A.M. in the Morning!

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

Are Progressives and Tancredo Singing from Similar Song Sheet?

by Ana Maria

Over the course of the 18 months or so after Katrina, I just couldn’t really understand what was taking so damned long for my family and friends to get it together. Good God already. Deal with the insurance companies. Play rough. Keep calling FEMA. Geeze, Louise!

It’s a hurricane like we’ve been through many times before. Heck, if we can survive Camille, I mean, goodness gracious alive.

Of course, I thought this from the comfort of my very lovely apartment in the heart of Silicon Valley. I thought this as I spoke to my family from my cell phone as I lay in the sun by one of the three sparkling pools in my complex. I reflected on this as I drank a Starbucks frappuccino in the middle of a relaxing 3-mile walk around my neat, orderly, well-maintained community in North San Jose.

Then in March of this year, I arrived in the heart of Katrina Land, ground zero for Katrina itself. My utter ignorance became apparent immediately. I’m days away from the six-month mark being here helping to put back together my elderly mother’s home. I’ve chronicled that journey on my blog A.M. in the Morning! which began as an outlet for my frustrations with the conditions with which my family members and friends here in Mississippi and throughout the New Orleans area must deal. It’s also a way to channel much needed political energy into helping get the resources we need to complete the job we desire AND to prevent our horrors from befalling other American families and businesses.

Friends outside of Katrina Land encouraged me to write what I was experiencing, witnessing, concluding. They told me that the MSM just doesn’t convey these critical pieces of information, and Americans care when we are shown a need. However, the drumming of “Katrina fatigue” beats on. Enter Tancredo.

Last week, Republican Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo grabbed the headlines with his “Enough is enough” declaration regarding federal aid in the Katrina-ravaged region. He is oblivious to or couldn’t care less about the reasons that this American region still suffers tremendously and in many directions and that the federal recovery efforts to date have been insufficient to put us back to our knees.

At the 2nd anniversary commemoration last week, Waveland Mayor Tommy Longo stated succinctly that we don’t want a hand out, just a hand up to get to our knees and that we can get to our feet from there. From New Orleans clear through the Mississippi Gulf Coast and over to Bayou LeBatre Alabama, we’re still not yet to our knees. I guess that’s a great place to be for people like Tancredo who choose to kick us in the teeth. I expect as much from people like Tancredo to turn their backs on their fellow Americans. Tancredo is a compassionless conservative.

In a rather disconcerting way, though, a comment on one of my posts on Daily Kos the other day forced me to look at what has been nagging at me for a while.

And it steams me that, once again, a post about Katrina and the misery the people of the Gulf Coast are enduring right now, sinks to the bottom so quickly.

Ho hum. It's just another post about Katrina. No need to reply. It's so -- Yesterday-- isn't it?

Is this poster accurate? Are progressives singing from a similar song sheet as Tancredo?

An excerpt of the mainstream media’s article on Tancredo received 254 comments. No analysis. No rebuttal. No discussion of real life in today’s Katrina region. No means through which to channel the political outrage that his comment created.

Primarily the entry excerpted Tancredo’s latest stupidity. Bam! Plenty of interaction.

OK it’s a posting from Kos himself, but still, I do believe that there is something missing. An article about yet another Republican bafoon garners hundreds of responses in what appears as a knee-jerk reaction from my side of the fence, at least to me as a progressive who is now deeply inside of Katrina reality. Other posts about real post-Katrina life and positive political action to take to remedy the situation . . . “sinks to the bottom so quickly”.

I just wonder. Katrina embodies every aspect of what is wrong with the Bush Administration and everything that is wonderful about the American people. When disaster hits, we’re generous with our time and money. We are doers and want to solve problems.

Bush leaves it up to the charity of our people to take care of completely heretofore government responsibilities such as emergency response and infrastructure. Bush creates disaster (i.e. Iraq) and is generous with our tax money to fund it and the time and lives of our soldiers who would rather be home with their families and friends. o on and so forth.

Again, I wonder about that one comment on my posting.

As progressives, are we only into the façade of political engagement particularly if its anti-something and we can demonstrate quickly our latest verbal prowess channeling our immense frustration into an arena that will bear no real political fruit from which we can eat nor any real political consequence to the object of our distain?

Maybe I’m just a bit weary. I’ve only been here in the heart of Katrina Land just a hair under six months, and I’m feeling the weight of it. My three brothers have put in gobs more months and time and effort than I have. They jokingly welcome me to the real 'Katrina-fatigued' club.

Everything is simply labor and time intensive. Nerves are frayed. Convenience is a distant memory, and we’re among the lucky throughout the region. This is hard, and I didn't even go through the storm itself or the immediate aftermath of dealing with Dirt, Dead Bodies, and White House Dirt Bags.

I supposed that I’m definitely suffering from a momentary lapse into Katrina-fatigue— that overwhelming sense that this is just never going to end, that our recovery is merely a political punch line to be used by left and right alike without any regard to doing what needs doing.

When it comes to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, though, I do wonder whether we are as guilty as the next of looking only for the attention grabbing headlines through which to channel our great frustration with a thoroughly corrupt administration as well as our lack of political savvy to achieve the goals we desire or the persistence to achieve them over time. An immediate sense of gratification for having shown someone something—even if it is anyone but those that hold the levers of political power.

