Budget cutbacks for levee development in New Orleans...

[Big Andy]

I don't have a cool article to link to or anything, but I just thought I would point out that Bush's budget for 2004 or 2005 rolled back the core of engineers budget by 60 million or so for New Orleans, as well as rolling back funds for levee development/repairs being cut in half, (15 million instead of 30 million, I think).

At the time, it was percieved by many as being diverted from New Orleans to Iraq and "National Security." I believe I read something about it referring to pressure from within the pentagon.

So apprently those funds were more important than we thought, huh? Now it's going to cost us far more than it would have to have just prepared better and SPENT OUR TAX MONEY AT HOME INSTEAD OF THE MIDDLE EAST.

I can't back these claims up, but I will try to find some sources if I have time. There's an article in today's Dallas Morning Disappointment, front section, I think. If anyone else knows about any of this, or has sources/articles/links, please post em up!

The DMN said something about an article in The Times Piccune (sp?) about it a year or more ago.


George W Bush to Diane Sawyers: "There was no way to know that the levees would break."

Hello, George, as your constituent, I would like you to remove your head from your anus as soon as possible. Thanks, Andy

[PETA]

Andy, can you with good conscience argue that had there been no cuts from the budget that bigger better levees would have been built AND that those new levees would have prevented a breach from this storm?

[Satchel]

I think you would have to be an engineer with a full knowledge of the situation to really know whether the cut backs made a difference or not. Either way, it's obviously a stain on his record any way you look at it.

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Satchel

I think you would have to be an engineer with a full knowledge of the situation to really know whether the cut backs made a difference or not. Either way, it's obviously a stain on his record any way you look at it.

I disagree, you'd have to know that, "but for" the funding cuts, changes in the levee absolutely would have occurred...

that has nothing what so ever to do with a knowledge of engineering...

otherwise one is speculating about the best case scenerio after the fact..... which is my point....

people are arguing that but for the funding cuts the flooding wouldn't have occurred.... to carry the argument they must argue, and hold, that

1) the funding would have been sufficient

2) the structure would have been sufficient to withstand this storm

and

3) they would have been in place prior to the storm....

those are big hurdles...

if you cannot argue with great confidence that all three would have been cleared you are then arguing a best case scenerio in hindsight which is not just unfair - its specious and dishonest.


so - do you think all three would have definetly happened?

[HarveytheRabbit]

Originally Posted by xian

I disagree, you'd have to know that, "but for" the funding cuts, changes in the levee absolutely would have occurred...

that has nothing what so ever to do with a knowledge of engineering...

otherwise one is speculating about the best case scenerio after the fact..... which is my point....

people are arguing that but for the funding cuts the flooding wouldn't have occurred.... to carry the argument they must argue, and hold, that

1) the funding would have been sufficient

2) the structure would have been sufficient to withstand this storm

and

3) they would have been in place prior to the storm....

those are big hurdles...

if you cannot argue with great confidence that all three would have been cleared you are then arguing a best case scenerio in hindsight which is not just unfair - its specious and dishonest.


so - do you think all three would have definetly happened?

Somebody told me....it might have actually been on here, that officials asked for a certain amount of money to repair/improve the levee system for protection against this exact type of disaster. They ended up getting 20% of what they said they needed. Assuming that the people who asked for the money knew what they were talking about, are you saying it wasn't a dumb idea to cut their funding?

[HarveytheRabbit]

I do see your point though.....that we have no way of knowing what would happen if they got the money.

I think they should have been more prepared given the geography of the area.

[PETA]

Originally Posted by HarveytheRabbit

Somebody told me....it might have actually been on here, that officials asked for a certain amount of money to repair/improve the levee system for protection against this exact type of disaster. They ended up getting 20% of what they said they needed. Assuming that the people who asked for the money knew what they were talking about, are you saying it wasn't a dumb idea to cut their funding?

nope I'm essentailly saying that if the guys demanding the most amount of $$$ had gotten their money they wouldn't have been able to build sufficiently strong levees in time to prevent this flooding - - not that doing so woulnd't have been a good idea..... it would have been a very good idea

[PETA]

Originally Posted by HarveytheRabbit

I do see your point though.....that we have no way of knowing what would happen if they got the money.

