Via “Brad DeLong”:http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2005/09/new_orleanss_hu.html, a report from the _Times Picayune_ from July 24th of this year about the New Orleans city government’s plan for evacuating the city in the event of a major hurricane. The plan (presented here in full) was: 1. Make a video telling people that if disaster threatens they will have to get the fuck out of town themselves, because the city isn’t going to do anything to help out. 2. Distribute the video around town on DVD. This completes the evacuation plan.
In storm, N.O. wants no one left behind; Number of people without cars makes evacuation difficult By Bruce Nolan, Staff writer, New Orleans Times-Picayne, July 24, 2005
City, state and federal emergency officials are preparing to give the poorest of New Orleans’ poor a historically blunt message: In the event of a major hurricane, you’re on your own. In scripted appearances being recorded now, officials such as Mayor Ray Nagin, local Red Cross Executive Director Kay Wilkins and City Council President Oliver Thomas drive home the word that the city does not have the resources to move out of harm’s way an estimated 134,000 people without transportation.
In the video, made by the anti-poverty agency Total Community Action, they urge those people to make arrangements now by finding their own ways to leave the city in the event of an evacuation. “You’re responsible for your safety, and you should be responsible for the person next to you,” …
Officials are recording the evacuation message even as recent research by the University of New Orleans indicated that as many as 60 percent of the residents of most southeast Louisiana parishes would remain in their homes in the event of a Category 3 hurricane. Their message will be distributed on hundreds of DVDs across the city. …
In an interview at the opening of this year’s hurricane season, New Orleans Emergency Preparedness Director Joseph Matthews acknowledged that the city is overmatched. “It’s important to emphasize that we just don’t have the resources to take everybody out,” he said in a interview in late May.
So, the city told them in advance that they’d be left to drown like animals and FEMA were careful not to take any action — e.g., planning and executing a relief effort — to prevent this plan from being put into effect. It’s clear that the city and federal authorities were just made for each other. What a nightmare.
*Update*: Archpundit “has a lot more context”:http://www.archpundit.com/archives/012870.html (“1”:http://www.archpundit.com/archives/012866.html, “2”:http://www.archpundit.com/archives/012865.html, “3”:http://www.archpundit.com/archives/012864.html, “4”:http://www.archpundit.com/archives/012863.html, “5”:http://www.archpundit.com/archives/012862.html) on city, state and federal preparedness, notably on what was learned from Hurricane Ivan and how all of this speaks to current arguments over responsibility.
{ 28 comments }
ArchPundit 09.05.05 at 6:06 pm
You’re missing the point here Kieran–the City understood the problem that people won’t leave and were attempting to impress upon people that they needed to find their own way out and were specifically targeting poor people.
The problem is that no City has the infrastructure to go door to door and put 100,000 people on buses and get them out. The City understood this and attempted to improve on this.
During Ivan only 1200 people even showed up at the Superdome. Additionally, this was most likely the highest rate of evacuation ever–in a previous evacuation the highest % was 60%.
Given the basic facts the City faced, it improved the situation by such messages.
Kieran Healy 09.05.05 at 6:13 pm
Well, there are a couple of ways to interpet it. I mean, if you’re not going to be able to move people you should of course tell them. And I can see why the city as such wouldn’t have the resources to stage an evacuation. Like I said in the post, that’s what the Feds and the army are for. Beyond that, though, you have to ask whether this was really the only thing they did. I suppose we’ll hear a lot in the next few months about what, exactly, prevented levees from being strengthened or replaced over the years; whether NO and LA authorities have been hammering on the Federal door for years about these, or whether there was just slack everywhere.
Steve LaBonne 09.05.05 at 6:17 pm
Nagin is an ex-Republican business executive (who endorsed Jindal for the Senate and made no secret that his endorsement of Kerry was very reluctant). I suspect that before this disaster he really didn’t spend a whole lot of time thinking about the kind of people who couldn’t get out. I hope his eyes are open a bit wider now.
eudoxis 09.05.05 at 6:18 pm
The City of New Orleans website.
eudoxis 09.05.05 at 6:21 pm
The big plans at the City of New Orleans website.
ArchPundit 09.05.05 at 6:23 pm
Kieran, I have a series of posts up about the lessons learned from Ivan–which would have been far worse:
http://www.archpundit.com/archives/012870.html
Some posts before that list some select news stories between Ivan and now. It was quite fascinating to go and read.