Today, many of the soldiers in Iraq come from the Katrina-ravaged region: Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama. We care greatly about ending the war, so perhaps we can take care of these soldiers and their families inside the Katrina region while also seeking ways to create the big political momentum needed to end the catastrophe that is Bush’s Iraq.

Personally, I cannot imagine how it must feel for these soldiers who are being sent to work day and night to rebuild a country that Bush destroyed all the while Bush’s insurance buddies are allowed to destroy the financial security of the families of these very same soldiers?!

When we talk of insurance companies deliberately not paying on the WIND policies, we’re also talking about men and women in Iraq whose homes were destroyed here in the Gulf Coast Katrina Region and whose insurance companies are not paying up on the wind-related damages. Perhaps we can contact our elected officials to support the proposal that will help Americans—including soldiers in Iraq—purchase wind and flood coverage in ONE policy and avoid the great rip off that the insurance industry has engaged in.

Clearly the Tancredos of the world are using Katrina as a punch line to grab media attention. Progressives can throw out that song sheet and sing a different tune to help everyone—including our beloved soldiers in Iraq—by helping to spur economic recovery down here through helping every family and business purchase a single and affordable policy for both wind and flood coverage. This will help revive the American Dream for the Katrina region. When it comes to helping our soldiers who live here, this becomes a rather delightfully patriotic act, too. Progressively patriotic.

Now that's a tune worth singing.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Fiore Animated Cartoon: The Doctor

Click to play The Doctor comic video regarding healthcare in post-Katrina New Orleans.

Mark Fiore is a San Francisco cartoonist and animator whose work also appears in the Washington Post, L.A. Times, San Francisco Chronicle, and other publications.

___________________________________________

Broadening Katrina’s Lens: A Five-Part Series
Part 1: Broadening Katrina's Lens
Part 2: Recovery’s Two Major Impediments: $$$ and the "F" word
Part 3: The "F" Word: FEMA
Part 4: Katrina’s Bigger Picture
Part 5: Katrina’s Karmic Payback: Insurance Reform
___________________________________________

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Paul Krugman: The New American Way

PAUL KRUGMAN

09/04/2007 PDT

Two years ago, Americans watched in horror as a great city drowned, and wondered what had happened to their country. Where was FEMA? Where was the National Guard? Why wasn't the government of the world's richest, most powerful nation coming to the aid of its citizens?

What we mostly saw on TV was the nightmarish scene at the Superdome, but things were even worse at the New Orleans convention center, where thousands were stranded without food or water. The levees were breached Monday morning — but as late as Thursday evening, The Washington Post reported, the convention center "still had no visible government presence," while "corpses lay out in the open among wailing babies and other refugees."

Meanwhile, federal officials were oblivious.

"We are extremely pleased with the response that every element of the federal government, all of our federal partners, have made to this terrible tragedy," declared Michael Chertoff, the secretary for Homeland Security, on Wednesday. When asked the next day about the situation at the convention center, he dismissed the reports as "a rumor."

Today, much of the Gulf Coast remains in ruins. Less than half the federal money set aside for rebuilding — as opposed to emergency relief — has actually been spent, in part because the Bush administration refused to waive the requirement that local governments put up matching funds for recovery projects: An impossible burden for communities whose tax bases have literally been washed away.

On the other hand, generous investment tax breaks, supposedly designed to spur recovery in the disaster area, have been used to build luxury condominiums near the University of Alabama's football stadium in Tuscaloosa, 200 miles inland.

But why should we be surprised by any of this? The Bush administration's response to Hurricane Katrina — the mixture of neglect of those in need, obliviousness to their plight, and self-congratulation in the face of abject failure — has become standard operating procedure. These days, it's Katrina all the time.

Consider the White House reaction to new Census data on income, poverty and health insurance. By any normal standard, this week's report was a devastating indictment of the administration's policies. After all, last year the administration insisted that the economy was booming — and whined that it wasn't getting enough credit. What the data show, however, is that 2006, while a good year for the wealthy, brought only a slight decline in the poverty rate and a modest rise in median income, with most Americans still considerably worse off than they were before President Bush took office.

Most disturbing of all, the number of Americans without health insurance jumped. At this point, there are 47 million uninsured people in this country, 8.5 million more than there were in 2000. Bush may think that being uninsured is no big deal — "you just go to an emergency room" — but the reality is that if you're uninsured every illness is a catastrophe.

Yet the White House news release on the report declared that President Bush was "pleased" with the new numbers: Heckuva job, economy!

Bush's only concession that something might be amiss was to say that "challenges remain in reducing the number of uninsured Americans" — a statement reminiscent of Emperor Hirohito's famous admission, in his surrender broadcast, that "the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage."

There's a powerful political faction in this country that's determined to draw exactly the wrong lesson from the Katrina debacle — namely, that the government always fails when it attempts to help people in need, so it shouldn't even try.

"I don't want the people who ran the Katrina cleanup to manage our health care system," says Mitt Romney, as if the Bush administration's practice of appointing incompetent cronies to key positions and refusing to hold them accountable no matter how badly they perform — did I mention that Chertoff still has his job? — were the way government always works.

