Without requiring any additional details, it is painfully apparent that there is a massive failure of planning and coordination at all levels of government in the response to Hurricane Katrina, both before and after the storm struck.

Recently, I posted a link to a Scientific American article published in October of 2001 that predicted with remarkable accuracy the physical effects of a hurricane hitting along the path taken by Katrina.

Wired News has posted a Reuters article titled “They Knew What to Expect” that starts:

Virtually everything that has happened in New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina struck was predicted by experts and in computer models, so emergency management specialists wonder why authorities were so unprepared.

“The scenario of a major hurricane hitting New Orleans was well anticipated, predicted and drilled around,” said Clare Rubin, an emergency management consultant who also teaches at the Institute for Crisis, Disaster and Risk Management at George Washington University.

Later in the article:

“Disaster response teams developed action plans in critical areas such as search and rescue, medical care, sheltering, temporary housing, school restoration and debris management. These plans are essential for quick response to a hurricane but will also help in other emergencies,” he said.

In light of that, said disaster expert Bill Waugh of Georgia State University, “It’s inexplicable how unprepared for the flooding they were.” He said a slow decline over several years in funding for emergency management was partly to blame.

In comments on Thursday, President Bush said, “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.”

But LSU engineer Joseph Suhayda and others have warned for years that defenses could fail. In 2002, the New Orleans Times Picayune published a five-part series on “The Big One,” examining what might happen if they did.

It predicted that 200,000 people or more would be unwilling or unable to heed evacuation orders and thousands would die, that people would be housed in the Superdome, that aid workers would find it difficult to gain access to the city as roads became impassable, as well as many other of the consequences that actually unfolded after Katrina hit this week.

John of Castle Argghhh! has written on the difficulties inherent in any massive operation. I recommend you read his entire post (the logistical discussion commences after the updates at the top). Regarding his credentials on disaster planning, he writes:

My thoughts on the subject are informed by the fact that I spent two years as one of those guys in the Army whose job it was to do the generic plans for incident responses (from a DoD perspective, and *ALWAYS* subordinate to FEMA - they’re the Big Dog), designing and executing training events to rehearse the plans, and, now and then, implement them, though during that time there was no event ever approaching the magnitude of what’s happening in Louisiana right now. But ask me about that exercise we did with Seattle that resulted in 10,000 notional dead and injured, with a concomitant breakdown in social control… my point being - we actually *do* planning (or at least did) for events of this size.

Some of the New Madrid earthquake scenarios, especially the winter ones… were visions of Apocalypse. Imagine flattening good chunks of St. Louis and Memphis - in January. And losing the bridges over the Mississippi (which means you can’t barge people and equipment, either), and we don’t want to even *think* about the economic impact of losing the I-70 and I-40 bridges… much less the rail bridges.

The weather makes your response focus completely different, because the shelter requirements suddenly become astounding and compelling. You’re thinking tent cities in 10 degree weather become nightmares. Clothing, keeping pipes from freezing, sanitation…. I’m thinking 10,000 suddenly homeless people dumped into that weather… in the clothes they had on at the time… There’s no spending the night wandering around in a daze, because you’ll freeze to death before that - the looting starts 5 minutes after the shaking stops. It *has* to - because they aren’t going to live through the night otherwise. But I digress. If you are going to have disasters of this magnitude, the Gulf Coast is a moderately benign place to have them, weather-wise, but I digress again.

Later in the post, John faults both Governor Kathleen Blanco and President George W. Bush for not putting what he terms “the Public Face of the Government” forward to get out the information on the rescue and relief efforts, “Because Controlling The Perception of The Disaster in it’s early stages will help shape the form of the follow-on actions.” I stress that you must read the entire post to get his full meaning. The quotes here are far from adequate to explain his points.

A few days ago at my non-centrist weblog Radio Saigon I posted “Some thoughts… …on leadership“, which was written before the full extent of the disaster in New Orleans became clear. The post was intended to discuss the declining support for the war in Iraq and how that decline could be at least in some measure attributed to a failure of leadership on the part of President George W. Bush. The post starts with a statement of how “leadership” in the wake of the attacks on September 11, 2001, was comparatively easy:

There are many who like to extol the “leadership” shown by President George W. Bush in the aftermath of unprecedented terrorist attacks in 2001.

While not attempting to minimize the effects of the statements and gestures made by President Bush (along with other political leaders, statements and gestures often forgotten in the partisan fray), there is something that must be said:

On September 12, 2001, the task of “leadership” was easy.

When a population is in shock, seeking for reassurance that the world has not ended, that all is not lost, it is easy to be a “leader”, it is easy to ignore personal feelings and say, “Everything will be OK, there is someone in charge who will see things through.”

