Skip to main content

Bush administration funding cuts forced federal engineers to delay improvements on the levees, floodgates and pumping stations that failed to protect New Orleans from Hurricane Katrina's floodwaters, agency documents showed on Thursday.

The former head of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the agency that handles the infrastructure of the nation's waterways, said the damage in New Orleans probably would have been much less extensive had flood-control efforts been fully funded over the years. "Levees would have been higher, levees would have been bigger, there would have been other pumps put in," said Mike Parker, a former Mississippi congressman who headed the engineering agency from 2001 to 2002. "I'm not saying it would have been totally alleviated but it would have been less than the damage that we have got now."

Eighty percent of New Orleans was under water after Katrina blew through with much of the flooding coming after two levees broke.

A May 2005 Corps memo said that funding levels for fiscal years 2005 and 2006 would not be enough to pay for new construction on the levees.

Agency officials said on Thursday in a conference call that delayed work was not related to the breakdown in the levee system and Parker told Reuters the funding problems could not be blamed on the Bush administration alone. Parker said a project dating to 1965 remains unfinished and that any recent projects would not have been in place by the time the hurricane struck even if they had been fully funded.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the administration had funded flood control efforts adequately. Tensions over funding for the New Orleans levees emerged more than a year ago when a local official asserted money had been diverted to pay for the Iraq war.

In early 2002, Parker told the U.S. Congress that the war on terrorism required spending cuts elsewhere in government. Situated below sea level, New Orleans relied on a 300-mile network of levees, floodgates and pumps to hold back the waters of the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain. Levees were fortified after floods in 1927 and 1965, and Congress approved another ambitious upgrade after a 1995 flood killed six people.

Since 2001, the Army Corps has requested $496 million for that project but the Bush administration only budgeted $166 million, according to figures provided by the office of Louisiana Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu). Congress ultimately approved $250 million for the project during that time period.

Another project designed to shore up defenses along Lake Pontchartrain was similarly underfunded, as the administration budgeted $22 million of the $99 million requested by the Corps between 2001 and 2005. Congress boosted spending on that project to $42.5 million, according to Landrieu's office.

"It's clear that we didn't do everything we could to safeguard ourselves from this hurricane or from a natural disaster such as Katrina but hopefully we will learn and be more prepared next time," said Landrieu spokesman Brian Richardson.

The levee defenses had been designed to withstand a milder Category Three hurricane and simply were overwhelmed by Hurricane Katrina, said senior project manager Al Naomi. "The design was not adequate to protect against a storm of this nature because we were not authorized to provide a Category Four or Five protection design," he said. A study examining a possible upgrade is under way, he said.

QUESTION: Why is it always after the fact, when something will be done to alleviate another situation from happening?

Answer: That's how it works under a fascist government.

Fine
QUESTION: Why are federal whistle blowers, who inform the public about issues from the Bush administration, "former" personnel?


~The CELA funds for New Orleans levees were diverted to fund the Iraqi war. The Army Corps. of Engineers knew that the old levees could not withstand a Category 5, which was predicted days before Katrina hit land. Yet, folks were left in New Orleans to fend for themselves, or to die.

Always Remember that: "Anytime We As A People Are Not Having Our WaySomeone Else Is Having Theirs...And It's Never To Our Advantage."

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
No one expected that weak spot to be on a canal that, if anything, had received more attention and shoring up than many other spots in the region. It did not have broad berms, but it did have strong concrete walls.

Shea Penland, director of the Pontchartrain Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of New Orleans, said that was particularly surprising because the break was "along a section that was just upgraded."

"It did not have an earthen levee," Dr. Penland said. "It had a vertical concrete wall several feel thick."

So, the levee that was breached was a new concrete levee. The levee had recently benefited from an upgrade. The upgrade was complete. Therefore Bush is to blame.
quote:
Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:
quote:
No one expected that weak spot to be on a canal that, if anything, had received more attention and shoring up than many other spots in the region. It did not have broad berms, but it did have strong concrete walls.

Shea Penland, director of the Pontchartrain Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of New Orleans, said that was particularly surprising because the break was "along a section that was just upgraded."

"It did not have an earthen levee," Dr. Penland said. "It had a vertical concrete wall several feel thick."

So, the levee that was breached was a new concrete levee. The levee had recently benefited from an upgrade. The upgrade was complete. Therefore Bush is to blame.


His administration took lightly the recommendations that had been made over the last 5 years. If you can find BILLIONS to spend to "liberate" Iraqis, certainly, you can find MILLIONS to improve YOUR country's infrastructure, right? Also, the administration's slow & luke-warm efforts to assist in New Orleans is inexcusable.
The Army Corp of Engineers funding is routinely, and annually, and without fail, opposed and cut by the powerful Environmental lobbyists and organizations that have been permitted far too much influence over the last few decades, but for which the black vote is partially to blame.

This is not conjecture, and only the ignorant amongst us would not be aware of the antagonistic relationship between democrats and environmental powers that be, and the corp of engineers.
The Mayor of New Orleans is and always has been asleep at the wheel, (and noticeably MIA) as has been his predecessors, who like him were elected not based on his qualifications, talents, or abilities, but because of his skin color. So this is a price to be paid for electing the likes of him.