Future historians will, without doubt, see Katrina as a turning point. The question is whether it will be seen as the moment when America remembered the importance of good government, or the moment when neglect and obliviousness to the needs of others became the new American way.

Paul Krugman writes for The New York Times.

Original published September 4, 2007 by Monterey Herald.

___________________________________________

Broadening Katrina’s Lens: A Five-Part Series
Part 1: Broadening Katrina's Lens
Part 2: Recovery’s Two Major Impediments: $$$ and the "F" word
Part 3: The "F" Word: FEMA
Part 4: Katrina’s Bigger Picture
Part 5: Katrina’s Karmic Payback: Insurance Reform
___________________________________________

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

WSJ: As Premiums Rise, Homeowners Drop Wind Coverage

By LIAM PLEVEN
September 4, 2007; Page B1

A small but growing number of homeowners are taking an extreme approach to insurance against hurricane winds: They're going "bare" -- doing without the coverage entirely.

Florida this year passed a law making it easier to opt out of wind coverage amid a voter backlash over soaring premiums, and the practice is also appearing in other states, particularly those along the Gulf Coast hit hard by recent storms.

A tree rests on a house in Beaumont, Texas, after Hurricane Rita hit in 2005.

While the option of doing without wind coverage is generally limited to people who don't have mortgages -- banks typically require borrowers to carry insurance -- even a slender increase in those going uncovered could have broader repercussions in the wake of another major storm. A drop in insurance payouts could leave storm-struck areas with fewer resources for rebuilding and shift some of the burden to taxpayers. That more individuals are opting to go without coverage also underscores the breakdown of the insurance system in coastal areas.

Nobody tracks how many Americans are going without wind coverage, and it's likely still rare -- most homeowners do have mortgages and 96% carry some kind of home insurance, which often includes wind coverage, according to the trade group Insurance Information Institute. Moreover, in some coastal states, wind coverage is typically included as part of a general policy, making it harder to drop. Nevertheless, people in the insurance industry say it occurs, and some say they see an increase.

"There's no doubt in my mind that there are more people going bare than in the past," says Robert Rusbuldt, chief executive of the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America, an Alexandria, Va.-based organization that represents 300,000 agents and brokers nationwide. "They're betting against Mother Nature."

Mr. Rusbuldt says a survey conducted for the group in May concluded that nearly three million Americans were dropped by their home insurers in the past two years -- more than two-thirds of them in 16 Southeastern states. The survey had an average margin of error of 3.7%. "You have to assume" that some of those people did not get new wind coverage, he says.

After the devastating hurricanes in 2004 and 2005 caused more than $150 billion in damages, much of which they had to pay for, insurers have increased rates dramatically while dropping clients they consider high-risk. Allstate Corp. -- which insures nearly one out of every eight homes in the U.S., according to A.M. Best Co. -- has moved to shed roughly 290,000 customers in hurricane-prone states since Katrina, most of them in Florida.

A house in Lake Charles, La., with roof damage after Hurricane Rita.

Customers can choose to drop wind coverage on their own. "We work with them to make sure they are appropriately covered," says Mike Siemienas, an Allstate spokesman. But, he adds, "At the end of the day, it's the customer's decision."

The federal government handed out at least $6.5 billion in grants and aid money after Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005 -- some of which went to help people who didn't have government-backed flood insurance. But one of Katrina's consequences was a sharp jump in premiums for wind coverage from private insurers, which doubled or tripled in some coastal areas. Some homeowners are doing the math and concluding it can be more cost-effective to cover rebuilding costs out-of-pocket, rather than paying big annual premiums.

Kathy Sansbury dropped coverage on her Fort Lauderdale, Fla., townhouse after the premium roughly doubled in December, to nearly $9,000. At that price, she and her husband concluded that after paying the higher premium for just 13 years, they would have spent enough to rebuild.

"It doesn't make sense, as expensive as it is," she says.

At the other end of the spectrum are individuals who either can't afford soaring premiums, or who have concluded that their homes aren't worth enough to warrant the price of coverage at all.

"There's no incentive to have my home insured," says Melissa DeStio, who owns a roughly 30-year-old mobile home in Boynton Beach, Fla., that she estimates is worth up to $6,000. "The premium far exceeds the benefit, after you pay the deductible."

Some insurance agents say they are seeing an increase in the number of clients who have taken the plunge of going uncovered or discussed the option. Alex Soto, who heads InSource Inc., a Miami insurance agency, estimates that 2% to 3% of his clients have dropped wind coverage. Five years ago, he says, such a step was almost unheard of.

Earlier this year, a number of homeowners in the New Orleans area opted to go without wind coverage after being dropped by their prior carriers and electing not to turn to Louisiana's insurer of last resort, says Marc Eagan, president of Eagan Insurance Agency. He estimates that 500 of his agency's 9,000 homeowners' insurance customers are currently without the coverage. But Mr. Eagan adds that the market's improving because no storms have struck the area so far this season, and he expects more insurers will be willing to offer coverage at rates that appeal to customers.

