I've heard this argument so much, not only on blogs but also on TV, that I'm obsessed with demolishing it, once and for all. The argument being: the Mayor was to blame for the last six days because he didn't act strongly enough to evacuate the city. The strong version of this argument is that legally speaking, the Mayor (and/or the Governor of Louisiana) had the primary responsiblity for planning and responding to the crisis and they failed the city.
Two Responses to "Flooded Buses":
1. Compelled evacuation is unprecedented, unlikely to succeed, and unconstitutional, and therefore is probably not allowed, even in a state of emergency. Read the Louisiana Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness Act, the law that provides the Mayor with emergency powers, which I wrote about in an earlier diary. Check out specifically LA 29:736.
Nothing in this Chapter shall be interpreted to diminish the rights guaranteed to all persons under the Declaration of Rights of the Louisiana Constitution or the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution. This Chapter shall not violate Article II (Distribution of Powers), Article III (Legislative Branch), or Article V (Judicial Branch) of the Louisiana Constitution.
Rounding up American citizens and forcing them, probably at gunpoint, onto buses against their will, without specific authorization from a disaster response plan designed by the State and approved by FEMA, violates basic notions of due process. Under State and Federal law, the Mayor could not do this, or at the very least, the Mayor could not escape personal liability should any of the sick or elderly perish because they were forced onto a bus. Additionally, the logistics of a forced evacuation are extremely taxing: who would wield the guns? Police officers who are understandably very busy on the eve of landfall? The National Guard which the City has no authority over? Where and how could you find those who had stayed behind?
2. There is no more dangerous place for evacuees during a hurricane than being trapped in a vehicle on an interstate. The Right made this very argument in criticizing President Clinton's evacuation order for the Carolinas during Hurricane Floyd. Traffic was gridlocked on the days leading up to landfall. Had the storm sped up, thousands would have been guaranteed death as the winds and rain tossed the buses around like pinballs. It's not a question of "take them to higher ground." Would you then unload them in a rice patty? Where would they take shelter? The people would could not afford to leave could not afford to buy a room in the Ramada Inn, which was likely booked anyhow. And would it have been any safer in the aftermath of the storm? Even assuming the evacuees survived the storm, how would the National Guard find them, to distribute supplies? How could you provide security to them unless they are in a centralized location? What centralized location was there on such short notice? Sadly, the Superdome was the safest highest ground, and the Mayor did right by providing those unwilling or unable to leave the strongest shelter they could find against the storm.
One Response to the "Mayor Didn't Plan" argument:
3. The idea that the Mayor did not plan is a fallacy, which I pointed out in an earlier diary.
In fact, he took emergency action, ordered evacuation, provided transportation, and otherwise helped 80% of his citizens evacuate. Although, as I diaried earlier, the State does have responsibility for designing emergency evacuation and response plans to natural disasters, when those disasters overwhelm local and state resources or when they are "incidents of national significance," which the breaches of the levees surely were (if not the threat of a Cat 5 hurricane itself), then the primary responsibility is upon FEMA and DHS to coordinate the response. Regardless, FEMA and DHS still have to approve of any state and local plans, not rubber-stamp them.
It is true that local authorities should be the "first responders," and in this case, to the extent they were able, they were. NOPD and NOFD and other local resources were deployed on a Herculean search-and-rescue mission under the worst possible conditions. Clearly, the State of Louisiana had a disaster response plan. Let's call that Plan A. Plan A became no longer operative when the levees broke. Perhaps they had a Plan B as well. Clearly, they were overwhelmed. Blanco recognized this and asked for sufficient resources from FEMA on August 28th, as has been diaried earlier by others. Plan C was to order mandatory evacuation, to shelter those who couldn't or didn't leave, and to wait for the cavalry to arrive to rescue the survivors. Plan C was executed by local authorities. Thousands were saved from the hurricane as well as from the flood. Plan C failed when FEMA failed to live up to their end of the bargain.
Sorry for the long diary, but these arguments sicken me. Surely there is enough blame to go around in hindsight on all parties, and surely even a perfect FEMA would have faced delays, foul-ups, and difficulties in responding to one of the worst crises in world history. But that does not absolve FEMA and the Bush Administration for their primary failure to adequately coordinate a response that could have mitigated this disaster and it certainly doesn't excuse the acts of the government which exacerbated the crisis, to wit:
a. Refusing help when offered or turning away useful help.
b. Failing to properly fund levee and pump repair in the first place.