|
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...6/ai_n14657367
New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers faces cuts June 6th, 2005 Deon Roberts In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal funding. It would be the largest single-year funding loss ever for the New Orleans district, Corps officials said. I've been here over 30 years and I've never seen this level of reduction, said Al Naomi, project manager for the New Orleans district. I think part of the problem is it's not so much the reduction, it's the drastic reduction in one fiscal year. It's the immediacy of the reduction that I think is the hardest thing to adapt to. There is an economic ripple effect, too. The cuts mean major hurricane and flood protection projects will not be awarded to local engineering firms. Also, a study to determine ways to protect the region from a Category 5 hurricane has been shelved for now. Money is so tight the New Orleans district, which employs 1,300 people, instituted a hiring freeze last month on all positions. The freeze is the first of its kind in about 10 years, said Marcia Demma, chief of the Corps' Programs Management Branch. Stephen Jeselink, interim commander of the New Orleans Corps district, told employees in an internal e-mail dated May 25 that the district is experiencing financial challenges. Execution of our available funds must be dealt with through prudent districtwide management decisions. In addition to a hiring freeze, Jeselink canceled the annual Corps picnic held every June. Congress is setting the Corps budget. The House of Representatives wants to cut the New Orleans district budget 21 percent to $272.4 million in 2006, down from $343.5 million in 2005. The House figure is about $20 million lower than the president's suggested $290.7 million budget. It's now up to the Senate. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-New Orleans, is making no promises. It's going to be very tough, Landrieu said. The House was not able to add back this money ... but hopefully we can rally in the Senate and get some of this money back. Landrieu said the Bush administration is not making Corps of Engineers funding a priority. I think it's extremely shortsighted, Landrieu said. When the Corps of Engineers' budget is cut, Louisiana bleeds. These projects are literally life-and-death projects to the people of south Louisiana and they are (of) vital economic interest to the entire nation. The Corps' budget could still be beefed up, as it is every year, through congressional additions. Last year, Congress added $20 million to the overall budget of the New Orleans district but a similar increase this year would still leave a $50 million shortfall. One of the hardest-hit areas of the New Orleans district's budget is the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, which was created after the May 1995 flood to improve drainage in Jefferson, Orleans and St. Tammany parishes. SELA's budget is being drained from $36.5 million awarded in 2005 to $10.4 million suggested for 2006 by the House of Representatives and the president. The project manager said there would be no contracts awarded with this $10.4 million, Demma said. The construction portion of the Corps' budget would suffer if Congress doesn't add money. In 2005, the district received $94.3 million in federal dollars dedicated to construction. In 2006, the proposal is for $56 million. It would be critical to this city if we had a $50 million construction budget compared with the past years, Demma said. It would be horrible for the city, it would be horrible for contractors and for flood protection if this were the final number compared to recent years and what the city needs. Construction generally has been on the decline for several years and focus has been on other projects in the Corps. The district has identified $35 million in projects to build and improve levees, floodwalls and pumping stations in St. Bernard, Orleans, Jefferson and St. Charles parishes. Those projects are included in a Corps line item called Lake Pontchartrain, where funding is scheduled to be cut from $5.7 million this year to $2.9 million in 2006. Naomi said it's enough to pay salaries but little else. We'll do some design work. We'll design the contracts and get them ready to go if we get the money. But we don't have the money to put the work in the field, and that's the problem, Naomi said. The Appropriations Committee in Congress will ultimately decide how much the New Orleans district will receive, he said. Obviously, the decisions are being made up there that are not beneficial to the state, in my opinion, Naomi said. Let's put it this way: When (former Rep.) Bob Livingston (R-Metairie) was chairman of the Appropriations Committee, we didn't have a monetary problem. Our problem was how do we spend all the money we were getting. ----- More incompentence from the Chimp In Chief. Vast Left Wing Conspiracy Melting The Tin Foil Hats Of Right Tards |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
On 30 Aug 2005 20:11:49 -0700,
Vast Left Wing Conspiracy , in .com wrote: + In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of + Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal + funding. + More incompentence from the Chimp In Chief. Perhaps the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy would care to comment how proposed budget cuts for the 2006-2007 fiscal year will affect the ACoE in August 2005? James -- Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good, either. I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated. |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