The Louisiana state and local infrastructure, which also has failed miserably here, is predominately Democrat controlled, right up to the governor herself, who like this inept mayor have been asleep at the wheel and aren't capable of competent leadership.

And those miserable bastards themselves who are robbing, raping and murdering with glee, and causing thousands more needless black deaths by diverting resources and energy, when its they most of all who should be pitching in to help others, are also very much at blame here.

We've got similar incompetance in cities such as Phila, Detroit, Atlanta and elsewhere, where these black mayors and administrations approach their jobs as if its just a game to enrich their friends.

The FACT about the CELA funds is that they've been sent to Louisiana year after year, and mostly have disappeared in Democrat pockets for years. THIS is Black and Democrat political culture at its finest, and we all know this goes on.

Now, come out from the blinders of ignorance and do not form opinions based on single slanted articles, and check for yourself over a period of time WHO it is that budget after budget, year after year, request after request, refuses and votes AGAINST funding the Army Corp of Engineers to the tune of what they say they'd like, and you'll see its primarily Democrats and crazy environmental whackoff organizations who NEVER support their budgets.

So the democrats have struck again. And wait until New York or Detroit or multiple urban disasters occur simultaneously god forbid. Who you think a nuke or bio attack is gonna kill mostly? Why would you not support to the fullest destroying as many terrorists as possible? Its WE who will pay the urban price for urban attacks against the US.

Orleans will be small potatoes compared to those, yet we'll vote blindly for democrats and elect people on skin color basis, oppose killing terrorists and law enforcement tools, and we'll suffer for it in the end.
quote:
His administration took lightly the recommendations that had been made over the last 5 years.


I agree with you on this point.

MY QUESTION IS - WHY DO YOU STOP AT 5 YEARS WHEN THE WARNINGS ABOUT THE LEVEE HAD GONE BACK SINCE THE 1960'S WHEN THE CURRENT MACRO DESIGN WAS IMPLEMENTED AND BEFORE THAT WHEN THERE WERE ACTUAL FLOODS THAT LEAD TO THE CREATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER COMMISSION.

It appears that some of your attack is against Bush rather than against the long ignored warnings about the threat to this city that has 3 of it's four sides encircled in water with man made structures keeping the water at bay.

quote:

If you can find BILLIONS to spend to "liberate" Iraqis, certainly, you can find MILLIONS to improve YOUR country's infrastructure, right? Also, the administration's slow & luke-warm efforts to assist in New Orleans is inexcusable.

Be an Internet Lover not a Fighter...


The Senate just approved 10.5 BILLION DOLLARS.
I don't want to hijack the thread Janes (and I hope you don't want to either...), but the link between terrorist activity, Al-Quida & Iraq is tenuous at best. Even to divert some of the war money, troops, & resources for 30 days would go a long way to improving things in New Orleans. Iraq is looking to be a 10-15 year proposition, so would 1 month of diverting resources (which would be a few BILLION dollars) to an American city really hurt that effort?
quote:
Even to divert some of the war money, troops, & resources for 30 days would go a long way to improving things in New Orleans. Iraq is looking to be a 10-15 year proposition, so would 1 month of diverting resources (which would be a few BILLION dollars) to an American city really hurt that effort?


ddouble:

Can I ask you.

Why do you reference the "money spent in Iraq that COULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO A BETTER USE but you remain silent on the MONEY THAT WASN'T SPENT PRIOR TO US BEING IN IRAQ TO WHICH THE "DIVERSION" OF IRAQ WAS NOT A POINT OF CONTENTION?

Did the problem with New Orleans just manifest itself 5 years ago or was this a century old issue based on the past experience with being so close to one of the most powerful rivers in the world that seeks to resist the reshaping that MAN has forced upon it?
quote:
Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:
quote:
Even to divert some of the war money, troops, & resources for 30 days would go a long way to improving things in New Orleans. Iraq is looking to be a 10-15 year proposition, so would 1 month of diverting resources (which would be a few BILLION dollars) to an American city really hurt that effort?


ddouble:

Can I ask you.

Why do you reference the "money spent in Iraq that COULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO A BETTER USE but you remain silent on the MONEY THAT WASN'T SPENT PRIOR TO US BEING IN IRAQ TO WHICH THE "DIVERSION" OF IRAQ WAS NOT A POINT OF CONTENTION?

Did the problem with New Orleans just manifest itself 5 years ago or was this a century old issue based on the past experience with being so close to one of the most powerful rivers in the world that seeks to resist the reshaping that MAN has forced upon it?


It's spilt milk to talk about that money (>5 years) now - I agree the other administrations share responsibility for the neglect of New Orleans' infrastructure. But the contrast of spending hundreds of billions over the last 2 years to fight an optional war (IMO) and the neglect of America's urban centers is too stark to ignore. I believe the Bush administration is as pro-government as previous Democratic administrations have been painted to be. If you can intervene on personal morality & steroid use in professional sports, you definitely should have higher concerns for your nation (education, health, employment, infrastructure) in order, right?

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×