The recent upheaval in the insurance industry has led to a dramatic rise in the number of people getting insurance through state-created insurers of last resort. These insurers sell insurance to people who can't get coverage otherwise, often at much higher rates than they got in the private sector. For instance, Florida's insurer of last resort, Citizens Property Insurance Corp., now insures more than 1.3 million homes, more than any other company in the state.

Until recently, insurers in Florida were required to include wind coverage in all policies they sold, except in particularly high-risk areas. But in response to anger over rising premiums, lawmakers passed new rules -- which took effect July 1 -- letting insurers sell policies without wind coverage to any Florida homeowner willing to sign a statement that they don't want it.

There's also interest in self-insurance pools. Homeowners are "looking for ways to bypass insurance companies," says state Sen. Don Gaetz, a Republican who represents part of the Florida Panhandle.

Large corporations have long turned to self-insurance, setting up their own insurance companies and paying premiums to them, or planning to pay out-of-pocket if disaster strikes.

Companies including Walt Disney Co. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. have said they now carry less insurance against hurricane damage after storms the past few years. In a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Disney blamed "recent weather events" for its inability to purchase as much wind insurance as it previously carried. As a result, the company says it is "carrying more self-insurance ... than we have in the past." Disney's main property in a hurricane-prone state is the Walt Disney World theme park in Florida.

But for some homeowners, dropping insurance simply means taking on a big risk. Wendy Avin, who lives in a mobile home park in Gulfport, Miss., a town that was ravaged by Hurricane Katrina, says she received an insurance payout for damages to her home from that storm. But now, she says, she cannot afford the wind coverage and is going without. "It really worries me," she says.

George Mastics, who lives near the Atlantic Ocean in Palm Beach, Fla., says the structural stability of his house, built in 1935, factors into his decision not to carry wind insurance. "The walls are so thick," he says. "I can't imagine a hurricane tearing it down."

"Maybe I'm a gambler. I don't know," he adds. But he hasn't paid for wind coverage for a few years. "So far, I'm ahead of the game."

Write to Liam Pleven at liam.pleven@wsj.com.

Copyright 2007 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.

___________________________________________

Broadening Katrina’s Lens: A Five-Part Series
Part 1: Broadening Katrina's Lens
Part 2: Recovery’s Two Major Impediments: $$$ and the "F" word
Part 3: The "F" Word: FEMA
Part 4: Katrina’s Bigger Picture
Part 5: Katrina’s Karmic Payback: Insurance Reform
___________________________________________

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Monday, September 03, 2007

St. Bernard sewage reveals waste: FEMA hauls it rather than build new plant

Saturday, September 01, 2007
By Bill Walsh
Washington bureau

WASHINGTON -- When floodwaters were finally pumped out of St. Bernard Parish after the 2005 hurricanes, local officials had hoped to move quickly to rebuild basic services, including the sewage-treatment system, so 66,000 displaced residents could return home.

They hadn't counted on "44 CFR 206.226."

That's one of the myriad federal regulations that tell FEMA what it can and cannot pay for when disasters strike. It turns out that a new sewage-treatment system in St. Bernard Parish wasn't covered.

A new system would have run about $38.6 million plus an additional $8 million to ring it with a levee to protect it from future flooding. But instead of footing the bill, FEMA encouraged locals to make repairs to the old, antiquated system. Two years later, they remain at loggerheads.

While officials negotiated and navigated through the complex regulations, federal taxpayers have paid $41.4 million through mid-August for heavy trucks to haul raw sewage away, almost 90 percent of what it would cost for the new system. And the trucks are still rumbling through St. Bernard's streets today.

Members of Congress may have thought that when it approved $110 billion for Gulf Coast recovery, spending the money would be the easy part. They were wrong. As the gatekeeper for most federal disaster money, FEMA hews strictly to the Robert T. Stafford Act and a host of federal regulations that spell out in mind-numbing detail how disaster money can be spent. Although the agency has shown signs recently of being more flexible in how it interprets the rules, the recovery throughout southern Louisiana has been characterized by legalistic arguments over arcane federal regulations.

Some say those rules, designed to protect against waste and fraud, are a hindrance when it comes to addressing a disaster on the scale of Katrina. When Congress reconvenes this month, Louisiana lawmakers, including Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., and Rep. Charlie Melancon, D-Napoleonville, are expected to push for changes that grant FEMA more flexibility in responding to catastrophes.

"Why is the federal government haggling with folks over what degree of repairs are recoverable after a major American city was put under water by failed federal levees?" said Andy Kopplin, executive director of the Louisiana Recovery Authority. "Why not give the community the money and make them document every red cent?"

Push for consolidation
The regulation that has delayed St. Bernard Parish from building a new sewer system is Title 44, section 206.226 of the Code of Federal Regulations. It says that for FEMA to cover the costs of replacing damaged public property it must be "cost effective." Cost effectiveness is determined by the "50 percent rule," which is further explained in the 333-page FEMA "Public Assistance Policy Manual." Under the rules, FEMA will pay only to replace a facility if the repairs would cost more than 50 percent of totally rebuilding.

In painstaking detail, FEMA surveyed the damage at St. Bernard's seven sewage-treatment facilities after the storms and determined that repairs would cost $16.25 million. That was nowhere near 50 percent of the price tag for rebuilding all seven treatment plants from scratch, which would run upward of $150 million.