I R A Darth Aggie wrote: On 30 Aug 2005 20:11:49 -0700, Vast Left Wing Conspiracy , in .com wrote: + In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of + Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal + funding. + More incompentence from the Chimp In Chief. Perhaps the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy would care to comment how proposed budget cuts for the 2006-2007 fiscal year will affect the ACoE in August 2005? James As a member of the Vast Moderate Conspiracy, the point is that at any time it is short sighted to cut funds intended to prevent or ameliorate disasters, IMO. Of course, it was short sighted to put a major city where New Orleans is, but the failings of our ancestors do not pardon us for the same failings. Cheers, Russell |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
|
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
So if the weather can be controlled this would certainly give a motive to either the military or some group(s) that benefit from the military to have created this hurricane. Kind of a stretch, but it sure is improbably coincidental. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy?hl=en http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
On 31 Aug 2005 06:09:12 -0700, , in . com wrote: + + I R A Darth Aggie wrote: + On 30 Aug 2005 20:11:49 -0700, + Vast Left Wing Conspiracy , in + .com wrote: + + + In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of + + Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal + + funding. + + + More incompentence from the Chimp In Chief. + + Perhaps the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy would care to comment how + proposed budget cuts for the 2006-2007 fiscal year will affect the + ACoE in August 2005? + As a member of the Vast Moderate Conspiracy, the point is that + at any time it is short sighted to cut funds intended to prevent + or ameliorate disasters, IMO. Would you care to place a wager on those proposed cuts seeing the light of day again? It depends on politics. IIRC Newton said something about being able to predict the course of the moon but not the irrationality of men. + Of course, it was short sighted + to put a major city where New Orleans is, but the failings of + our ancestors do not pardon us for the same failings. Well, now that the city is essentially in ruins it would behoove us to move the city, yes? yes, I know, I'm fantasizing. Oh, well. One could hope. James Yes, I've been wondering how much damage it would take for people to decide it is cheaper in the long run to rebuild the whole place on higher (of course, sea level would be higher) ground. Some small towns did it after the Midwest floods in 1993, but I doubt if they'll do that with New Orleans. They rebuilt San Fancisco in the same place after all. If insurance companies demand it, it might happen I suppose, but unless a clause like that is in the policies already, all they could do is refuse to insure the new construction in the future. They might do that just as risk control. IIRC some companies pulled out of Florida after Andrew. Cheers, Russell |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
Hurt wrote:
So if the weather can be controlled this would certainly give a motive to either the military or some group(s) that benefit from the military to have created this hurricane. Kind of a stretch, but it sure is improbably coincidental. How can a coincidence be anything but improbable? I will note, however, that your statement is a true one. (But only because the if clause is false -- As a rudimentary energy analysis would show.) Scott |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
How can a coincidence be anything but improbable? Well, I meant on a scale of [0,1] it's a bit a ways from being .5 There's unlikely, and highly unlikely. I will note, however, that your statement is a true one. (But only because the if clause is false -- As a rudimentary energy analysis would show.) Oh I don't think so. It's not about injecting the energy; it's about steering the energy. Do you think the levies were taken out intentionally because the hurricane didn't quite manage to do it. |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
Hurt wrote:
How can a coincidence be anything but improbable? Well, I meant on a scale of [0,1] it's a bit a ways from being .5 There's unlikely, and highly unlikely. I will note, however, that your statement is a true one. (But only because the if clause is false -- As a rudimentary energy analysis would show.) Oh I don't think so. It's not about injecting the energy; it's about steering the energy. Perhaps. It would be far easier to start a tropical system than to steer it. Either action, however, is beyond anyone's capabilities . . . (as an energy analysis would show) Do you think the levies were taken out intentionally because the hurricane didn't quite manage to do it. By whom was my initial question? Then I saw the attribution list. Oops, my bad. I wouldn't say that Mother Nature *intentionally* took out the levies, as that ascribes to Mother Nature some kind of consciousness. I will say that the removal of levies was very likely governed by the laws of physics of saturated soils and high lake levels. Scott |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
Perhaps. It would be far easier to start a tropical system than to steer it. Either action, however, is beyond anyone's capabilities . . . (as an energy analysis would show) Please show me the analysis; roughly. I think the challenge would be informational, not energy. Just gotta keep "zapping" the right points. http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/haarp.html http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/wxmod.html http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ng_000303.html |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
