Corps officials: Funding levels not to blame for flooding

[gilliam]

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.

In a telephone interview with reporters, corps officials said that although portions of the flood-protection levees remain incomplete, the levees near Lake Pontchartrain that gave way--inundating much of the city--were completed and in good condition before the hurricane.

...

"I don't see that the level of funding was really a contributing factor in this case," said Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, chief of engineers for the corps. "Had this project been fully complete, it is my opinion that based on the intensity of this storm that the flooding of the business district and the French Quarter would have still taken place."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...l=chi-news-hed

[Brad]

Originally Posted by gilliam

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.

In a telephone interview with reporters, corps officials said that although portions of the flood-protection levees remain incomplete, the levees near Lake Pontchartrain that gave way--inundating much of the city--were completed and in good condition before the hurricane.

...

"I don't see that the level of funding was really a contributing factor in this case," said Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, chief of engineers for the corps. "Had this project been fully complete, it is my opinion that based on the intensity of this storm that the flooding of the business district and the French Quarter would have still taken place."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...l=chi-news-hed

This directly contradicts one of the army engineers on TV Wednesday night (Dateline I believe) that said that the cost benefit analysis decision was to build only to hurricane level 3.

He was asked whether the cost benefit analysis would show up differently today and he said possibly

[The Black Knight]

Originally Posted by gilliam

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.

In a telephone interview with reporters, corps officials said that although portions of the flood-protection levees remain incomplete, the levees near Lake Pontchartrain that gave way--inundating much of the city--were completed and in good condition before the hurricane.

...

"I don't see that the level of funding was really a contributing factor in this case," said Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, chief of engineers for the corps. "Had this project been fully complete, it is my opinion that based on the intensity of this storm that the flooding of the business district and the French Quarter would have still taken place."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...l=chi-news-hed

Good to hear it.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

Good to hear it.

If only it were true.

[gomer tree]

Originally Posted by Brad

If only it were true.

So, you hear two conflicting accounts that the other one is true. And you know this how?

[truth05]

they knew that the levees could only sustain a cat 3 storm. Bills for funding to make them stronger were thrown out. Funding is to blame for the levees not sustaining a cat 4 or higher storm.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by gomer tree

So, you hear two conflicting accounts that the other one is true. And you know this how?

Frankly, the first account is in conflict with almost every other report. Everyone knew this was a potential problem and everyone knew the city could only handle a category 3 or lower.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/02/op...fischetti.html

[Ghosty]

Funding was also cut on the studies that were to see what kind of preparation was needed to protect from a higher level storm. In fact, it was those studies that were specifically cut a year ago. It's not the cut on the work on the levees that worries me, it's the cut on the disaster studies that were proposed. This was reported last September in the Times-Picayune, and the Corps specifically cited the costs of the Iraq situation as one of the reasons for the cut.

We don't need to make excuses in order to cut down the administration, but we do need to make honest criticisms where they are due. The studies would have taken years, but the fact that hurricane protection studies were cut to supply money for the Iraq occupation appears as stark negligence given what we've seen unfold this week.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by truth05

they knew that the levees could only sustain a cat 3 storm. Bills for funding to make them stronger were thrown out. Funding is to blame for the levees not sustaining a cat 4 or higher storm.

Yes. They alll knew.

http://www.wusatv9.com/news/news_art...?storyid=42521

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Ghosty

Funding was also cut on the studies that were to see what kind of preparation was needed to protect from a higher level storm. In fact, it was those studies that were specifically cut a year ago. It's not the cut on the work on the levees that worries me, it's the cut on the disaster studies that were proposed. This was reported last September in the Times-Picayune, and the Corps specifically cited the costs of the Iraq situation as one of the reasons for the cut.

We don't need to make excuses in order to cut down the administration, but we do need to make honest criticisms where they are due. The studies would have taken years, but the fact that hurricane protection studies were cut to supply money for the Iraq occupation appears as stark negligence given what we've seen unfold this week.

This isn't about the "administration". This is about politicians in New Orleans and the state more than anything else.

[Ghosty]

This isn't about the "administration". This is about politicians in New Orleans and the state more than anything else.

It was the Federal government that cut the funding on the studies, and it was the federal government that cited the Iraq War as a major reason.

From the article in question regarding disaster prevention studies:

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.

No doubt the local governments have major egg on their faces, but it's pretty clear that the federal government directly neglected this reality also.