Clark Goble 09.05.05 at 6:28 pm
While I think there’s a lot of blame to point at FEMA in all this, as well as the President’s and Congress’ reformulation of FEMA after 9/11. But surely FEMA has no authority due to the way the constitution is set up to simply create and implement a plan independent of the city and execute independent of the city authorities and especially the police.
Are you seriously suggesting President Bush should have violated the basic constitutional protections of states rights and ramroded the Governor and the Mayor? Wouldn’t that provoke a *huge* constitutional crisis? (With undoubtedly the Mayor and the Governor denying that what did happen would have happened?)
I notice that this weekend there already was an attempt by Bush to Federalize the situation, with the Governor rebuffing him.
While I think FEMA did some horrible things, the main fault seems to lie with local authorities for having no plan. For screwing things up once the disaster started. For stopping people from going into the area to rescue people. For letting the superdome situation occur. For having a police force where reportedly 1/2 to 2/3s went awol. For that situation of 200 schoolbuses sitting in water. For not having hospitals put their generators on the 3rd floor. For not having plans for hospitals and assisted care facilities. One could go on.
Further it seems like communication channels and who was in charge was never established. Most of the problems were due to bureaucracy. While FEMA is deserving of a whole lot of blame. Even if it was effective, there was a limit on what it could have done.
Clark Goble 09.05.05 at 6:28 pm
While I think there’s a lot of blame to point at FEMA in all this, as well as the President’s and Congress’ reformulation of FEMA after 9/11. But surely FEMA has no authority due to the way the constitution is set up to simply create and implement a plan independent of the city and execute independent of the city authorities and especially the police.
Are you seriously suggesting President Bush should have violated the basic constitutional protections of states rights and ramroded the Governor and the Mayor? Wouldn’t that provoke a *huge* constitutional crisis? (With undoubtedly the Mayor and the Governor denying that what did happen would have happened?)
I notice that this weekend there already was an attempt by Bush to Federalize the situation, with the Governor rebuffing him.
While I think FEMA did some horrible things, the main fault seems to lie with local authorities for having no plan. For screwing things up once the disaster started. For stopping people from going into the area to rescue people. For letting the superdome situation occur. For having a police force where reportedly 1/2 to 2/3s went awol. For that situation of 200 schoolbuses sitting in water. For not having hospitals put their generators on the 3rd floor. For not having plans for hospitals and assisted care facilities. One could go on.
Further it seems like communication channels and who was in charge was never established. Most of the problems were due to bureaucracy. While FEMA is deserving of a whole lot of blame. Even if it was effective, there was a limit on what it could have done.
Mary Catherine Moran 09.05.05 at 6:36 pm
Given this laissez-faire approach, the following is not so surprising.
CNN’s Drew Griffin:
“I am stunned by an interview I conducted with New Orleans Detective Lawrence Dupree. He told me they were trying to rescue people with a helicopter and the people were so poor they were afraid it would cost too much to get a ride and they had no money for a “ticket.” Dupree was shaken telling us the story. He just couldn’t believe these people were afraid they’d be charged for a rescue.”
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/05/scene.blog/index.html
Peter H 09.05.05 at 6:42 pm
Before anybody points the finger at Mayor Nagin, I’d recommend they go to Archpundit’s blog. It really does give you an excellent understanding of New Orleans’ decision-making process before Katrina, and how unrealistic it was to order a mass evacuation. Those pictures of the empty schoolbuses don’t tell you what a massive commitment of infrastructure and human resources a mass evacuation would have required:
http://www.archpundit.com/
David 09.05.05 at 6:48 pm
Think through the logistics here. Airlifting a hundred thousand people out of NO [not to mention those in the ‘burbs] on–what–48 hours’ notice at most? [Armstrong International normally handles half a million a month]–involving tracking people down and making sure they got to the airport, to boot? And at a time when commercial airliners were stranding tourists and conventioneers by cancelling flights because of the approaching storm? Sorry, but this sounds to me like a recipe for major disaster.
In fact, the plan as discussed in the full article [including the parts you don’t quote here] was considerably different from “every man for himself.” Basically, the proposal was to get people to put carpool plans together, drawing on their community and family ties, i.e. those who’d know them and would make sure they got out. Sounds to me like a much better approach than a last-minute airlift, with all the attendant ground logistics and communications problems–PROVIDED IT WAS WELL THOUGHT OUT AND WELL ORGANIZED IN ADVANCE.
The big problem was the half-assed execution; properly done, such a scheme would require the sort of citywide coordination of community organizations that had only barely begun to be developed. The important thing was to have means in place IN ADVANCE by which people without their own transportation could get out, and could get word that they needed to go. This might’ve worked, and worked much better than a massive, last-minute airlift; but since they didn’t have it in place, it didn’t work at all.