Hurt wrote:
Perhaps. It would be far easier to start a tropical system than to steer it. Either action, however, is beyond anyone's capabilities . . . (as an energy analysis would show) Please show me the analysis; roughly. I think the challenge would be informational, not energy. Just gotta keep "zapping" the right points. An average thunderstorm, many hundreds of which comprise a hurricane, releases in an hour about 10M kilowatt-hours of energy. Of course, a lot of that energy is drawn out of the sea surface -- but if environmental conditions are correct, it can be redistributed into the atmosphere. The energy from the warm sea surface is converted into latent heat and also wind and ultimately wave action. Say you wanted to control a thunderstorm -- maybe you'd only have to input a small fraction of the energy released, assuming you have a sophisticated enough model to tell you *where* to input that energy. "Zapping" the right points, as you put it. Where those points are changes constantly as the dynamic and thermodynamic structure of the atmosphere changes -- and those changes that influence the structure of the thunderstorm are caused by the thunderstorm. But say you *could* predict those points. First off, you'd be very famous, because you'd have a better model of thunderstorm evolution than exists at present. How much energy would be needed for the nudge? Maybe 10% of the hourly amount released? That's a 2-kiloton warhead. And again, this is for just 1 generic thunderstorm. Multiply this by many times and you'll see what you're up against to initiate or control a thunderstorm complex that might (or might not) evolve into a hurricane. I hope you're rich. You'll need plenty of resources to do this several times before you acquire the background knowledge to be efficient at it. Maybe no one will notice the abortive attempts. Scott |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
|
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
"I R A Darth Aggie" wrote in message ... On 31 Aug 2005 08:30:14 -0700, , in . com wrote: + I R A Darth Aggie wrote: + It depends on politics. IIRC Newton said something about being able + to predict the course of the moon but not the irrationality of men. *snork* + Well, now that the city is essentially in ruins it would behoove us to + move the city, yes? yes, I know, I'm fantasizing. + Yes, I've been wondering how much damage it would take for people + to decide it is cheaper in the long run to rebuild the whole place + on higher (of course, sea level would be higher) ground. Some + small towns did it after the Midwest floods in 1993, but I doubt + if they'll do that with New Orleans. They rebuilt San Fancisco + in the same place after all. If insurance companies demand it, + it might happen I suppose, but unless a clause like that is in + the policies already, all they could do is refuse to insure the + new construction in the future. They might do that just as risk + control. All they need to do is not insure losses due to tropical cyclones. And yeah, I fully expect something along those lines to happen. + IIRC some companies pulled out of Florida after Andrew. And after last year, too. IIRC, Allstate dropped all Florida homeowners policies in the last year. James -- Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good, either. I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated. Perhaps the Globalists, deciding that such catastrophe is a huge waste of their dollars, will decide, overwhelmingly to move New Orleans to North Lousiana. We have already seen their brilliance in both Iraq and finding OBL. Something they can't seem to do, whether Repub, or Dem. Clinton shoots missles at the guy. Bush sends a crack commando team into tora bora, and the guy escapes both times. And seems to get dialysis treatment at US Naval bases.... I didn't know OBL had Medicare? A or B? Or both? The guy is a ghost, unless they don't want him to be found. I mean for a ragtag Islamic extremist, he sure is mobile, equipped, funded, and has longevity. But then again the globalists do love their Boogey Mans. OMG, the boogey man is gonna get us! Save us Government! Save us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ok, you can go back to The Apprentice now.... Aperio Acerbus Reveal Darkness |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
On 31 Aug 2005 08:30:14 -0700, , in . com wrote: + I R A Darth Aggie wrote: + It depends on politics. IIRC Newton said something about being able + to predict the course of the moon but not the irrationality of men. *snork* + Well, now that the city is essentially in ruins it would behoove us to + move the city, yes? yes, I know, I'm fantasizing. + Yes, I've been wondering how much damage it would take for people + to decide it is cheaper in the long run to rebuild the whole place + on higher (of course, sea level would be higher) ground. Some + small towns did it after the Midwest floods in 1993, but I doubt + if they'll do that with New Orleans. They rebuilt San Fancisco + in the same place after all. If insurance companies demand it, + it might happen I suppose, but unless a clause like that is in + the policies already, all they could do is refuse to insure the + new construction in the future. They might do that just as risk + control. All they need to do is not insure losses due to tropical cyclones. And yeah, I fully expect something along those lines to happen. + IIRC some companies pulled out of Florida after Andrew. And after last year, too. IIRC, Allstate dropped all Florida homeowners policies in the last year. James Allstate upped my homeowner's insurance premium a bunch after Andrew and I didn't even live in hurricane ally. But I have good news. I saved a bunch by switching to another company. :-) followups trimmed Cheers, Russell |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
