$200 billion government bribe for New Orleans

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten


It is a bit strange that Louisiana's diversion of federal funds into pork-barrel projects instead of sensible projects to protect New Orleans will result in an unprecedented windfall of pork for the state.

And isn't it also funny that the Federal government refused to allot funds to upgrade the levees around New Orleans to Category 4-proof?

But the richies needed their tax cuts to buy new Mercedes!

[Drake Tungsten]

And isn't it also funny that the Federal government refused to allot funds to upgrade the levees around New Orleans to Category 4-proof?

You need to get your facts straight. Louisiana got more funds for Army Corps of Engineers projects than any other state in the Union. If they had really wanted to build Cat-4 proof levees for New Orleans, they had the cash for it.

[Theben]

Dan is right about one thing tho, a good chunk of the money will be siphoned off for local pork.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Budget cuts delayed New Orleans flood control work By Andy Sullivan
Thu Sep 1, 7:33 PM ET



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Bush administration funding cuts forced federal engineers to delay improvements on the levees, floodgates and pumping stations that failed to protect New Orleans from Hurricane Katrina's floodwaters, agency documents showed on Thursday.

The former head of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the agency that handles the infrastructure of the nation's waterways, said the damage in New Orleans probably would have been much less extensive had flood-control efforts been fully funded over the years.

"Levees would have been higher, levees would have been bigger, there would have been other pumps put in," said Mike Parker, a former Mississippi congressman who headed the engineering agency from 2001 to 2002.

"I'm not saying it would have been totally alleviated but it would have been less than the damage that we have got now."

Eighty percent of New Orleans was under water after Katrina blew through with much of the flooding coming after two levees broke.

A May 2005 Corps memo said that funding levels for fiscal years 2005 and 2006 would not be enough to pay for new construction on the levees.

Agency officials said on Thursday in a conference call that delayed work was not related to the breakdown in the levee system and Parker told Reuters the funding problems could not be blamed on the Bush administration alone.

Parker said a project dating to 1965 remains unfinished and that any recent projects would not have been in place by the time the hurricane struck even if they had been fully funded.

"If we do stuff now it's not going to have an effect tomorrow," Parker said. "These projects are huge, they're expensive and they're not sexy."

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the administration had funded flood control efforts adequately.

Tensions over funding for the New Orleans levees emerged more than a year ago when a local official asserted money had been diverted to pay for the Iraq war. In early 2002, Parker told the U.S. Congress that the war on terrorism required spending cuts elsewhere in government.

Situated below sea level, New Orleans relied on a 300-mile

network of levees, floodgates and pumps to hold back the waters of the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain.

Levees were fortified after floods in 1927 and 1965, and Congress approved another ambitious upgrade after a 1995 flood killed six people.

Since 2001, the Army Corps has requested $496 million for that project but the Bush administration only budgeted $166 million, according to figures provided by the office of Louisiana Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu (news, bio, voting record).

Congress ultimately approved $250 million for the project during that time period.

Another project designed to shore up defenses along Lake Pontchartrain was similarly underfunded, as the administration budgeted $22 million of the $99 million requested by the Corps between 2001 and 2005. Congress boosted spending on that project to $42.5 million, according to Landrieu's office.

"It's clear that we didn't do everything we could to safeguard ourselves from this hurricane or from a natural disaster such as Katrina but hopefully we will learn and be more prepared next time," said Landrieu spokesman Brian Richardson.

The levee defenses had been designed to withstand a milder Category Three hurricane and simply were overwhelmed by Hurricane Katrina, said senior project manager Al Naomi.

"The design was not adequate to protect against a storm of this nature because we were not authorized to provide a Category Four or Five protection design," he said.

A study examining a possible upgrade is under way, he said.

Drake, I'm getting tired of proving you wrong.

[Theben]

There was another thread where it was posted the USACE had squandered their funding, and that's why it was getting cut.

Not notably, both links break down on left-right agendas.

[Drake Tungsten]

Drake, I'm getting tired of proving you wrong.

How can one get tired of something one's never done?

Before Hurricane Katrina breached a levee on the New Orleans Industrial Canal, the Army Corps of Engineers had already launched a $748 million construction project at that very location. But the project had nothing to do with flood control. The Corps was building a huge new lock for the canal, an effort to accommodate steadily increasing barge traffic.

Except that barge traffic on the canal has been steadily decreasing.

In Katrina's wake, Louisiana politicians and other critics have complained about paltry funding for the Army Corps in general and Louisiana projects in particular. But over the five years of President Bush's administration, Louisiana has received far more money for Corps civil works projects than any other state, about $1.9 billion; California was a distant second with less than $1.4 billion, even though its population is more than seven times as large.

Much of that Louisiana money was spent to try to keep low-lying New Orleans dry. But hundreds of millions of dollars have gone to unrelated water projects demanded by the state's congressional delegation and approved by the Corps, often after economic analyses that turned out to be inaccurate. Despite a series of independent investigations criticizing Army Corps construction projects as wasteful pork-barrel spending, Louisiana's representatives have kept bringing home the bacon.

