Katrina after-math: Inclusively a federal failure Posted by: Jon Henke
on Wednesday, September 14, 2005
We've been debating the proper allocation of blame for the post-Katrina problems lately, and it seems a lot of people don't think the Federal Government and FEMA has much, if any, share of that blame. The argument usually rests on the assumption that locals fouled up—that locals failed to request help—and that FEMA simply couldn't act on their own; that, ultimately, the locals and not FEMA were the authors of the mistakes.
I'd certainly agree that a substantial portion of blame will ultimately rest on local and State authorities, but I want to examine some of this a bit further.
First, let's recall that Governor Blanco invoked the Stafford Act with her "Disaster Relief Request" of August 27th. (it's dated the 28th, but it was made the 27th) That same day—still, August 27th—President Bush responded to her request by declaring an Emergency, which "authorizes the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to coordinate all disaster relief efforts which have the purpose of alleviating the hardship and suffering caused by the emergency on the local population, and to provide appropriate assistance for required emergency measures, authorized under Title V of the Stafford Act".
From here, the argument has gone, the responsibility was left to the State to tell FEMA what they needed and where it needed to go—FEMA couldn't just "start pitching these things out of the back of a truck". But that's not quite the case. According to the the Stafford Act, "Immediately upon his declaration of a major disaster or emergency, the President shall appoint a Federal coordinating officer to operate in the affected area." The President did just that, appointing "William Lokey as the Federal Coordinating Officer for Federal recovery operations in the affected area".
The function of the Federal Coordinating Officer is to "coordinate the administration of relief" and to "take such other action...as he may deem necessary to assist local citizens and public officials in promptly obtaining assistance". And Lokey, apparently did try to coordinate the immediate delivery of aid.
"All I can say is it wasn't for the efforts here. We put in the orders" for food, water and other aid for storm victims, Lokey told reporters at the command center in Baton Rouge, La.
When asked why it took so long to get aid to the Convention Center, Lokey again said "I put in orders". Aid took so long to arrive, Lokey said, because it came from California.
So there was coordination between FEMA and the State, and yet aid still failed to materialize in a timely manner.
So, we've got a local FEMA official with authority to coordinate with the State—and he did—who says "it wasn't for the efforts here" that aid wasn't delivered as needed and says "bureaucracy delayed the delivery of provisions to people stranded in New Orleans".
It seems to me that, whatever failures happened locally, it's also clear that there were bureaucratic failures at the federal level, too. Structural failures? A bad plan? Inattention? Incompetence? I don't know. But there was local coordination, and the local/state level did put in requests to FEMA. And, rather than waiting for State requests, FEMA did have the authority to "make an initial appraisal", to "coordinate the administration of relief, including activities of the State and local governments", and then to take action.
If FEMA didn't get enough cooperation from the State and local levels, FEMA should probably ask why their own Federal Coordinating Officer—who had the authority to appraise, request and act on his own—did not do more. Alternately, if he did, we ought to find out why his requests were not acted upon more quickly.
" When asked why it took so long to get aid to the Convention Center, Lokey again said "I put in orders". Aid took so long to arrive, Lokey said, because it came from California."
I thought it was reported that the trucks were turned away by locals from the convention center as they didn’t want to attract more people than they could safely put in there?
There were hundreds (350, iirc) of pre-positioned food trucks (and more trucks carrying other aid). Whether those were insufficient, unable to reach their goal or what, I don’t know.
"I thought it was reported that the trucks were turned away by locals from the convention center as they didn’t want to attract more people than they could safely put in there?"
That is true, so I don’t think we can count on the "coordinating" that Lockey? was trying to do between feds and state being coordination that was happening within the state—his efforts may have been moot. This means attempts to show that an increased amount of blame falls rightly to the feds, on this account, so far are also moot.
When asked why it took so long to get aid to the Convention Center, Lokey again said "I put in orders". Aid took so long to arrive, Lokey said, because it came from California.
So there was coordination between FEMA and the State, and yet aid still failed to materialize in a timely manner.
Well if we’re talking about the "Convention Center" it didn’t arrive because the STATE refused entry to anyone to include the ARC and the Salvation Army, as early as that monday of the hurricane.
I’m not sure I understand the point here. Again, management of the crisis, which included what goes where and when, as well as control of the area is a STATE responsibility. FEMA can put orders in all day, but if the STATE refuses access to a particlar area, as they did at the Dome and CC, there’s not a dman thing FEMA can do about it.