"I R A Darth Aggie" wrote in message ... On 30 Aug 2005 20:11:49 -0700, Vast Left Wing Conspiracy , in .com wrote: + In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of + Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal + funding. + More incompentence from the Chimp In Chief. Perhaps the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy would care to comment how proposed budget cuts for the 2006-2007 fiscal year will affect the ACoE in August 2005? James -- Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good, either. I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated. The cuts started taking place in 2004. "At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars" Did New Orleans Catastrophe Have to Happen? 'Times-Picayune' Had Repeatedly Raised Federal Spending Issues By Will Bunch Published: August 31, 2005 9:00 PM ET PHILADELPHIA Even though Hurricane Katrina has moved well north of the city, the waters may still keep rising in New Orleans. That's because Lake Pontchartrain continues to pour through a two-block-long break in the main levee, near the city's 17th Street Canal. With much of the Crescent City some 10 feet below sea level, the rising tide may not stop until it's level with the massive lake. New Orleans had long known it was highly vulnerable to flooding and a direct hit from a hurricane. In fact, the federal government has been working with state and local officials in the region since the late 1960s on major hurricane and flood relief efforts. When flooding from a massive rainstorm in May 1995 killed six people, Congress authorized the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, or SELA. Over the next 10 years, the Army Corps of Engineers, tasked with carrying out SELA, spent $430 million on shoring up levees and building pumping stations, with $50 million in local aid. But at least $250 million in crucial projects remained, even as hurricane activity in the Atlantic Basin increased dramatically and the levees surrounding New Orleans continued to subside. Yet after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars. Newhouse News Service, in an article posted late Tuesday night at The Times-Picayune Web site, reported: "No one can say they didn't see it coming. ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious questions are being asked about the lack of preparation." In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness. On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us." Also that June, with the 2004 hurricane season starting, the Corps' project manager Al Naomi went before a local agency, the East Jefferson Levee Authority, and essentially begged for $2 million for urgent work that Washington was now unable to pay for. From the June 18, 2004 Times-Picayune: "The system is in great shape, but the levees are sinking. Everything is sinking, and if we don't get the money fast enough to raise them, then we can't stay ahead of the settlement," he said. "The problem that we have isn't that the levee is low, but that the federal funds have dried up so that we can't raise them." The panel authorized that money, and on July 1, 2004, it had to pony up another $250,000 when it learned that stretches of the levee in Metairie had sunk by four feet. The agency had to pay for the work with higher property taxes. The levee board noted in October 2004 that the feds were also now not paying for a hoped-for $15 million project to better shore up the banks of Lake Pontchartrain. The 2004 hurricane season was the worst in decades. In spite of that, the federal government came back this spring with the steepest reduction in hurricane and flood-control funding for New Orleans in history. Because of the proposed cuts, the Corps office there imposed a hiring freeze. Officials said that money targeted for the SELA project -- $10.4 million, down from $36.5 million -- was not enough to start any new jobs. There was, at the same time, a growing recognition that more research was needed to see what New Orleans must do to protect itself from a Category 4 or 5 hurricane. But once again, the money was not there. As the Times-Picayune reported last Sept. 22: "That second study would take about four years to complete and would cost about $4 million, said Army Corps of Engineers project manager Al Naomi. About $300,000 in federal money was proposed for the 2005 fiscal-year budget, and the state had agreed to match that amount. But the cost of the Iraq war forced the Bush administration to order the New Orleans district office not to begin any new studies, and the 2005 budget no longer includes the needed money, he said." The Senate was seeking to restore some of the SELA funding cuts for 2006. But now it's too late. One project that a contractor had been racing to finish this summer: a bridge and levee job right at the 17th Street Canal, site of the main breach on Monday. The Newhouse News Service article published Tuesday night observed, "The Louisiana congressional delegation urged Congress earlier this year to dedicate a stream of federal money to Louisiana's coast, only to be opposed by the White House. ... In its budget, the Bush administration proposed a significant reduction in funding for southeast Louisiana's chief hurricane protection project. Bush proposed $10.4 million, a sixth of what local officials say they need." Local officials are now saying, the article reported, that had Washington heeded their warnings about the dire need for hurricane protection, including building up levees and repairing barrier islands, "the damage might not have been nearly as bad as it turned out to be." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Will Bunch ) is senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News. He won a Pulitzer Prize in 1992 when he reported for Newsday. Much of this article also appears on his blog, Attytood, at the Daily News. http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1001051313 |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
