Democrats Not Blameless on Katrina [View All]

[Don1]

Introduction

El Presidente is getting a lot of flack over this. He seriously failed in his response. Even prior to the response, there were failures. The war is a failure. Our classist society is a failure. But let's be rational here for a moment. Bush does not have absolute control over the government. Though the FEMA budget was proposed by Bush's minions, it was modified and approved by Congress. All appropriations bills must start in the House of Representatives. Yes, it is very difficult for the minority party to do anything, but not only were some of them not objecting, they were saying the same things as Republicans. Whether it was downsizing FEMA, adding more money to the Iraq quagmire, adding more troops to the military, or confirming Bush's idiotic nominations into office, the Democrats sometimes voted right along with the Republicans. Yes, as much as it is feasible to blame government for this tragedy, Bush bares the brunt of the responsibility, but the Democrats are not completely blameless.

Here is a closer look at some charges being made about the Bush administration. Yes, he is at fault. Yes, he is a fascist. Yes, he is a corrupt bastard. Yes, he is a moron. But some Democrats were going along with him. There was an article posted to Washington Monthly which exemplifies the art of hiding of this complicity.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_09/007023.php

Claims

"January 2001: Bush appoints Joe Allbaugh, a crony from Texas, as head of FEMA. Allbaugh has no previous experience in disaster management."

The Senate unanimously confirmed Allbaugh's appointment, even though Allbaugh was a Bush crony with no experience. The confirmation was a 91-0 score. One ridiculous argument used in favor of confirming Allbaugh was that he was in the same fraternity as one of the Senators who knew him. He vouched for him and that included this comment, "He is a very good friend of my wife's brother Steve." Couldn't someone stand up and object to that Republican good-ole-boy-from-Oklahoma insanity at the time? Even just one dissenter, like Ted Kennedy or Russ Feingold, that way we could see the criticism in the Congressional record and know it was just the Republicans selling us out?

"April 2001: Budget Director Mitch Daniels announces the Bush administration's goal of privatizing much of FEMA's work. In May, Allbaugh confirms that FEMA will be downsized: 'Many are concerned that federal disaster assistance may have evolved into both an oversized entitlement program....' he said. 'Expectations of when the federal government should be involved and the degree of involvement may have ballooned beyond what is an appropriate level.' "

Privatize and downsize?? Clearly, the Republicans and BushCo are corporate fascist bastards, but did anyone stand up to this move? Again, all appropriations bills must start in the House. There was debate and thank God, someone did in fact stand up to object. His name is Bentsen and here is what he said:
"While the Administration is pushing people out of the NFIP, it also proposes to reduce the federal share of hazard mitigation grants from 75% to 50%, reducing funds available for flood prevention by $83 million. The administration also proposes to eliminate FEMA's Project Impact, which helps communities protect themselves from the devastating effects of natural disasters. In addition, the 2002 budget cuts the Army Corps of Engineers by $600 million. Of that cut, $451 million comes from Construction General funds, which fund flood control and navigation projects. A policy of reducing flood prevention efforts while reducing insurance will compound the safety risk and financial pain for homeowners in the floodplain."

Kudos to standing up to them over this, even though eventually BushCo's budget was approved.

"2001: FEMA designates a major hurricane hitting New Orleans as one of the three 'likeliest, most catastrophic disasters facing this country.' "

Right and leadership on this one should have come up with a damned good plan for what to do if that happened. That leadership includes the President of the US, the FEMA director, the Governor of Louisiana, the Mayor of New Orleans, and many others and other agencies. Congress also should probably not have been so pre-occupied with terrorism as natural disasters are also catastrophes. Certainly having BushCo propose a budget cut to FEMA did not help here, but some blame goes all around, too, for lack of planning and lack of emergency drills.

"December 2002: After less than two years at FEMA, Allbaugh announces he is leaving to start up a consulting firm that advises companies seeking to do business in Iraq. He is succeeded by his deputy, Michael Brown, who, like Allbaugh, has no previous experience in disaster management."

So, again, why did Congress confirm Michael Brown on August 1st, 2002? In the Congressional record I see no debate at all.

“June 2004: The Army Corps of Engineers budget for levee construction in New Orleans is slashed. Jefferson Parish emergency management chiefs Walter Maestri comments: ‘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.’ ”

The President was not the only one to vote for the war. And wasn’t it a unanimous decision to add $80 billion to the war fund just a couple of months ago? On this specific issue, the President’s proposed budget gave this fund $3 million when they asked for $11 million. The House of Representatives is in charge of appropriations bills. They decided in a bipartisan committee to make the budget for this project $5.5 million. That is only 50% funded and only slightly better than the fascist Bush’s proposal.

“June 2005: Funding for the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is cut by a record $71.2 million. One of the hardest-hit areas 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.”

Again, the issue here is that budgetary items are decided in bi-partisan committees in the House. Then, the vote comes later.

Conclusion

It is important at this time to ask what is wrong with our government. Why did Congress, Democrats included, allow cronies with no experience to be confirmed in important positions? Why did the House approve under-funding projects? Were they too focused on the war and on terrorism? Or are they just too corrupt to fix?

Sure, the Democrats show that they are better than Bush, but how much better? It is time to not be so anti-Bush over this issue, and see to it Congress, Democrats included , shares some of the blame. Moreover, it is time for we the people to call out our government on this issue. Challenge them. Tell them to start up the War on Poverty once again or we will vote them out of office.