Crystal 09.05.05 at 7:29 pm
From what I understand, many of New Orleans’ poor do not own cars. There’s one weak link in the “call upon your social network” connection. Then there’s the fact that many of the evacuees were elderly, disabled, and/or had large families. One family might have, say, five kids, grandma with her walker and oxygen tank, and a dog and cat they cannot bear to leave behind. Multiply that by three and cram them all into a Neon. And on top of it, there’s always a possibility that a cop might be in an asshattish mood and give the driver a ticket for not having all the kids in carseats or something.
While a mass airlift or bus platoon may not have been practical, I don’t know that neighborhood carpooling would have worked in New Orleans either. I believe there were too few cars and too many people. What is undeniable is that just leaving them to literally sink or swim was unconscionable.
Michael Cross 09.05.05 at 7:35 pm
The New Orleans “plan” was prescient. The US government also tells the poor they are on their own: on their own in natural disasters; on their own in health crises; on their own in retirement; on their own in finding housing etc., etc.
The rest of the world should shout loudly to the US government: “Don’t you dare, don’t you ever dare, to tell anyone, anywhere, how to run their affairs! Don’t you dare pretend you are spreading freedom when you are condemning your own people to die in filthy flood waters! Don’t you dare!”
jet 09.05.05 at 7:46 pm
Not sure how big a deal this will turn out to be, but I saw on Fox that while the MS governor immediately declared martial law and called in the national guard, LA declared their equivalent to martial law but was hesitant to give police powers to their national guard. I wonder if the police being left to hang without military support was a major reason they quit?
Matt 09.05.05 at 8:16 pm
Do many people who don’t have cars have DVD players? I’m not asking to be smart here, I’m really wondering. I don’t have a car and I have a DVD player, but that’s because I don’t really need a car and it would be more trouble than good to me where I live and someone gave me a DVD player. But, it seems possible to me that many people who don’t have cars might not have DVD players. Why not just show this on TV? I don’t really get it. Do others have any idea on this?
y81 09.05.05 at 8:43 pm
Well, michael cross, obviously you feel strongly, for reasons unclear, but your case would be more persuasive if you explained how much better the French government treats its old people without air conditioners.
ArchPundit 09.05.05 at 8:58 pm
Let me state clearly that while I’ve watched Nagin a lot during the time, I doubt anyone is blameless–everyone has some fault in this, but I think scapegoating him as the primary person is unfair.
In terms of FEMA and the Constitutional argument, sure, there could be some technical legal issues there, but Blanco asked for federal help on the 27th and FEMA was just getting in touch with some parishes and towns in Mississippi on Saturday. Blanco certainly has made some significant mistakes and I don’t hold her blameless at all, but if you are the President, don’t you call and ask if you can send some rescue helicopters from Northcom?
Add to that FEMA’s issues of blocking several things like deliveries and it seems hard to say the Feds weren’t already controlling a lot of those decisions so in that case–aren’t they already in a position of taking some control? I’m honestly confused about that.
There’s a lot more we’ll learn and like I said, no one is going to come out looking good.
On the DVDs—the problem is that to get a station to run it is really hard. And honestly, if its on over the air, people will turn it off.
I’ve done some evaluation work on trying to reach similar audiences with some child care programming and the focus group findings were that there were specific media you could hit with short messages, but longer programs would be ignored.
Second, the target was churches and other organizations first—remember the idea was to create networks were people could make plans with fellow church members. The other thing–DVDs are relatively cheap to reproduce compared to other types of communication.
bob mcmanus 09.05.05 at 8:58 pm
“But, it seems possible to me that many people who don’t have cars might not have DVD players.”
You can get a decent new DVD player for less than $50. Computer units, S30-40. Aftermarket, such as it is, $10-20. In a given neighborhood, I would expect there to be quite a few, for sharing.
sara 09.05.05 at 9:11 pm
McManus: as I understand it, many of these people lived at a poverty level where they might not have $10 at their free disposal, let alone $50.
The media by giving the impression that all inner-city black people are criminals and drug dealers has also given the impression that all of them have a lot of ill-gotten money to dispose of.
Tom T. 09.05.05 at 9:48 pm
Not everyone has to see the DVD firsthand. They may have thought that as long as they could get it out to people and organizations (churches, bars, barber/beauty shops) that do have DVD players, combined with showings at schools and local political meetings, the city’s message would have spread through the community.