FEMA said it was willing to spend $16 million on repairs so St. Bernard could get its old system up and running again -- and the waste-hauling trucks could stop -- but a new plant was off the table.

Locals protested that it made no sense to rebuild the old system, which parish officials had planned to scrap before the storm. It was outdated and obsolete. Two of the treatment plants were out of compliance with current environmental standards; one was nearly 50 years old and another was on the property of the historic Chalmette Battlefield, where Andrew Jackson whipped the British in the last major military engagement in the War of 1812.

St. Bernard's plan was to consolidate its seven treatment plants into one. It would be cheaper to operate. It had the backing on environmental agencies and watchdog groups who worried that the current system was prone to accidents. It even had the backing of the U.S. Department of the Interior, which wanted to get rid of a wastewater-treatment facility on one of the most prized battlefields in the country.

A bout of optimism

St. Bernard officials thought FEMA would embrace the idea. And in a future flood, locals would only have to protect one plant, not seven.

"Everyone was in favor of doing this," said Chris Merkl, the parish director of public works. "The FEMA people saw what we saw. Why reinvest in rebuilding this old facility? Let's move ahead with what we had planned."

In a 16-page proposal in January 2006, Parish President Henry "Junior" Rodriguez made his case for a consolidated system. A few days later, FEMA Public Assistance Coordinator Jeffrey Bower wrote back with encouragement.

"We are optimistic regarding approval of the consolidation project," Bower wrote.

There was plenty of reason for optimism. In his speech in Jackson Square two weeks after Katrina, President Bush emphasized the need to rebuild basic municipal services to kick-start the resurgence of the Gulf Coast. "Our goal is to get the work done quickly," he said at the time. He added, "When communities are rebuilt, they must be even better and stronger than before the storm."

But the guiding principle at FEMA is to replace damaged facilities to their pre-storm condition, nothing more.

"We're watching everyone's wallets here," said Jim Stark, director of the FEMA office in New Orleans.

Under the rules, FEMA doesn't merely inspect the damage to a facility and cut a check. It must develop a detailed document, known as a "project worksheet," that spells out the scope of work to be done and how it will be financed in accordance with federal disaster regulations.

At first, St. Bernard officials say, they were encouraged by FEMA to classify their plan as an "alternative project," one of the many terms sprinkled throughout the Stafford Act and the regulations. The strategy would free the $16 million FEMA was offering for repairs so St. Bernard could spend it instead on building the consolidated system. But "alternative" projects also carry a 25 percent penalty, meaning the parish would only get about $12 million, far short of what it needed.

Next, FEMA encouraged St. Bernard to apply for money by classifying its project as an "improvement" under federal rules. There was no penalty associated with "improved" projects, but financing would be capped at the total amount of repairs, a little over $16 million. Before the storm, St. Bernard planned to issue bonds to pay for a new sewerage system. When its tax base was obliterated in the flooding, it was in no position to pay the more than $30 million needed to foot the part of the bill FEMA wouldn't pay.

FEMA had also made clear that while the parish could get money for an "improved" project, the agency wouldn't pay for the $8 million levee to go around it. The Stafford Act forbade mitigation of "improved" facilities that replace old ones, they were told.

By late summer, FEMA's Bower, who had been so encouraging, was gone, and so was optimism over a new sewage-treatment system. In October, the parish made another request for full financing, this time as a "relocation project" under 44 CFR 206.226. A month later, FEMA officially said no.

What had irked the locals as much as the denial was what they saw as duplicity on FEMA's part.

"Don't encourage me to do this and then turn around and reject it. Tell me you aren't going to do it up front. I can take it. I'm a big boy," said Merkl, the public works director. "For two years, we could have been doing improvements and there wouldn't have been any hauling trucks now."

Rodriguez, the parish president, seethed as he pointed to a chair in his temporary trailer where he says a FEMA official sat and promised consolidation would be fully financed by the federal government.

"I just wish I had tape-recorded the meeting," Rodriguez said.

Money on the table
John Connolly, who now oversees FEMA public assistance projects in Louisiana, said the agency never promised to pick up the whole tab.

"Yes, we encouraged them to work with us," Connolly said. "But the agency did not make a commitment. . . . We made a pledge to take a hard look at it. We gave them an answer they didn't like."

Connolly says that FEMA is no happier with the waste-hauling costs than the locals are. The agency was so alarmed at the mounting costs that it balked at paying the bills. The Unified Recovery Group, the private company doing the work, threatened in March to let raw sewage run in the streets unless it was paid the $24 million it was owed. A settlement was quickly reached and a new contractor now hauls the sewage.

Still, FEMA officials put the blame on St. Bernard for not taking the money available to make repairs and get its old system back on line. FEMA says that had St. Bernard made repairs, hauling costs wouldn't be nearly as high as they are.

"St. Bernard hasn't taken the money on the table," said Gil Jamieson, who oversees FEMA operations in the Gulf Coast. "St. Bernard isn't doing what they need to do."

Recently, there have been signs that a resolution could finally be in the offing.