All,
The levee/canal system was poorly designed in the first place. 1) There were no control gates at the lake/river openings to the canals to block it off in case a levee failed like it just did. The levees which failed were on canals...not the Mississippi River or Lake Pontchitrain (sp?) 2) I don't believe the pumping stations have auxiliary power to run them if the main power is lost. Those levee & pump systems have been there a loooong time and these issues are nothing new. The governments of Louisiana and New Orleans were playing russian roulette with hurricanes for many years and they finaly got shot...It was not the US govts. fault the state and city govts. did not follow and impliment thier emergency evacuation plans. Of course, they (city & state) will blame anyone else at first chance to avoid responsibility and if they (city & state) are democrats and the national leaders are republicans, hey, kill two birds with one stone!! Jeff Gman wrote: "I R A Darth Aggie" wrote in message ... On 30 Aug 2005 20:11:49 -0700, Vast Left Wing Conspiracy , in .com wrote: + In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of + Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal + funding. + More incompentence from the Chimp In Chief. Perhaps the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy would care to comment how proposed budget cuts for the 2006-2007 fiscal year will affect the ACoE in August 2005? James -- Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good, either. I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated. The cuts started taking place in 2004. "At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars" Did New Orleans Catastrophe Have to Happen? 'Times-Picayune' Had Repeatedly Raised Federal Spending Issues By Will Bunch Published: August 31, 2005 9:00 PM ET PHILADELPHIA Even though Hurricane Katrina has moved well north of the city, the waters may still keep rising in New Orleans. That's because Lake Pontchartrain continues to pour through a two-block-long break in the main levee, near the city's 17th Street Canal. With much of the Crescent City some 10 feet below sea level, the rising tide may not stop until it's level with the massive lake. New Orleans had long known it was highly vulnerable to flooding and a direct hit from a hurricane. In fact, the federal government has been working with state and local officials in the region since the late 1960s on major hurricane and flood relief efforts. When flooding from a massive rainstorm in May 1995 killed six people, Congress authorized the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, or SELA. Over the next 10 years, the Army Corps of Engineers, tasked with carrying out SELA, spent $430 million on shoring up levees and building pumping stations, with $50 million in local aid. But at least $250 million in crucial projects remained, even as hurricane activity in the Atlantic Basin increased dramatically and the levees surrounding New Orleans continued to subside. Yet after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars. Newhouse News Service, in an article posted late Tuesday night at The Times-Picayune Web site, reported: "No one can say they didn't see it coming. ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious questions are being asked about the lack of preparation." In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness. On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us." Also that June, with the 2004 hurricane season starting, the Corps' project manager Al Naomi went before a local agency, the East Jefferson Levee Authority, and essentially begged for $2 million for urgent work that Washington was now unable to pay for. From the June 18, 2004 Times-Picayune: "The system is in great shape, but the levees are sinking. Everything is sinking, and if we don't get the money fast enough to raise them, then we can't stay ahead of the settlement," he said. "The problem that we have isn't that the levee is low, but that the federal funds have dried up so that we can't raise them." The panel authorized that money, and on July 1, 2004, it had to pony up another $250,000 when it learned that stretches of the levee in Metairie had sunk by four feet. The agency had to pay for the work with higher property taxes. The levee board noted in October 2004 that the feds were also now not paying for a hoped-for $15 million project to better shore up the banks of Lake Pontchartrain. The 2004 hurricane season was the worst in decades. In spite of that, the federal government came back this spring with the steepest reduction in hurricane and flood-control funding for New Orleans in history. Because of the proposed cuts, the Corps office there imposed a hiring freeze. Officials said that money targeted for the SELA project -- $10.4 million, down from $36.5 million -- was not enough to start any new