Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (
More info?)
"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:dfj0o00h9u@enews2.newsguy.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> Speaking of previous relevant experience, let's talk
>> about the Mayor of New Orleans.
>>
>> Zero previous experience in government, not even
>> governor of Texas. ;-)
>>
>> His career was installing TV cable systems, Before
>> becoming Mayor, Mr Nagin served as the vice president
>> and general manager for Cox Communications in south-east
>> Louisiana.
> This is extremely common for Mayor's everywhere. Disaster
> management is almost nowhere considered a requisite for
> that office.
Then why do so many cities have good disaster management
plans?
BTW, the mayors don't have to know anything about disaster
management, they just have to be able to wake up and smell
the coffee.
>This is exactly why such management must be
> dealt with at a national level.
Here's the problem especially with states like Lousiana,
this puts you right in the middle of a state's rights
situation.
BTW, am I the only person here who notices the fact that
we're dealing with a situation involving a predominately
black city and a state with errr, a race-rights history?
We've got a similar situation here in Michigan, about right
under my nose. It's called Detroit. While Michigan does not
have hands that are exactly clean of racial politics, I'd
like to think we're a little ahead of Lousiana. It's not a
pretty picture under the best of circumstances.
> There is no other way to
> get the required uniform co-ordination and multi-state
> response.
We seem to have a pracctical contradiction of that theory
right before us, involving the response of Texas.
> The people under attack in such a situation are
> the last people that should be expected to be managing
> the problem for all kinds of obvious reasons.
Like I keep saying, this problem is verrrry old, and
predates the emergency at hand by decades.
> I think most of us believed that the fed understood this
> and were prepared for states coming under attack by at
> least something this predictable with such a predictable
> scope.
The fed is not all-powerful. For example, its still the law
that the National Guard can't enter a state with police
powers without being given them by the state.
> The reality is a stunner.
Lots of people put their heads in the sand and decided to
play politics instead of address a projected prolbem that
became reality.
BTW, who is Trent Lott and why is he building shipyards
instead of dealing with this problem in advance?
>The fed is like an insurance company in this regard.
Next-day claims service is a rarity.
> No state or locality
> can possibly be liable for the specific disaster that can
> befall it.
No doubt the fed is going to pour tons of money into this
catastrophe.
> As we see, events can be too big for that.
Remember this discussion started out someplace else -
response time by Fema and the perception that the president
held up approvals for some unknown reason. The public
record shows a different story - the problem started out at
the local level.
/www.usatoday.com/weather/hurricane/2005-03-25-witt-fema_x.htm?csp=34
Facebook
Twitter