FEMA has revised its treatment-plant repair estimate in St. Bernard upward to $23.5 million, about half the cost of the new system and a levee to protect it. In June, the Louisiana Recovery Authority earmarked $26.3 million for infrastructure improvements in St. Bernard. Together, the two pots of money would be enough to pay for a new consolidated sewer system in the parish.

But, once again, there are procedures to be followed. St. Bernard must officially request that FEMA reclassify the project from a "repair" to an "improvement" so it can get access to the $23.5 million. As of last week, FEMA officials said the money would be available for St. Bernard's sewer consolidation, all they had to do was ask.

Bill Walsh can be reached at bill.walsh@newhouse.com or (202) 383-7817.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Sunday, September 02, 2007

Note from A.M. in the Morning! on Sun Herald Editorial

by Ana Maria

With great sadness, I am posting the Sun Herald editorial which addresses the divide and conquer approach to reviewing what is needed to ensure the recovery of the entire Katrina-ravaged region. My sadness comes from seeing a tremendous amount of dissension among all of us who are trying to go beyond merely surviving Katrina's wrath to gloriously flourishing in her aftermath.

Whether pitting the Lower 9th War against the totality of the City of New Orleans, or the smaller towns outside of New Orleans against the city itself, or Louisiana against Mississippi and Alabama, the dichotomy is false, hurtful, painful, and unproductive.

This is not about who "got" more. This is about whether everyone is receiving what they need in an efficient and effective manner to achieve full recovery. Many of us have family and friends throughout the Katrina-ravaged region. Pitting us against each other needs to be turned into joining hands together to make things happen for all of us.

If something needs doing, let's get to doing it, funding it, building it, creating it, developing it. Recovery is about doing right by all of us. Recovery is about justice for all. The language of inclusion will assist us most in having folks think about ALL of us and doing for ALL of us.

That is one of the Sun Herald's points with which I agree most adamantly. I hope that you will, also.

I once heard a story about the difference between those who are successful and those who only dream of it. Plenty of variations of this story exist, I'm sure. This is the one I enjoy sharing.

In one room, a massive banquet was set on a table where the hungry folks sat. The most delicious foods and beverages with the most savory of smells filled the room. The problem, however, was that no recipient had elbows. The hunger made everyone more agitated and the inability to feed oneself made life . . . living hell.

In another room, the banquet was set all the same where hungry folks sat. The most delicious foods and beverages with the most savory of smells filled the room. Like the other room, the hungry folks had no elbows. Their own forks and spoons--like their friends in the other room--could not reach their own mouths.

What to do?

They fed each other.

I'm big on eating and celebrating, helping each other, and pulling together our resources so that all of us get what we need, create a united front so that others cannot divide us, and living happily ever after in each moment.

For those who think I'm pollyanna, I say that dividing and conquering is an old tactic to which each of us have a choice regarding whether we participate.

I want New Orleans to have media coverage and plenty of it. Mississippi and Alabama would like the same, thank you. I want the 9th Ward to have plenty of media coverage . . . and I want Slidell and Chalmette as well as the rest of New Orleans to receive it as well. We ALL need money, resources, insurance, jobs, health and vibrant businesses, safe communities, fabulous schools, and wonderful lives.

This isn't about getting our share of the pie with someone else determining the size, shape, and type for our families and communities. It's about ensuring that we have plenty of pie in the first place.

I'm a great pie baker. So, I say, let's be sure that we have plenty of ingredients to make all the pie we need!

(Really, I'm a great cook like many folks down here. Just a quick plug for our fabulous culinary skills throughout the Katrina-ravaged region: Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama!)

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

A False War Between the States

Posted on Sun, Sep. 02, 2007
An Editorial

There is a particular sadness with which we consider the offensive launched against Mississippi survivors of Hurricane Katrina on the very somber second anniversary of the awful day in which the great storm devastated our state and caused a civil engineering failure of vast and deadly proportions in Louisiana.

On Aug. 29, 2005, South Mississippi and Southern Louisiana, geographic and cultural members of the family of Gulf Coast States, were united by a bond of common suffering forged in the destructive assault against our people and property.

In the days that followed, a coalition of political and social assets possessed by these neighbors was arrayed in a united effort to gain federal support for the recovery of a region that had suffered the greatest natural disaster in American history.

By most objective analyses of this strategic effort, Mississippi, though a poor state with meager resources, possessed the superior congressional team with Sens. Thad Cochran and Trent Lott situated especially well to spearhead the fight for the billions that would be necessary to help citizens of the Gulf recover and rebuild.

Louisiana seemed to recognize the value of the neighboring leaders, and gladly accepted the additional role that Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour played in obtaining the relief funding.

This newspaper has from the very beginning of the debate supported New Orleans and Louisiana as an ally and a friend in the full meaning that term implies.

Over the course of the two years since Katrina we have listened to the occasional signs of partisanship that have rumbled across the border but have remained silent, choosing to stay focused on our own knitting, understanding the frustration with many aspects of the difficult environment in which our neighbors were existing. But we must express concern about the emerging narrative put forward by Louisiana newspapers that suggest there is a competition for federal Katrina dollars, and that Mississippi has received an unfair share of those funds.