For example, after a $194 million deepening project for the Port of Iberia flunked a Corps cost-benefit analysis, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) tucked language into an emergency Iraq spending bill ordering the agency to redo its calculations. The Corps also spends tens of millions of dollars a year dredging little-used waterways such as the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, the Atchafalaya River and the Red River -- now known as the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, in honor of the project's congressional godfather -- for barge traffic that is less than forecast.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/07/AR2005090702462.html

Educate yourself, man...

[DinoDoc]

You might want to find a better source than Mike Parker. He's had an ax to grind since being tossed out on his ass. Anyway dueling articles:

Army's engineers spent millions on Louisiana projects labeled as pork
Michael Grunwald, Washington Post

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Before Hurricane Katrina breached a levee on the New Orleans Industrial Canal, the Army Corps of Engineers had launched a $748 million construction project at that very location. But the project had nothing to do with flood control. The Corps was building a massive new lock for the canal, an effort to accommodate steadily increasing barge traffic.

Except barge traffic on the canal has been steadily decreasing.

In Katrina's wake, Louisiana politicians and other critics have complained about paltry funding for the Army Corps in general and Louisiana projects in particular. But over the five years of President Bush's administration, Louisiana has received far more money for Corps civil works projects than any other state, about $1.9 billion; California was a distant second with less than $1.4 billion, even though its population is more than seven times larger.

Much of that Louisiana money was spent to try to keep low-lying New Orleans dry. But hundreds of millions of dollars have gone to unrelated water projects demanded by the state's congressional delegation and approved by the Corps, often after economic analyses that turned out to be inaccurate. Despite a series of independent investigations criticizing Army Corps construction projects as wasteful pork-barrel spending, Louisiana's representatives have kept bringing home the bacon.

For example, after a $194 million deepening project for the Port of Iberia flunked a Corps cost-benefit analysis, Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., tucked language into an emergency Iraq spending bill ordering the agency to redo its calculations. The Corps also spends tens of millions of dollars a year dredging little-used waterways like the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, the Atchafalaya River and the Red River -- now known as the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, in honor of the project's congressional godfather -- for barge traffic that turns out to be less than forecast.

Most controversial

The Industrial Canal lock is one of the agency's most controversial projects, sued by residents of a New Orleans low-income black neighborhood and cited by an alliance of environmentalists and taxpayer advocates as the fifth-worst current Corps boondoggle. In 1998, the Corps justified its plan to build a new lock -- rather than fix the old lock for a tiny fraction of the cost -- by predicting huge increases in barge traffic.

In fact, barge traffic on the canal had been plummeting since 1994, but the Corps left that data out of its study. And barges have continued to avoid the canal since the study was finished, even though they are visiting the port in increased numbers.

Pam Dashiell, president of the Holy Cross Neighborhood Association, remembers holding a protest against the lock four years ago -- right where the levee broke last week. Now she's holed up with her family in a St. Louis hotel, and her neighborhood is underwater. "Our politicians never cared half as much about protecting us as they cared about pork," she said.

Wednesday, congressional defenders of the Corps said they hoped the fallout from Hurricane Katrina would pave the way for billions of dollars of additional spending on water projects. Steve Ellis, a Corps critic with Taxpayers for Common Sense, called their push "the legislative equivalent of looting."

Louisiana's politicians have requested much more money for New Orleans hurricane protection than the Bush administration has proposed or Congress has provided. In the last budget bill, Louisiana's delegation requested $27.1 million for shoring up levees around Lake Pontchartrain, the full amount the Corps had declared as its "project capability." Bush suggested $3.9 million, and Congress agreed to spend $5.7 million.

Administration officials also scaled back a long-term project to restore Louisiana's disappearing coastal marshes, which once provided a measure of natural hurricane protection for New Orleans. They ordered the Corps to stop work on a $14 billion plan and devise a $2 billion plan instead.

Levees only so strong

But overall, the Bush administration's funding requests for the key New Orleans flood-control projects for the past five years were slightly higher than the Clinton administration's for its past five years. Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, the chief of the Corps, has said that in any event, more money would not have prevented the drowning of the city, since its levees were only designed to protect against a Category 3 storm. Strock also has said the marsh restoration project would not have done much to diminish Katrina's storm surge, which passed east of the coastal wetlands.

"The project manager for the Great Pyramids probably put in a request for 100 million shekels and only got 50 million," said John Paul Woodley Jr., the Bush administration official overseeing the Corps. "Flood protection is always a work in progress; on any given day, if you ask whether any community has all the protection it needs, the answer is almost always: Maybe, but maybe not."

The Corps had been studying the possibility of upgrading the New Orleans levees for a higher level of protection before Katrina hit, but Woodley said that study would not have been finished for years. Still, liberal bloggers, Democratic politicians and some Republican defenders of the Corps have linked the catastrophe to the underfunding of the agency.

