Hurricane Katrina's needless blame game

Everyone in the country is justifiably outraged about the conditions that millions in the hurricane zone have suffered. I can not begin to express my sympathy to those who had have lost their houses, their worldly belongings, and their lives. Naturally in situations like these people become angry and I am not just referring to those who have physically suffered. Granted that the situation has been such a monumental failure that it could only be achieved by a collaborative failure by the National Guard, FEMA, the city of New Orleans, the state of Louisiana, the Federal Government, and the White House. But I do think we have to relax on blaming any one or group. For the most part we are just seeing a variety of politicians attempting to further their own lot. Anger at any lack of action two days ago accomplishes nothing. What we can focus on is what can be done and how we can correctly assist as much as possible.

One of the most contentious issues has been the issue of race. All the images from New Orleans show an overwhelmingly black population stranded. The Black Congressional Caucus and NAACP has attempted to make this an issue of race, contending that the response would have been faster and better had the victims been white. But on the other side of the spectrum, the National Review's response to such concerns was needlessly biting and sarcastic:

Sadly, poverty and age have affected who got out and who didn’t, as many of the poor and elderly didn’t have cars or the resources to evacuate. Many of these people are black, but, pace Elijah Cummings, their skin color as such had nothing to do with whether they escaped the city.

If the federal response has seemed flat-footed, does anyone believe that President Bush got on the phone with the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Michael Brown, and said, “Hey, Michael, let’s slow-walk this thing — we’re talking about mostly black victims here”?

Apparently some people do believe it. According to Jesse Jackson, “Many black people feel that their race, their property conditions and their voting patterns have been a factor in the response.” Voting patterns! Louisiana voted for Bush and just elected a Republican U.S. senator. Is it plausible to think Bush wanted to watch the state’s major city sink into chaos for political reasons? Not to mention that the chairman of the Republican National Committee, Ken Mehlman, has devoted his chairmanship to winning more black voters.

I do think that had wealthy white Americans been the ones stranded they would end up better off in the long run. All you have to do is look at the response the Northridge earthquake got, in which the devestated Los Angeles highway system was completely repaired in a couple of years, versus the response to similar disasters in Oakland or Flordia. The basic reason that LA became a model of disaster response was because completely rebuilding LA's infrastructure was incredibly profitable.

But I reject the notion that if the residents of Brentwood or Beverly Hills were stranded in the identical situation of those in New Orleans that they would have recieved federal assistance any faster. The politics of the matter is just too clear. Bush had every reason to get down to New Orleans and help as much as he could. Showing leadership in any situation like this is simple, you get the media to tape you handing out water while you tour the carnage. I don't think it took Bush 5 days to do this because of the race of the victims. In fact if you want to get involved in the politics of this Bush would have more reason to help Lousiana blacks in comparison to wealthy white Californians. First, Lousiana is a swing-state that Republicans need to keep the White House. Second, Republicans are increasingly trying to woo black voters and it is in their interest to keep gaining 2-3% of black voters every year (especially considering that ideologically many blacks should be Republicans).

Obviously Bush has failed politically, this may play out in the mid-term elections (though that is unlikely). But I don't think we should jump the gun and blame the state of those in New Orleans on Bush's political gaffe. The very influential New York Times editorial page achieves nothing by inferring that the Iraqi war is the reason for the state of New Orleans. I also don't think we should blame it on looters, the hysterical Mayor Ray Nagin of New Orleans, FEMA, etc. There is a time for genuine reflection and eventual blame (think the 9/11 commission) and a time for action and solidarity.

-Mr. Alec

PS I strongly encourage people to donate some money. I know many who read this are poor cheap students, but you don't have to donate much. I gave $20 today, I gave $40 for the Tsunami relief.