(This is not to say that the distribution of the DVD was an adequate response, or that government at all levels should not have done more. I’m just addressing the not-everyone-has-DVD-players point).
Stephen M (Ethesis) 09.05.05 at 10:04 pm
McManus: as I understand it, many of these people lived at a poverty level where they might not have $10 at their free disposal, let alone $50.
Very, very, very true.
BTW, most drug dealers make so little net that they live at home with their mothers — though it is important to remember that most of these people (the huge, huge majority) are not drug dealers or any other kind of criminal.
(People can’t survive by selling drugs to each other any more than you can get full employment by having everyone wash their neighbor’s laundry).
BTW, is there a reliable central site that tells how many refugees are going to each state. It is pretty easy to find out how many are going to Dallas, but hard to determine how many are going to San Francisco (for example) or Portland.
Thanks!
Walt Pohl 09.05.05 at 10:27 pm
y81, you are so obsessed with France, you’d clearly be happier living there.
Dylan 09.05.05 at 11:13 pm
Evacuation was never going to be practical. If you call the evacuation, however well organized, in time you’re calling it when the odds of the storm hitting are still pretty low. While the rational individual will leave when told there’s a 10% chance he’s going to drown if he stays at home, the rational government cannot spend this much money and mobilize this many resources to move this many people out on a 10% chance. It’s just politically impossible.
And whatever you want to say about the rescue efforts since Monday, if the huuricane hadn’t weakened and shifted east, there would be ALMOST NO ONE TO RESCUE. Of the three phases that had to go wrong for this to happen, (1) prevention, (2) evacuation, and (3) response, only the first had any realistic possibility of stopping a mass tragedy if NO number came up in the hurricane roulette wheel. And if someone deserves the blame for not building higher and thicker levees, that blame is spread over several decades, two political parties, and three levels of government.
bad Jim 09.06.05 at 3:00 am
In other words, there’s nothing to be done. While it’s possible that the city could have been saved had we been as practical and efficient as the Dutch, we’re not. We’re Americans, the greatest nation on the planet, but we can’t actually take care of problems we’ve known about for decades.
Since there was nothing anyone could do to prevent this from happening, it’s perfectly clear that once it did happen no one should be blamed for a nearly complete failure to offer timely aid and assistance to the survivors, even though we’ve demonstrated such an ability on numerous occasions in the recent past.
Firebug 09.06.05 at 4:11 am
clark goble: While I think there’s a lot of blame to point at FEMA in all this, as well as the President’s and Congress’ reformulation of FEMA after 9/11. But surely FEMA has no authority due to the way the constitution is set up to simply create and implement a plan independent of the city and execute independent of the city authorities and especially the police.
Oh please. The Constitution hasn’t been interpreted that way since the 1930s, despite what you might fervently desire. Whether you agree or not, the vast majority of Americans do believe that disaster relief should be a Federal responsibility. First and foremost, only the Feds actually have the resources to perform these functions.
Bruce Baugh 09.06.05 at 5:13 am
I know I’m not the first to point this out, but…
Objections in the general form of “there’s no clear constitutional authority for…” aren’t valid when delivered on behalf of the Bush administration. Bush explicitly claims unlimited power with regard to matters of national security, and if anything is, surely the largest port in the country and 25% of our oil refining capacity is. Certainly jurisdiction over it has been assigned to the agency made specifically for matters of national security. If the survival of New Orleans and its people matter to the war effort, then the Bush administration has complete authority to do as it wishes – to require New Orleans and Louisiana to make plans and pay for them, to run its own plan, to requisition forces, to deputize forces, anything at all.
It doesn’t much matter whether I personally agree with the general doctrine of presidential supremacy in times like this. The fact is that Bush does, and his attorneys back him up, and the whole weight of the executive is behind it, and the legislative seems to be willing to along with it. So they have no excuse by their actual standard for this kind of problem.
The question of what some other administration with a different view of executive power might do is an altogether separate issue.
SJ 09.06.05 at 7:39 am
Michael Cross says:
I think that most of the world, the UK and Australia excepted, woke up to that two years ago.
Stephen M (Ethesis) 09.07.05 at 9:42 pm
y81, you are so obsessed with France, you’d clearly be happier living there.
So? Paris is delightful. With enough money, most people would be very happy to live there.
Given the lack of free money, I prefer to live in Texas, but one on one and in small groups (heck, even large ones) the French these days are enjoyable to be around and France is pleasant.
Comments on this entry are closed.