jobs. There was, at the same time, a growing recognition that more research was needed to see what New Orleans must do to protect itself from a Category 4 or 5 hurricane. But once again, the money was not there. As the Times-Picayune reported last Sept. 22: "That second study would take about four years to complete and would cost about $4 million, said Army Corps of Engineers project manager Al Naomi. About $300,000 in federal money was proposed for the 2005 fiscal-year budget, and the state had agreed to match that amount. But the cost of the Iraq war forced the Bush administration to order the New Orleans district office not to begin any new studies, and the 2005 budget no longer includes the needed money, he said." The Senate was seeking to restore some of the SELA funding cuts for 2006. But now it's too late. One project that a contractor had been racing to finish this summer: a bridge and levee job right at the 17th Street Canal, site of the main breach on Monday. The Newhouse News Service article published Tuesday night observed, "The Louisiana congressional delegation urged Congress earlier this year to dedicate a stream of federal money to Louisiana's coast, only to be opposed by the White House. ... In its budget, the Bush administration proposed a significant reduction in funding for southeast Louisiana's chief hurricane protection project. Bush proposed $10.4 million, a sixth of what local officials say they need." Local officials are now saying, the article reported, that had Washington heeded their warnings about the dire need for hurricane protection, including building up levees and repairing barrier islands, "the damage might not have been nearly as bad as it turned out to be." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Will Bunch ) is senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News. He won a Pulitzer Prize in 1992 when he reported for Newsday. Much of this article also appears on his blog, Attytood, at the Daily News. http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1001051313 |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
I heard the Louisana governer call the hurricane a level 5 today ....
"tornado Jeff" wrote in message oups.com... All, The levee/canal system was poorly designed in the first place. 1) There were no control gates at the lake/river openings to the canals to block it off in case a levee failed like it just did. The levees which failed were on canals...not the Mississippi River or Lake Pontchitrain (sp?) 2) I don't believe the pumping stations have auxiliary power to run them if the main power is lost. Those levee & pump systems have been there a loooong time and these issues are nothing new. The governments of Louisiana and New Orleans were playing russian roulette with hurricanes for many years and they finaly got shot...It was not the US govts. fault the state and city govts. did not follow and impliment thier emergency evacuation plans. Of course, they (city & state) will blame anyone else at first chance to avoid responsibility and if they (city & state) are democrats and the national leaders are republicans, hey, kill two birds with one stone!! Jeff Gman wrote: "I R A Darth Aggie" wrote in message ... On 30 Aug 2005 20:11:49 -0700, Vast Left Wing Conspiracy , in .com wrote: + In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of + Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal + funding. + More incompentence from the Chimp In Chief. Perhaps the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy would care to comment how proposed budget cuts for the 2006-2007 fiscal year will affect the ACoE in August 2005? James -- Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good, either. I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated. The cuts started taking place in 2004. "At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars" Did New Orleans Catastrophe Have to Happen? 'Times-Picayune' Had Repeatedly Raised Federal Spending Issues By Will Bunch Published: August 31, 2005 9:00 PM ET PHILADELPHIA Even though Hurricane Katrina has moved well north of the city, the waters may still keep rising in New Orleans. That's because Lake Pontchartrain continues to pour through a two-block-long break in the main levee, near the city's 17th Street Canal. With much of the Crescent City some 10 feet below sea level, the rising tide may not stop until it's level with the massive lake. New Orleans had long known it was highly vulnerable to flooding and a direct hit from a hurricane. In fact, the federal government has been working with state and local officials in the region since the late 1960s on major hurricane and flood relief efforts. When flooding from a massive rainstorm in May 1995 killed six people, Congress authorized the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, or SELA. Over the next 10 years, the Army Corps of Engineers, tasked with carrying out SELA, spent $430 million on shoring up levees and building pumping stations, with $50 million in local aid. But at least $250 million in crucial projects remained, even as hurricane activity in the Atlantic Basin increased dramatically and the levees surrounding New Orleans continued to subside. Yet after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars. Newhouse News Service, in an article posted late Tuesday night at The Times-Picayune Web site, reported: "No one can say they didn't see it coming. ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious questions are being asked about the lack of preparation." In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness. On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us." Also that June, with the 2004 hurricane season starting, the Corps' project manager Al Naomi went before a local agency, the East Jefferson Levee Authority, and essentially begged for $2 million for urgent work that Washington was now unable to pay for. From the June 18, 2004 Times-Picayune: "The system is in great shape, but the levees are sinking. Everything is sinking, and if we don't get the money fast enough to raise them, then we can't stay ahead of the settlement," he said. "The problem that we have isn't that the levee is low, but that the federal funds have dried up so that we can't raise them." The panel authorized that money, and on July 1, 2004, it had to pony up another $250,000 when it learned that stretches of the levee in Metairie had sunk by four feet. The agency had to pay for the work with higher property taxes. The levee board noted in October 2004 that the feds were also now not paying for a hoped-for $15 million project to better shore up the banks of Lake Pontchartrain. The 2004 hurricane season was the worst in decades. In spite of that, the federal government came back this spring with the steepest reduction in hurricane and flood-control funding for New Orleans in history. Because of the proposed cuts, the Corps office there imposed a hiring freeze. Officials said that money targeted for the SELA project -- $10.4 million, down from $36.5 million -- was not enough to start any new jobs. There was, at the same time, a growing recognition that more research was needed to see what New Orleans must do to protect itself from a Category 4 or 5 hurricane. But once again, the money was not there. As the Times-Picayune reported last Sept. 22: "That second study would take about four years to complete and would cost about $4 million, said Army Corps of Engineers project manager Al Naomi. About $300,000 in federal money was proposed for the 2005 fiscal-year budget, and the state had agreed to match that amount. But the cost of the Iraq war forced the Bush administration to order the New Orleans district office not to begin any new studies, and the 2005 budget no longer includes the needed money, he said." The Senate was seeking to restore some of the SELA funding cuts for 2006. But now it's too late. One project that a contractor had been racing to finish this summer: a bridge and levee job right at the 17th Street Canal, site of the main breach on Monday. The Newhouse News Service article published Tuesday night observed, "The Louisiana congressional delegation urged Congress earlier this year to dedicate a stream of federal money to Louisiana's coast, only to be opposed by the White House. ... In its budget, the Bush administration proposed a significant reduction in funding for southeast Louisiana's chief hurricane protection project. Bush proposed $10.4 million, a sixth of what local officials say they need." Local officials are now saying, the article reported, that had Washington heeded their warnings about the dire need for hurricane protection, including building up levees and repairing barrier islands, "the damage might not have been nearly as bad as it turned out to be." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Will Bunch ) is senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News. He won a Pulitzer Prize in 1992 when he reported for Newsday. Much of this article also appears on his blog, Attytood, at the Daily News. http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1001051313 |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
Since you didn't read the article, I will snip the most important part for
you. Yet after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars. When you need billions of dollar to fix a problem, it IS a federal issue - not a local or state issue. "tornado Jeff" wrote in message oups.com... All, The levee/canal system was poorly designed in the first place. 1) There were no control gates at the lake/river openings to the canals to block it off in case a levee failed like it just did. The levees which failed were on canals...not the Mississippi River or Lake Pontchitrain (sp?) 2) I don't believe the pumping stations have auxiliary power to run them if the main power is lost. Those levee & pump systems have been there a loooong time and these issues are nothing new. The governments of Louisiana and New Orleans were playing russian roulette with hurricanes for many years and they finaly got shot...It was not the US govts. fault the state and city govts. did not follow and impliment thier emergency evacuation plans. Of course, they (city & state) will blame anyone else at first chance to avoid responsibility and if they (city & state) are democrats and the national leaders are republicans, hey, kill two birds with one stone!! Jeff Gman wrote: "I R A Darth Aggie" wrote in message ... On 30 Aug 2005 20:11:49 -0700, Vast Left Wing Conspiracy , in .com wrote: + In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of + Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal + funding. + More incompentence from the Chimp In Chief. Perhaps the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy would care to comment how proposed budget cuts for the 2006-2007 fiscal year will affect the ACoE in August 2005? James -- Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good, either. I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated. The cuts started taking place in 2004. "At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars" Did New Orleans Catastrophe Have to Happen? 