[Hildebrand]

Originally Posted by Ghosty

Funding was also cut on the studies that were to see what kind of preparation was needed to protect from a higher level storm. In fact, it was those studies that were specifically cut a year ago. It's not the cut on the work on the levees that worries me, it's the cut on the disaster studies that were proposed. This was reported last September in the Times-Picayune, and the Corps specifically cited the costs of the Iraq situation as one of the reasons for the cut.

One: the work on the levees was COMPLETED in the area where the levee broke according to the Army Corp of Engineers. END OF STORY.

Two: The only use for bringing this up is if in one year the study would have begun, collected all the data, finalized the report, made recommendations, passed those recommendations onto authorities, the authorities look over, discuss, and fund the recommendations, and those recommendations would be in place and finished today as we speak.

If the study's recommendations would not be in place today, then the study would be useless to save lives today. With all this, still the Democrat and liberal partisans are blasting Bush over something that would not have helped now (I agree with what you said, Ghosty: "The studies would have taken years").

Now there were DOZENS of other studies and reports that led to the common sense conclusion that the city needed to be COMPLETELY evacuated before a Cat 4 or 5 storm hit New Orleans. All who look at the data conclude that since the levees are not guaranteed to handle anything over a Cat 3, the vast majority of the city could flood killing thousands or more. With that knowledge from all of the previous studies and reports - what was the evacuation plan to get every soul out of New Orleans, including the hospitals, jails, everything? The evacuation was sheer incompetence. New Orleans was not like every other city, it was different, it was a fragile bowl surrounded by water.

There were four categories of people who stayed in New Orleans: The poor with no means to leave, The tourists who were forgotten about in the evacuation plan and had to stay in the city, Those who were stuck on the highways and returned home or to the shelters, Those who had the means but made the decision to weather out the storm (the later group is completely unmentioned by the media, although many interviews with survivors has indicated this was a sizable group).

If you are going to abandon people to shelters to save them from flooding out in the city, you had better tell them to bring their own food/medicine or provide it for them. To leave the eating and drinking of those in shelters to chance when a Cat 5 is heading to a city below sea level is completely revolting.

But, Bush is to blame. Yes, Bush is to blame these hundreds of buses that are now flooded. These buses were not used for evacuating people out of New Orleans. Bush is to blame for everything. Keep pointing you finger at him.

[Fidei Defensor]

Originally Posted by Hildebrand

But, Bush is to blame. Yes, Bush is to blame these hundreds of buses that are now flooded. These buses were not used for evacuating people out of New Orleans. Bush is to blame for everything. Keep pointing you finger at him.

OHHH! PWNT!

[Ghosty]

Hildebrand: Slow down, cowboy, I didn't say the administration was guilty of the destruction of New Orleans or the loss of life, I said it was guilty of negligence in cutting funding to levee projects and disaster studies.

The government, when it cut funding a year ago, did not say "We won't be able to finish the studies and projects by the time Katrina hits in 2005, so we might as well use the money elsewhere." They had no way of knowing that the destruction was just a year off, nobody did. They can't be held accountable for that. They can be held accountable for the negligent diverting and cutting of funds to a situation that was recognized by FEMA as the major disaster waiting to happen.

I'm not upset that the project wasn't finished, I'm upset that we have a government that will cut funding to absolutely critical studies that have potentially dire and far-reaching consequences.

This has nothing to do with Bush-bashing, this is very real, very serious evaluation of our government on all levels. I don't think you have to have a political affiliation (I don't) to say that a government that cuts funding to disaster studies in an area that is listed by FEMA as the biggest danger to our nation is seriously negligent. If this happened under a Democrat, a Libertarian, or a Communist administration I'd be saying the exact same thing.

If you check my posts, I've also been critical of the local governements for what they failed to do, but the fact is that I don't have to worry about their negligence where I live, but I do have to worry about the federal government's. As this event has shown, our lives are at risk and our government at all levels is dropping the ball in critical and obvious areas. As a citizen and a tax payer, I have a right to safety and protection, and when I see that threatened I have a duty to criticize my government if it behaves in a negligent manner.

[Hildebrand]

Originally Posted by Ghosty

They can be held accountable for the negligent diverting and cutting of funds to a situation that was recognized by FEMA as the major disaster waiting to happen.

You have people today yelling and screaming at Bush for this very reason and blaming him for cuts that LED to this disaster (cuts to repair levees and cuts in research).

This is fueling into the divisions we are witness in the United States and is not right.