"We've been hollering about funding for years, but everyone would say: There goes Louisiana again, asking for more money," said former Democratic senator John Breaux. "We've had some powerful people in powerful places, but we never got what we needed."

http://www.startribune.com/stories/125/5602732.html

[Spiffor]

This policy is consistent with the rest of Bush's economic policies. Bush (like Reagan btw) had the State make considerable budgetary sacrifices in order to help the economy by artificially creating demand. This is one of the reasons why your military budget has been so bloated under Bush.
It also had a significant effect on your growth, considering that the military industrial complex is the kind of activity where not too much public money is seeping out abroad.

Now, Bush is willing to help economic growth again with a big and short jolt. 200 billion in a few months are serious money, and it will make quite a difference ion the US economy. And for once, it will be for peaceful ends, instead of war.

I'm waiting for your next "Let the good times roll" threads, where you'll gloat about the huge number of new jobs and about the large economic growth. The motto of NOLA will never be as appropriate

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Drake, I'm getting tired of proving you wrong.

How can one get tired of something one's never done?

Actually, one HAS done, with your liitle blog linkie thingy that said Hurricanes frequency and power were decreasing (which they aren't).

Lets go for an older article:

In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal funding.

It would be the largest single-year funding loss ever for the New Orleans district, Corps officials said.

I've been here over 30 years and I've never seen this level of reduction, said Al Naomi, project manager for the New Orleans district. I think part of the problem is it's not so much the reduction, it's the drastic reduction in one fiscal year. It's the immediacy of the reduction that I think is the hardest thing to adapt to.

There is an economic ripple effect, too. The cuts mean major hurricane and flood protection projects will not be awarded to local engineering firms. Also, a study to determine ways to protect the region from a Category 5 hurricane has been shelved for now.

Money is so tight the New Orleans district, which employs 1,300 people, instituted a hiring freeze last month on all positions. The freeze is the first of its kind in about 10 years, said Marcia Demma, chief of the Corps' Programs Management Branch.

Stephen Jeselink, interim commander of the New Orleans Corps district, told employees in an internal e-mail dated May 25 that the district is experiencing financial challenges. Execution of our available funds must be dealt with through prudent districtwide management decisions. In addition to a hiring freeze, Jeselink canceled the annual Corps picnic held every June.

From the Wiki:

From 2001 through 2005, the Bush administration battled with Congress to cut a total of approximately 67% from the budgetary requests from the Army Corps of Engineers for levee augmentation projects in the New Orleans area, but ultimately settled with Congress on a mere 50% cut in these budgetary requests

And don't you think, perhaps, that the reason LA got more money is because it NEEDED more money? And that, just maybe, since its money was CUT, it didn't have what it NEEDED?

[Drake Tungsten]

Actually, one HAS done, with your liitle blog linkie thingy that said Hurricanes frequency and power were decreasing (which they aren't).

It said no such thing and neither did I. It's not hard to prove someone "wrong" when you either don't understand what they're saying or claim that they are saying something that they aren't.

[Mr. Harley]

DanS - I told you so. The Neocons are not the Republican party of strong defense plus limited and balanced budgets. Instead they and the Neopuritans (those who want to pass laws imposing their moral decisions on others) have made a Devil's pact. You're just seeing it.

This is NOT Reagan's party, I listened to a recording of one his speeches recently where he stated while he felt his opponents were wrong, he knew they were just as patriotic as they were. Compare that to what comes out of Karl Rove's machine. FYI, when I vote in my local Republican primaries, first I vote on family values (that is between me and God so if you want to butt in, I'll vote against you). Next, I look for somebody who believes in balanced budgets versus simple tax-cut rhetoric. Failing that, and it just happened to me last year in a three way House Primary (we had an open seat) - I look for somebody who is willing to admit that maybe, just maybe the Bush adminstration has some misplaced priorities. The guy stating that won, and was the best I could vote on. Our district is fairly red.

[Ted Striker]

Shawn said it right.

This is not the party of McCain, Dole, and Lugar.

This is the neo-cons, plain and simple. Anyone that refuses to play the game is squashed.

Utterly immoral corruption is all over the board in Iraq, meanwhile taking care of our own people is a sin and spending needs to be capped??

It's time to roll back the tax cuts. How long can we sustain this? It's why crap like Iraq is so reckless. It puts you in a situation where it gives you less room to respond to unplanned emergencies. You don't go looking for trouble because trouble comes looking for you. In this case, Katrina got a third round knockout. Let's help something else doesn't sweep in for the TKO.

[Drake Tungsten]

This is the neo-cons, plain and simple.

Neo-cons had nothing to do with this, I assure you.

[Ted Striker]

okay

[Drake Tungsten]

The only reason you think they're involved is that you and shawn have no idea what a neo-conservative actually is...