
Two things are simultaneously true: First, this was going to be bad, no matter what the government did. Second, there are things the government should have done, before and after the storm hit, that would have lessened the blow considerably.
We need to sort that out, and fix it before the next Katrina. But in the meantime, there are far more urgent matters before us.
Another quote, this one from The Chicago Tribune: “Democrats and Republicans returned Tuesday to a Washington scene changed dramatically by Hurricane Katrina and began maneuvering to seize control of the volatile political terrain, deflect blame and appear compassionate without seeming to politicize a national tragedy.”
Seeming? Seeming? We know exactly what you’re trying to do, and we deserve better.
Related Posts
Brad, Great editorial. I think many people will agree that you sound like a ship of reason in a sea of insanity.
I think that the entire response to Katrina could have been handled much better. I also think that NO ONE of any stripe intentionally tried to harm citizens who were involved in this disaster in any way.
Unfortunately, I noticed the complaints and criticisms that began even before the storm hit. How could Bush possibly enjoy a vacation while a storm was developing? For the first time ever, a president declared a federal emergency before the storm even hit, and that still was worthy of condemnation.
One point that strikes me about how this crisis escalated may come across as racist but that is not my intention. Officials now know that the vast majority of those who did not evacuate were from the welfare public project housing. The question is why, with almost 5 days of pre-storm awareness. Where was the element of self initiative by many of these people. The basic instinct to take responsibility to protect themselves and their families. Instead, the approach taken was to sit and wait for someone else to do it. Is this what being on welfare for decades does to people? That may be the biggest long term problem/issue to contend with for the future.
Hi Brad,
Good column, but why is it that whenever those of us who have always been alarmed about Bush and his cronies speak up – suddenly we are “partisan politics?” It’s very dismissive to always label our concerns that way. I agree that the first order of business is to help victims. But many of us are grateful that this tragedy has at last forced to public view the deep problems that have been there all along. Bush and the neocons have a habit of ignoring all critics; the Katrina disaster is one critic they will not be able to ignore.
Brad, partisan or not, there’s nothing wrong with pointing out the failure of the Bushies to both prepare for and react to disaster. After all, he’s spent five years since September 11, 2001 telling us that he was absolutely on the case, woohboy, and by God, if something happened on his watch again all we had to do was sit down and wait for the calvary to arrive.
I think it’s pretty safe to say that last November’s election came down to the American people believing they were more secure under Bush than under Kerry. Is it partisan to point out that given the federal response to Katrina that turns out to be a damned stupid assumption?
Not buying it? Look at this way. We’ve known for years that New Orleans was a disaster waiting to happen. Terrorists with a few hundred pounds of explosives likely could have done the same thing to those levees as the hurricane did, with even less warning – and the Bush response would have been just as inept. The only difference would be than the he would have someone else to blame for the initial disaster.
This timeline appears to be the most comprehensive available right now. It’s valuable in that it lists what happened, avoiding for the most part what should have happened. It’s therefore a good starting point for analysis.
Brad…couldn’t agree more with your column of Sept 8, 2005. It hit several nails right on the head. It should be required reading, especially with members of Congress.
One suggestion regarding the Letters to the Editor…why continue to print letters from the childish whiners who want to blame Bush for everything from soup to nuts and whose letters are filled with misstatement of facts, whether intentional or through ignorance? I know we all have a right to free speech but there is no right to be published. Limit letters to those that are factually accurate and make a legitimate point. Just a thought.
Brad, your column as usual is quite sensible. However, I disagree somewhat with the Detroit columnist who claims that nationwide opinion on the federal response to Katrina has divided “along sharply political lines.” In fact, I think this is an unusual event for the number of political figures within the President’s own party who have at least mildly questioned the President’s leadership and federal response in general. Also, many normally conservative op-ed columnists such as Kathleen Parker in today’s paper point a very critical finger directly at the President. I think things may have gone too far even for many conservatives who would normally support the President.
I truly believe that, as Ms. Parker says in her column, by his initial response to this crisis, George W. Bush “revealed a truer self than we were meant to see.” If you’re Ken Lay or a Saudi prince or a Hummer owner, you would get W’s ear and his attention much faster than did thousands of poor people stranded by rising water in New Orleans, which he never carried in an election, anyway. It’s just not George’s “constituency.” It’s quite believable that it took 2 or 3 extra days to quicken W’s pulse enough to take stronger action.
This is not about partisanship…I’m a progressive but I respect a lot of conservative leaders and thinkers. Nevertheless, I just cannot help but think that the tone set by this administration from day one about who matters, and who matters less, has played some role in the way this catastrophe has been handled.