If FEMA didn’t get enough cooperation from the State and local levels, FEMA should probably ask why their own Federal Coordinating Officer—who had the authority to appraise, request and act on his own—did not do more. Alternately, if he did, we ought to find out why his requests were not acted upon more quickly.
Again, the point here is who’s in charge of the MANAGEMENT of the relief effort?
It isn’t FEMA. He can request, act on his own, stipulate, advise, order and recommend all day, but if the state refuses to allow access to a particular area, like it did to the Dome and CC, there’s not a damn thing he can do about it?
...aid still failed to materialize in a timely manner.
Is there some type of objective number attached to timely? Did aid fail to materialize in a timely manner everywhere in the disaster area? Part of the questioning is due, of course, to my skepticism behind the article. Even so, I’d like to know if this is a systemic FEMA problem, a problem in one area, or even a problem at all (timely in the article means within 4 hours).
Again, the point here is who’s in charge of the MANAGEMENT of the relief effort?
Well, according to the Stafford Act, it seems that FEMA takes on a more primary role once the Federal Coordinating official is in place. It was his role to assess, request and direct. Blanco, to some degree, discharged her responsibilities when she had Bush declare a federal emergency, invoking more federal control.
if the state refuses to allow access to a particular area, like it did to the Dome and CC, there’s not a damn thing he can do about it?
The FCO also has responsibility to "coordinate ... activities of the State and local governments". Seems he didn’t do that very well, did he? In any event, I’m not sure that the lack of aid was restricted to those two locations. Perhaps they were. I don’t know.
Is there some type of objective number attached to timely? Did aid fail to materialize in a timely manner everywhere in the disaster area?
Good questions. I don’t know. I base my assumption that aid didn’t arrive in a timely manner on the comments of those at FEMA and the federal level (Lokey, for example) who were disatisfied, as well as the general concensus that it took days for the efforts to ramp up.
I know this response in awfully vague, but I’m operating on short time, so I can’t be more specific. Gonna have to bail soon.
Well, according to the Stafford Act, it seems that FEMA takes on a more primary role once the Federal Coordinating official is in place. It was his role to assess, request and direct. Blanco, to some degree, discharged her responsibilities when she had Bush declare a federal emergency, invoking more federal control.
No.
You’re still ignoring the role of manager of the disaster area. She never, ever relinquished that role (in fact, there was a big fight about that where the fed finally backed off). And with that role goes the determination of what goes where and when. It also has the role of granting or denying access to areas. If the state says, "don’t go", FEMA has no authority to override that.
FEMA/EPR disaster assistance falls into three general categories:
* Individual Assistance - aid to individuals and households; * Public Assistance - aid to public (and certain private non-profit) entities for certain emergency services and the repair or replacement of disaster-damaged public facilities; * Hazard Mitigation Assistance - funding for measures designed to reduce future losses to public and private property.
Note the key word in all of them, "assistance". It does not lead or manage the total effort. That remains with the state EOC (directed by the governor) unless he or she voluntarily gives that authority to the fed. She never did that.
The FCO also has responsibility to "coordinate ... activities of the State and local governments". Seems he didn’t do that very well, did he? In any event, I’m not sure that the lack of aid was restricted to those two locations. Perhaps they were. I don’t know.
He can’t "coordinate" what he doesn’t control.
What he can do is coordiante HIS ACTIVITY with that of the state and local governments. Or said another way, coordinate relief supplies and personnel in such a way that he amplifies their efforts or fills in where they don’t have a capability.
So aid to supplement what was already here was slow. So what? Once again, a nice discussion of how to try and improve the bureaucracy but what difference would it have made here if the food came from Texas? That is what I want to know. People nationwide are not worried because aid was 24 hours or whatever late in supplementing what was already here. Having food for people on Thursday or Friday wasn’t the issue, the state believes it can’t afford it and wants federal help, but push comes to shove food can be found. What people are shocked by is the image of thousands of people trapped in the Superdome and downtown New Orleans with no food or water and living in their own filth. Aid was available, why wans’t it delivered and why were people stuck there so long? That is the critical question. How was the quote Lokely gave speaking of ordering food for people in the convention center on Thursday relevant to that?