Much of the Louisiana storyline in the discussion is crafted around a set of numbers apparently compiled by the Louisiana Recovery Authority, numbers cited around the anniversary date to show that Mississippians received a disproportionate share of the funds.

The leading number cited by the newspapers involves the number of damaged homes, and the number is outrageously in error. The numbers, cited both in a chart accompanying a Times-Picayune editorial headlined "Treat us fairly Mr. President," reported that in Mississippi Katrina severely damaged only 15,610 homes and only 61,386 homes were damaged at all.

The numbers provided by FEMA show that more than 60,000 homes were totally destroyed, and an additional 55,000 were heavily damaged.

Given this obvious error, it is difficult to take any of the LRA report, repeated by The Times-Picayune and other papers, seriously.

The tone of the discussion relating to Mississippi took a serious step toward incivility with an op-ed piece in The Times-Picayune on Aug. 29, headlined "Cleaning up, the Mississippi Way." In the column, a staff writer sarcastically suggested that even though Louisiana is in line for $15 billion in federal funding to improve levees, "Mississippi might as well have grabbed the levee loot; it certainly grabbed everything else."

The column goes on to state: "Louisiana bore the brunt of Katrina, and its aftermath. Yet from health care to higher education, Mississippi won out every time."

So, it would seem proper for such a debate not to be one-sided and lacking in response.

Others in the media from across the land have attempted to engage us in the comparison between the recovery efforts in Louisiana and Mississippi. They have almost universally commented that they observe two distinctive approaches to the recovery efforts in each state, and that this goes back to the earliest days following the storm.

The lack of agreement between the mayor of New Orleans and the governor of Louisiana was the most noticeable early part of the Louisiana response.

Meanwhile in Mississippi a recovery plan started in the Sun Herald newspaper offices with local political leaders, civic and business leaders and the governor, meeting within the first week to create a recovery plan that resulted in a comprehensive plan to rebuild our coast, a plan that was completed and delivered to the public by year's end of 2005.

It was understood that getting our schools up and running was central to establishing a sense of orderliness and normalcy in the life of our communities, and though half our schools were destroyed, all but one had been re-established and were up and running by November. In comparison, by the end of that year no school had re-opened in New Orleans. This may speak to the functionality, planning and execution of a vision that existed within the framework of the two regions. It should also be noted that one of the most significant early roadblocks to the recovery effort in both states involved the effort by Louisiana's members of Congress when they said their state should be given $250 billion for disaster assistance. This high number created a chilling political response in the Congress and the administration and has been described by some as the low point of the effort to obtain the funding needed in both states.

The principal fact concerning whatever success Mississippi has enjoyed is that our state had a plan, and Louisiana did not. Indeed without Mississippi's effort, Louisiana would not have received as much as it has.

Both Louisiana and Mississippi have received billions in federal assistance, and both have been aided by the unbelievable help of hundreds of thousands of volunteers without whom we could not have recovered anywhere near our current state.

Louisiana has received significantly more media coverage, and far more aid delivered by national foundations.

But the most notable component of South Mississippi recovery is the spirit and hard work of our people who grabbed their chainsaws and started digging out from day one. More than 90 percent of our citizens have returned to the region and are re-establishing roots in their homeland, although many who formerly resided on the coastline will rebuild inland.

So to our friends in Louisiana we respectfully say their desire to receive more funding is understandable, and our prayers and support for those efforts will continue. However, we believe this focus on what someone else has or has not gotten, as a means to that effort, will only diminish their future hopes, and ours, as such a competition will not likely provide a more charitable or generous mood in either the public or private sectors.

We believe today, as we did on Aug. 29, 2005, that Louisiana and Mississippi will stand or fall together. This war of words between neighbors should cease.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

A War (of words) Between the States

Posted on Sun, Sep. 02, 2007

By GEOFF PENDER
SUN HERALD

BILOXI -- Numerous recent national and regional media reports and opinions stop just short of saying Mississippi has stolen federal Katrina-recovery dollars from Louisiana.

"Mississippi might as well have grabbed the (New Orleans) levee loot; it certainly grabbed everything else," penned Times-Picayune staff writer James Gill in a column titled "Cleaning up, the Mississippi way." Although national media reports weren't as blunt, the message was similar: Per capita, Mississippians have made out like bandits in federal Katrina-relief spending.

But is it true? Per capita, have we received more?

That's questionable.

About 65,000 homes in Mississippi were destroyed (not just "damaged" as numerous news outlets are reporting) by Katrina. About 205,000 homes in Louisiana were damaged either with "major" or "severe" damage, according to the state's Web site. It also noted that of the 205,000 homes, 169,000 had major or severe flooding. The number includes 82,000 rental units.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office says federal hurricane-relief spending to date is about $116 billion.

Mississippi has received about $23.5 billion of that total, including money that went to repair federal facilities here.

Though no one in Louisiana appears to have a firm number on how much has been spent there, it would be reasonable to assume the bulk of the remaining $92.5 billion Mississippi wasn't able to "grab" went to Louisiana.

Conservatively assuming Louisiana received only $75 billion of that spending, that would put Louisiana slightly ahead, per capita, of those who lost their homes, at $366,000 in federal spending for each. Mississippi's total federal spending amounts to $361,000 per devastated homeowner.