I’ll sign off with the hope that, out of this disaster, we as a people have two large national epiphanies: 1) that there is a large and persistent underclass of hard-working poor and suffering people in this country who deserve on an ongoing basis more of our attention than they get, from our leaders especially, and 2) that we finally wake up and make independence from oil THE overriding national emergency priority for the next 20 years.
David, great points:
“One point that strikes me about how this crisis escalated may come across as racist but that is not my intention. Officials now know that the vast majority of those who did not evacuate were from the welfare public project housing. The question is why, with almost 5 days of pre-storm awareness. Where was the element of self initiative by many of these people. The basic instinct to take responsibility to protect themselves and their families.”
You’re right, those people should have booked rooms at the Ritz Carlton, chartered jets and flown on out of there.
“Instead, the approach taken was to sit and wait for someone else to do it. Is this what being on welfare for decades does to people? That may be the biggest long term problem/issue to contend with for the future.”
Don’t know. I don’t live in a state like South Carolina, where the citizens get $1.35 in federal services and subsidies for every $1.00 they pay in federal taxes. So you tell me about hte debilitating effects of living on handouts.
“Hearings. Now. When (and if you’re squeamish, don’t click on this next link) bodies are still floating through the streets of New Orleans, and thousands upon thousands of others are in desperate need of immediate help. And all they can think of to do is hold hearings.
Well, I can think of something better: Let’s march them out of their hearing rooms, take them to the Gulf Coast and put them to work filling sandbags. Or manning pumps. Or picking up bodies. Or, more urgently, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, housing the homeless and ministering to the sick.”
Or you could do it.
Brad, you are one of my favorite editors/writers. But SON! We have enough BushBashers to last a lifetime.
I am disappointed that you jumped into the pickle jar of whiners. George Bush is the PRESIDENT. Get over it, or seek his impeachment…but quit whining!
If there ever was a PERFECT president, it hasn’t been in my lifetime or any history book I’ve read.
Only a complete dolt would believe that screwups in this catastrophe do not range from the residents to the president. Can we not PLEASE shift our attention to the “heros” and the “survivors”? You could do it!
Bush Basher:
Kathleen Parker
the Liberal?
Philip – epiphany about the poor???? You must be kidding. The “poor” in the US for the most part own two color tvs, have air conditioning, and from the obesity statistics for the US population aren’t missing too many meals. Yes, there are truly the poor among us but in a country with all the free services and food stamps etc. to call anyone poor here is almost unreal. The poor are in Africa, Bangladesh, Rwanda etc. Haven’t we spent a trillion dollars on the War On Poverty to resolve poverty. Oh, I forgot, that was another liberal program that is a dirty secret now.
Mary — Who would you want on the Supreme Court? Let me guess. Jane Fonda, Michael Moore, Sandy Berger. With jurists like that, South Carolina could get even more skewing in the wealth redistribution that our tax system gives us now. Joking aside, Roberts will be confirmed and then we will get the conservative woman from Louisiana, Edith Clements (guess) as the next judge.
While I’m working on a grander, sourced timeline for my blog, this story – New Orleans ignored its own plans – is accurate according to all the sources I’ve reviewed.
Per this contemporaneous report Mayor Nagin ordered an evacuation order Sunday (8/28/05) morning, less than 24 hour before the storm was due to hit, per Bush’s personal appeal.
Note that Blanco did not order and evacuation – she had concerns about the state’s liability should an evacuation not prove necessary.
It’s clear too that everybody outside of NO was working from NOs plan, and that communication between the state and the city was not good. In her request to Bush, Blanco did not request evacuation support because she thought, per the NO plan that the city was taking care of it.
Finally, both the NY Times and WaPo have articles today on the “political” (not in the partisan sense, but in the federal versus state context). My reading is that the Bush administration and Blanco administrations were concerned about the lawlessness and health of folks in the NO shelters, but were having a heck of a time coming to terms because existing laws left little flexibility in how to respond; no one envisioned that the local first-responders would be incapacitated. Official communication with city officials was poor. In the end Bush administration officials “decided to rely on the growing number of National Guard personnel flowing into Louisiana, who were under Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco’s control,” in part because the guv was unsure what to ask for.
While both federal and National Guard troops were available for rapid response — NG troops were moving in — negotiations between state and federal officials dragged on.
I suggest we stop with the mind-reading, trying to guess motivations, and see what further reporting digs up. Recall that all this has been occurring in an environment where highly energized political partisans are making charges of global warming, racism, federal neglect of levee security, etc.