'Times-Picayune' Had Repeatedly Raised Federal Spending Issues By Will Bunch Published: August 31, 2005 9:00 PM ET PHILADELPHIA Even though Hurricane Katrina has moved well north of the city, the waters may still keep rising in New Orleans. That's because Lake Pontchartrain continues to pour through a two-block-long break in the main levee, near the city's 17th Street Canal. With much of the Crescent City some 10 feet below sea level, the rising tide may not stop until it's level with the massive lake. New Orleans had long known it was highly vulnerable to flooding and a direct hit from a hurricane. In fact, the federal government has been working with state and local officials in the region since the late 1960s on major hurricane and flood relief efforts. When flooding from a massive rainstorm in May 1995 killed six people, Congress authorized the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, or SELA. Over the next 10 years, the Army Corps of Engineers, tasked with carrying out SELA, spent $430 million on shoring up levees and building pumping stations, with $50 million in local aid. But at least $250 million in crucial projects remained, even as hurricane activity in the Atlantic Basin increased dramatically and the levees surrounding New Orleans continued to subside. Yet after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars. Newhouse News Service, in an article posted late Tuesday night at The Times-Picayune Web site, reported: "No one can say they didn't see it coming. ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious questions are being asked about the lack of preparation." In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness. On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us." Also that June, with the 2004 hurricane season starting, the Corps' project manager Al Naomi went before a local agency, the East Jefferson Levee Authority, and essentially begged for $2 million for urgent work that Washington was now unable to pay for. From the June 18, 2004 Times-Picayune: "The system is in great shape, but the levees are sinking. Everything is sinking, and if we don't get the money fast enough to raise them, then we can't stay ahead of the settlement," he said. "The problem that we have isn't that the levee is low, but that the federal funds have dried up so that we can't raise them." The panel authorized that money, and on July 1, 2004, it had to pony up another $250,000 when it learned that stretches of the levee in Metairie had sunk by four feet. The agency had to pay for the work with higher property taxes. The levee board noted in October 2004 that the feds were also now not paying for a hoped-for $15 million project to better shore up the banks of Lake Pontchartrain. The 2004 hurricane season was the worst in decades. In spite of that, the federal government came back this spring with the steepest reduction in hurricane and flood-control funding for New Orleans in history. Because of the proposed cuts, the Corps office there imposed a hiring freeze. Officials said that money targeted for the SELA project -- $10.4 million, down from $36.5 million -- was not enough to start any new jobs. There was, at the same time, a growing recognition that more research was needed to see what New Orleans must do to protect itself from a Category 4 or 5 hurricane. But once again, the money was not there. As the Times-Picayune reported last Sept. 22: "That second study would take about four years to complete and would cost about $4 million, said Army Corps of Engineers project manager Al Naomi. About $300,000 in federal money was proposed for the 2005 fiscal-year budget, and the state had agreed to match that amount. But the cost of the Iraq war forced the Bush administration to order the New Orleans district office not to begin any new studies, and the 2005 budget no longer includes the needed money, he said." The Senate was seeking to restore some of the SELA funding cuts for 2006. But now it's too late. One project that a contractor had been racing to finish this summer: a bridge and levee job right at the 17th Street Canal, site of the main breach on Monday. The Newhouse News Service article published Tuesday night observed, "The Louisiana congressional delegation urged Congress earlier this year to dedicate a stream of federal money to Louisiana's coast, only to be opposed by the White House. ... In its budget, the Bush administration proposed a significant reduction in funding for southeast Louisiana's chief hurricane protection project. Bush proposed $10.4 million, a sixth of what local officials say they need." Local officials are now saying, the article reported, that had Washington heeded their warnings about the dire need for hurricane protection, including building up levees and repairing barrier islands, "the damage might not have been nearly as bad as it turned out to be." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Will Bunch ) is senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News. He won a Pulitzer Prize in 1992 when he reported for Newsday. Much of this article also appears on his blog, Attytood, at the Daily News. http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1001051313 |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
Actually, after a decline in funding every year of the Clinton
presidency, funding for this purpose has increased every year under Bush. |
BUSH CUT HURRICANE FUNDING FOR NEW ORLEANS IN JUNE
"Vox Populi" wrote in message ... Actually, after a decline in funding every year of the Clinton presidency, funding for this purpose has increased every year under Bush. And your source is... |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:28 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 WeatherBanter.co.uk