I think they should have been more prepared given the geography of the area.

I cannot pose a valid counter to that

[kit'n]

Originally Posted by HarveytheRabbit

Somebody told me....it might have actually been on here, that officials asked for a certain amount of money to repair/improve the levee system for protection against this exact type of disaster. They ended up getting 20% of what they said they needed. Assuming that the people who asked for the money knew what they were talking about, are you saying it wasn't a dumb idea to cut their funding?

i was watching the news tonight and they were interviewing one of the LA representatives and they said that they have been asking for money to strengthen/repair/build new levees for nearly 10 years and have never gotten any.

[Satchel]

Originally Posted by xian

I disagree, you'd have to know that, "but for" the funding cuts, changes in the levee absolutely would have occurred...

that has nothing what so ever to do with a knowledge of engineering...

otherwise one is speculating about the best case scenerio after the fact..... which is my point....

people are arguing that but for the funding cuts the flooding wouldn't have occurred.... to carry the argument they must argue, and hold, that

1) the funding would have been sufficient

2) the structure would have been sufficient to withstand this storm

and

3) they would have been in place prior to the storm....

those are big hurdles...

if you cannot argue with great confidence that all three would have been cleared you are then arguing a best case scenerio in hindsight which is not just unfair - its specious and dishonest.


so - do you think all three would have definetly happened?

Of course not. As I said I have no idea. However, you also have no idea if some extra funding and planning could have helped somewhere along the line. It's just ridiculous to speculate about things you don't know anything about.

Still it's a black eye much in the same way as Clintons intelligence cuts are.

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Satchel

Of course not. As I said I have no idea. However, you also have no idea if some extra funding and planning could have helped somewhere along the line. It's just ridiculous to speculate about things you don't know anything about.

And I acknowledged that doing something would have been better than doing nothing

we are in agreement

Originally Posted by Satchel

Still it's a black eye much in the same way as Clintons intelligence cuts are.

I'll show some dignity for the situation and not run with that one - - but I do appreciate the personal satisfaction it gave....

[Satchel]

Originally Posted by xian

nope I'm essentailly saying that if the guys demanding the most amount of $$$ had gotten their money they wouldn't have been able to build sufficiently strong levees in time to prevent this flooding - - not that doing so woulnd't have been a good idea..... it would have been a very good idea

Yes, but you are only looking at the long term solutions, you don't know how much fuding might have been put into short term fixes.

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Satchel

Yes, but you are only looking at the long term solutions, you don't know how much fuding might have been put into short term fixes.

not just long term but alson and more importantly... disaster situation funding...


but as you said above... and as I agree... it is all speculative...


this quote has always been a favorite of mine and may have bizarre application today.... "when you are up to your ass in alligators, it is difficult to remember that your initial objective was to drain the swamp."

[Satchel]

I'm from south florida so I'm all about swamp draining. I like to consider myself conscious of the environment but they can turn the Everglades into a Super Target for all I care.

My granddad was actually pretty big in the Corps of Engineers and headed the development of most of the Florida levees. He used to get credit for protecting the area from Hurricanes but now is more noted for "destroying the Everglades". Much in life is all a matter of perspective.

[transparentaura]

Originally Posted by xian

Andy, can you with good conscience argue that had there been no cuts from the budget that bigger better levees would have been built AND that those new levees would have prevented a breach from this storm?

It can be said without a doubt that there were those in New Orleans that were trying like hell to get that done and issuing repeated warnings, describing a scenario that is now horribly familiar. The Army corp of engineers and FEMA released a report full of dire warnings in 2004. Read the archives of the "Times Picayune" as far back as you can, this was not unexpected. So, yes I for one think that given the money they would have raised the height of and fortified the levees, its not a complicated piece of engineering.