As for Phillip and other progressives, I’d like to point out that we conservatives are rather tired of being called racist curmudgeons who hate the poor. The key to being poor is to have kids out of wedlock, not finish high school, and depend on others for one’s wants and needs. There’s an ethos of poverty that’s become ingrained in many; conservatives want to break that, to make folks self-sufficient and self-reliant citizens. When we act sternly by insisting on things like welfare reform, why do you deny that love might be a motivation? When we argue against affirmative action, why do you call us “racist” and refuse to accept our explanation that we believe that racial preferences of any sort are wrong? If we dare correctly say that the Ku Klux Klan practiced affirmative action, you call us racist. We have some ideas that evidence indicates work. We have other ideas that we believe will work. We have lots of evidence that solutions tried to date have not worked and will hold NO up as an example of a city ruled for decades by folks with a progressive bent that is not successful.
Oooops! Sorry, I was getting logical again.
Hi Mike,
I’ll have to read your post and eventual layout of the timeline in more detail, it looks intriguing—I didn’t claim that local and state officials are not also responsible for certain failures in the Katrina response. My point, and that of Ms. Parker in her column, has only to do with the leadership responsibilities of the President and the tone he sets from the first minutes of a crisis.
Which brings me to my second point: I do not think classic conservatives hate the poor. Your way of expressing your beliefs is quite eloquent–I wish more conservatives talked thus, instead of often appealing to people’s most selfish and prejudiced instincts. No, it’s not about hating the poor. Warren Bolton’s column in today’s State expresses it perfectly: “…there wasn’t sufficient urgency to help these forgotten people…they simply weren’t a priority…” That’s it in a nutshell. Priorities. By the way, Mike, you have to know in your heart that there are an enormous number of people who are at or close to the poverty line who did NOT have kids out of wedlock, who DO have a high school degree and who are still outsiders in our society, struggling every day.
Phillip – Sorry if I offended.
I’ll post the link to my meisterwerk here when it’s finished.
People continually expect government to always be right and to always come to their rescue. But it isn’t their fault, not really. Especially after 9/11, we were told that we would be as protected from terrorism as any strong-armed government could protect its citizenry. We demanded it. We fled in fear towards government’s opened, safe, nanny arms.
And then we get upset because government didn’t save everyone in Katrina. After all, they PROMISED!
We’ve seen people have raging fits because the governor of SC has declared a mandatory evacuation in a hurricane – and the storm was no more than a nuisance, compounded by the struggles to evacuate. But it was the government’s fault for forcing a mandatory evacuation when no danger existed. Hunh? After recent evacuations, many people in SC have declared that they are not going anywhere, that government can’t make them. Then, if a Katrina hits Charleston or Myrtle Beach next week, it will be the government’s fault that people stayed and died. Hunh? again.
When we stop imagining, pretending, and telling ourselves that government can make all of the personal decisions that direct our lives; when we limit government’s power and ability to take our money for programs that only expand bureaucracies and enhance the quid pro quo of the good ol’ boy system, and start taking responsibility for our own lives (up to and including living 15 feet below sea level), only then will we have a true constitutional republic again – not the whiny, dependent, every-soul-must-be-saved-at-any-cost socialist regime that we have become.
Howdy! I’m back AGAIN.
No matter how many times you flush a cockroach down the tolet, they manage to crawl back out and multiply and I’m that roach. Always coming back for more and multiplying like rabbits.
You can’t stop me and nothing will stop me and thus you are DOOMED!
Hey yah’ll. I reside down in dear ol’ Virginny, and I’d just like to throw my two cents in; my only two cents, actually! You see, the cotton business ain’t what she used to be, and all my “African-American” happy helpers are getting lazy and fat. Well, not as fat as my little Tessa, but I reckon yah’ll get the idea. Anywho, I hate cockroaches cause, by Saint-Jeeves, they is always getting up my underware and making me itch something fierce. You ain’t never itched in them places till you had a roach running about. Sounds like yah’ll got a bit of a roach problem yoreselves on this here site, and I reckon I know just hows to get rid of it.
Hey yah’ll. I reside down in dear ol’ Virginny, and I’d just like to throw my two cents in; my only two cents, actually! You see, the cotton business ain’t what she used to be, and all my “African-American” happy helpers are getting lazy and fat. Well, not as fat as my little Tessa, but I reckon yah’ll get the idea. Anywho, I hate cockroaches cause, by Saint-Jeeves, they is always getting up my underware and making me itch something fierce. You ain’t never itched in them places till you had a roach running about. Sounds like yah’ll got a bit of a roach problem yoreselves on this here site, and I reckon I know just hows to get rid of it.