Ask any parent.

The inability of President Bush to convey complex messages in understandable terms is one of the root causes of the failure of his leadership, both in maintaining public support for the continuing war in Iraq along with the seemingly rudderless response to the aftermath of the New Orleans disaster.

As John pointed out, however, this failure of leadership exists at multiple levels of government. John faults Louisiana Governor Blanco along with President Bush. The problem is more widespread than merely those two levels.

For example, a recent interchange during an interview has gained much attention, as commented upon by Jack Shafer in Slate:

Last night, CNN’s Anderson Cooper abandoned the old persona to throttle Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., in a live interview. (See the video or read the transcript.)

“Does the federal government bear responsibility for what is happening now? Should they apologize for what is happening now?” Cooper opened.

As if campaigning before the local Democratic Ladies’ Club lunch, Landrieu sing-songed back, “Anderson, there will be plenty of time to discuss all of those issues, about why, and how, and what, and if.” She went on to thank President Bush, President Clinton, former President Bush, Senators Frist and Reid, and “all leaders that are coming to Louisiana, and Mississippi, and Alabama, “for their help.

Her condescending filibuster continued: “Anderson, tonight, I don’t know if you’ve heard—maybe you all have announced it—but Congress is going to an unprecedented session to pass a $10 billion supplemental bill tonight to keep FEMA and the Red Cross up and operating.”

Cooper suspended the traditional TV rules of decorum and, approaching tears of fury, said:

Excuse me, Senator, I’m sorry for interrupting. I haven’t heard that, because, for the last four days, I’ve been seeing dead bodies in the streets here in Mississippi. And to listen to politicians thanking each other and complimenting each other, you know, I got to tell you, there are a lot of people here who are very upset, and very angry, and very frustrated.

And when they hear politicians slap—you know, thanking one another, it just, you know, it kind of cuts them the wrong way right now, because literally there was a body on the streets of this town yesterday being eaten by rats because this woman had been laying in the street for 48 hours. And there’s not enough facilities to take her up.

Do you get the anger that is out here? …

I mean, I know you say there’s a time and a place for, kind of, you know, looking back, but this seems to be the time and the place. I mean, there are people who want answers, and there are people who want someone to stand up and say, “You know what? We should have done more. Are all the assets being brought to bear?”

Landrieu kept her cool, probably because she’s in Baton Rouge, while the stink of corpses caused Cooper to tremble in rage all the way to the commercial break.

I saw this interview live; it was painful.

The article continues to describe an aggressive (especially for the source) exchange on NPR between Robert Siegel and Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, refusing to allow Secretary Chertoff to dodge questions regarding why the situation in New Orleans was so dire. In this commentary piece, Shafer is discussing the context of reporters finally calling public officials on lies and stonewalling responses to questions.

There is another context here.

How is it that the failure is of such a large scope, involving all levels of government?

How is it that someone Senator Landrieu can spend time congratulating her fellows in Congress in a manner that Cooper almost called “back slapping”?

Who can be held accountable?

That question is the easiest one to answer in this entire tragedy.

To find who the American people should hold accountable, go to the nearest mirror and look into it.

We are proud that the United States is a democracy at all levels of government, city, county or parish, state, federal. All of those tasked with creating disaster plans, with coordinating activities between the different levels of government, with ultimately minimizing as much as reasonably possible the effects of disasters natural or man-made ultimately report to the voters, directly or indirectly.

So, who is accountable?

Those who chose the ones who call themselves our leaders.

Those who voted.

Those who voted for candidates who said what the voters wanted to hear instead of what they needed to hear.

Those who voted for their own regional concerns first and only incidentally thought about the nation as a whole.

Those who voted based on a single issue.

These leaders towards whom I am reading outrage from all sides were elected.

Only the voters can change things.

The objection always arises - one vote makes no difference.

One of the worlds greatest criminals, and ironically enough a man who led his nation into the industrial age, Josef Stalin, once said, “A single death is a tragedy; a million, a statistic.”

I offer this in response to the objection: A single cry for change is a voice in the wilderness; a million, a revolution.

The people of Lebanon and Ukraine peacefully forced change through against all odds. We have a stable system that they did not have, we have advantages they did not have, we can make changes through the ballot box.

Yet we refuse to change.

We can stop listening to the panderers and instead vote for those who do the real work of governing.

We can ignore the grandstanders.

We can change what we say we support when the pollsters call.

We can change our priorities.

We can change what we say when we write our government representatives, at all levels.

We can change things, but it is up to us.

It is past time we did so.

—

Cross-posted to Random Fate.

Technorati Tags: hurricane Katrina, hurricane Katrina news, New Orleans, news, patterns in the white noise, some thoughts