I don’t think anyone is arguing Jon that FEMA is somehow incapable of screwing up. I take it as a given that they did, I am not sure how one couldn’t given what was going on down here and I am pretty confident in the ability for them to screw up in the best of circumstances. I read the two articles you cite and he argues in them that he was hamstrung because of his dependence on other’s, specifically state and local authorities, ummm... not exactly different than McQ’s point is it? In fact I don’t see how the two articles support the thesis of the post except that on the legal obligations FEMA was there doing its job and so the fed must shoulder some of the blame. Okay, now what? Where was transportation and food Monday through Wednesday and who is at fault there. If that had been dealt with this would all be just another Hurricane and we would all still feel safe, though sad for New Orleans and the rest of the coast. What did FEMA do wrong then that was critical? Not saying they didn’t screw the pooch here, I just haven’t heard how yet.
Oh, and coordinate implies people willing or able to work with you. The state especially was unable and at times unwilling due to no plan of their own. Lokely points that out. Maybe he was an idiot and a hack, I don’t know the man, but I find it hard to believe that somehow the Bush administration left people who can’t tie their own shoes at every point along the way. That is comforting for liberals, and was comfortable for conservatives in the past. I am glad we are all comfortable with the idea that people who disagree with us are incompetent, but things still seem to run just about the same in aggregate. Or to put it another way Jamie Lee Witt seems like a pretty accomplished guy and he let a far smaller event like Hugo throw him off as bad or worse than what Katrina did and the locals were not nearly the problem they were here from what I can tell. I remember feeling he was being made a scapegoat then. How am I supposed to assess the far larger and faster response now?
Aid was available, but the State of LA refused to allow it be delivered. Actively asking Red Cross to not assist at the dome, et al.
The fact that Red Cross was kept out of NOLA because “Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city” didn’t help either and was an incredibly bad decision on LA DHS’s part.
If Red Cross had been allowed in to supply the Superdome, and the convention center, I do not think you would have seen the issues you had at those facilities, at least to the level of which you saw them. Instead of being concerned about saving lives, it seems they LADHS was more interested in encouraging people to leave New Orleans by actively not supplying the dome and convention center.
On the flip side, I can also understand that, due to the lack of security, sending Red Cross in there could have been a problem.
Jon, in looking at the deficiencies of the Federal response you conclude: "...aid still failed to materialize in a timely manner." Your goal is important: Federal oversight, but I’m confused by your terms, and their clarification may help you and your readers in the search for the Federal failings.
Call this a "heads-up" from an objectivist: any formula plotted on a graph whose X-axis is labelled "aid materialization," and Y-axis is named "timeliness" will be unsolveable because x and y can’t be clearly defined. It follows that a public policy that derives from this formula will be necessarily flawed.
First what do you mean by "Aid?" Is it evacuation, medical assistance, a daily 2000 calorie meal, a sheltered bed and eventual family reunification? Which one would you prioritize first? Or must it be the whole shebang?
Second, the intransitive verb, "materialize," is too vague to evince the answers you seek. I’ll demonstrate with a question. How much "aid" would have to reach how much of the population we call "effected" to qualify as "materialized?"
Last, the word "timely" further handicaps your inquiry. 24 hours, 36 hours, - or the Federally promised 72-96 hours, could all be called "untimely" by reasonable people.
I know a man’s choice of words is his own, but you may want to define, or change, your terms to get the specific answers that will better inform public policy. -Steve
Sorry, I guess I assumed Jon knew I meant what you are talking about as a deciding factor, others may not have followed my conversation from earlier posts. You are hitting the nail on the head. More aid in those first few hours might have made a difference, especially the aid right there. If they had been evacuated in a timely manner food might have been minimal, but people would have survived the ordeal that didn’t. I want Jon and anybody else anywhere to tell me what the feds could have done that they didn’t that would have made a difference at the critical times given the conditions as they were. This doesn’t seem to make any difference to that, though it might make a difference in making the department more efficient to address such missteps, assuming the characterization is accurate.
Sorry for bailing yesterday, guys, but, ah, I had to bail.
Suffice it to say that we’ll have to agree to disagee on how much responsibility and authority the Stafford Act gave FEMA (and Lokey). It seems to me that there were significant delays that should not have occurred, so either FEMAs appraisal was way off, or their delivery was. No doubt there’s a mix of all of it, at every level.
Ultimately, though, I don’t buy this idea that (in general) the State refused to tell FEMA what they needed and refused to let FEMA deliver the aid. Once the emergency declaration has been made, FEMA does have the authority to coordinate on their own—including the authority to "coordinate ... activities of the State and local governments"—so if aid wasn’t delivered properly, then there was a failure in coordination and/or appraisal. Well, why wasn’t the FEMA leader properly coordinating and appraising?
But what delays occurred were strictly within the emergency plan that the city signed off on. The city and state level emergency managers were explicitly warned within the plan THEY SIGNED...that no help would be coming from the federal government for between 72 and 96 hours after the event. And as you know I’ve already posted links to those reports.
Since they did arrive around 70 hours after the event, I still fail to see whose goals were not being met. If anything Fema exceeded expectations.
As opposed to the city, who didn’t follow thing one in the plan.
The Feds had the authority to take over the situation once the state and local authorities were overwhelmed. It says so in the National Emergency Response Plan. They didn’t do that.
The FEDs knew, via their simulation from last year, what the breach of the levees would do. The simulation was incredibly accurate, yet knowing that and seeing the incompetence at the state and local levels in the beginning of the crisis—they chose to not excercise their authority and take over.
We played the blame game at TwoBabesandaBrain and no one wants to admit that the Feds did anything wrong—some people are still saying FEMA got there within the 72 hours that is expected.
Who is to blame is less important than the fact that FEMA is the agency tasked with responding to disasters of all kinds—including terrorist attacks and we need to fix it. Since FEMA and Immigration have been folded into Homeland Security they have become too bogged down in layers of bureacratic (sp?) crap. We can play the blame game to find out what went wrong where so we can fix it. Until then I am stockpiling canned goods because I am pretty sure no one is coming for me the next time disaster strikes.
The Feds had the authority to take over the situation once the state and local authorities were overwhelmed. It says so in the National Emergency Response Plan. They didn’t do that.
Uh, no, they didn’t. They only have that power when the governor of the state in question relinquishes control, and none of the governors in the effected states did so.
The FEDs knew, via their simulation from last year, what the breach of the levees would do. The simulation was incredibly accurate, yet knowing that and seeing the incompetence at the state and local levels in the beginning of the crisis—they chose to not excercise their authority and take over.
I’m afraid the NRP does not superscede the Constitution of the United States although, given your argument, it appears you believe it does.
We played the blame game at TwoBabesandaBrain and no one wants to admit that the Feds did anything wrong—some people are still saying FEMA got there within the 72 hours that is expected.
No one here is going to say they didn’t do anything wrong, but we’re also not going to pretend they had power and authority they never had.
Who is to blame is less important than the fact that FEMA is the agency tasked with responding to disasters of all kinds—including terrorist attacks and we need to fix it.
Works for me ... but again, get the process and how it works straight before you start blaming people and agencies for something they have no authority or power over.
Until then I am stockpiling canned goods because I am pretty sure no one is coming for me the next time disaster strikes.
Actually that’s smart whether they fix it or not ... self-reliance ... whatta concept.
Ok I read the National Response Plan, I didn’t just pull that out of my butt it gives four instances where the FEDS assume power—one is when the state and locals are overwhelmed—here are the 4 1) a Federal department or agency acting under its own authority has requested DHS assistance; (2) the resources of State and local authorities are overwhelmed and Federal assistance has been requested; (3) more than one Federal department or agency has become substantially involved in responding to the incident; or (4) the Secretary has been directed to assume incident management responsibilities by the President.
So either 2 or 4 could have applied here.(Since the governor had already requested help and the President had declared a state of emergency) You needn’t get all snarky with me about it. I’m plenty self reliant, not sure how I’ll fair with the dirty bomb attack or a case of the plague, but you know, I guess we’ll see—
Ok I read the National Response Plan, I didn’t just pull that out of my butt
No one suggested you did. What was suggested is you may not fully understand what you read.
You needn’t get all snarky with me about it.
I didn’t, so how you decided to read it is your problem. Believe me, you’ll know when I get "all snarky".
There was never a moment in which the State of LA relinquished the control of the relief effort.
Just because the NPR says the fed can take control in certain instances doesn’t mean the state will give them the control the NPR says they can wield if certain conditions are met.
The part that everyone who reads the NPR misses is the state, who always has control over any relief effort in its boudaries, must relinquish control to the fed before the fed can take over managment responsibility.
You cannot "assume incident management responsiblities" of something you don’t control.
You may recall reports about a friday night fight between the feds and the state over the feds taking control and Blanco flatly refused to give up control.