Now, some pundits who are lamenting Louisiana being shortchanged use the total population of Louisiana, which dwarfs that of Mississippi. But another way to look at that would be that a far larger percentage of Mississippians were harmed by Katrina.

Those leveling the complaints about Mississippi also use only federal Community Development Block Grant funding, from U.S. Housing and Urban Development, as their basis. Louisiana received $10.4 billion; Mississippi, $5.5 billion. Using the number of destroyed homes, Mississippians averaged $84,600 each; Louisianians, only $50,500 each.

So if there is a disparity, why?

Louisiana 'whining'

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour believes it's because Mississippi had a plan when it went to Congress, hat in hand, after Katrina.

"We presented a very specific, reasonable request... ," Barbour said. "We didn't ask for everything we ever dreamed of, multiplied by two."

Louisiana, Barbour noted, "said they should get $250 billion, about two months after the storm." Barbour and others at the time said this request from Louisiana, made by Sen. Mary Landrieu, made it hard to get any additional relief funding from Congress at the time. "Everybody in Washington was offended," Barbour said.

Louisiana's initial request after Katrina included spending for improvements at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge and other projects of dubious relation to Katrina.

During a recent meeting with the Sun Herald, Barbour went off on what he called the "whining" in Louisiana that Mississippi got too large a share.

"One of the things they used was that the number of schools in Mississippi that were still closed by December in 2005 compared to the number of schools that were closed in Louisiana was just a tiny fraction," Barbour said. "Of course it was, because we had all our schools back open. We worked our tails off. We had all our schools back open before New Orleans had one back open."

And though Mississippi schools were open, children were, and are, attending in temporary trailers used as classrooms because their schools were destroyed.

"So what's the idea? Are they supposed to punish us for getting our schools back open quickly? That's their mentality: 'Somebody do this for me,'

" Barbour said. "Down here, people said, 'We're going to do this for ourselves, and we hope you'll help us,' and that's what happened."

But, Barbour said, he doesn't bear any ill will toward New Orleanians.

"New Orleans was a very important part of many people in Mississippi's lives," Barbour said, noting he "went to New Orleans seven times" during one semester of college which, "is probably why my grades weren't what they should have been."

Ironic envy

Of the Louisiana complaints, U.S. Sen. Trent Lott said, "I don't know if it's justified, but I don't think it's helpful." He said such sniping is not going on between Mississippi's and Louisiana's congressional delegations.

"Our congressional delegations work well, across party lines," Lott said. "I think Louisiana people would have to acknowledge that a good chunk of the money they have gotten is because of the efforts of Sen. (Thad) Cochran, with some help from myself and others."

Lott said, "I'm not going to say anything negative about Louisiana. I feel sorry for them. But one thing they are going to have to answer for is the difference in attitude. They have complained and whined and focused on who else got what. If they would just focus on what they need, they'd be better off."

Reilly Morse, a member of the Steps Coalition community advocacy agency, said, "There's merit to the complaint," when you look at per capita spending on housing. But he said Louisiana and Mississippi sniping at each other about it is "heartbreaking."

"I think there have been some successful efforts to divide advocates for a fair and equitable recovery along state lines, along party lines - because Louisiana's delegation is primarily Democratic and Mississippi's Republican - and along racial lines and class lines," Morse said. "Any time we do that, we are failing ourselves. We are all United States citizens.... My view is that, if Mississippi residents need that much (CDBG spending) to recover, then that ought to be the benchmark for the entire region. If Mississippi has indeed gotten more, then even it out and help them."

Gulf Coast Business Council President Brian Sanderson, as a guest on a national TV news show last week, found himself having to defend Mississippi over the Louisiana disparity claims.

"The point I made was that we had a reasonable, well-laid-out plan, a thoughtful plan, and we didn't just go out and ask for $250 billion thinking we'll figure out what to do with it once we get it," Sanderson said. "We've been too busy doing the work of recovery rather than keeping score."

Sanderson said any fighting between the two states would be sound and fury at best, and possibly hurt both states in the long run.

"We have a lot of historical and cultural ties with New Orleans, and economic," Sanderson said. "It doesn't serve anyone good to get into that type argument."

Marty Wiseman, director of the Stennis Institute for Government, notes the irony of any state being envious of Mississippi.

"For once in Mississippi's life, I think we were in the best position to take advantage of who we are and the people we know," Wiseman said. "It was how the stars were aligned - we had as our governor the former chairman of the Republican National Committee, who has helped a number of powerful people in Washington. We had the chairman of the Appropriations Committee and a powerful former majority leader.

"For once, we were standing first in line. Gov. (Kathleen) Blanco was a Democrat coming before what was then (2005-'06) Republican-held (Congress) with a Republican president. She had to introduce herself at our family reunion."

Original Sun Herald article published September 2, 2007.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Church Groups Give Key Aid to Miss. Town

Volunteers Courtney Jeselsohn left, and Chuck Thigpen, from the Christ Church in Mandarin, Fl., work to install flooring in a home they are building in Pearlington, Miss. Wednesday, Aug. 15, 2007.(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

By REGINA L. BURNS

PEARLINGTON, Miss. (AP) — The sweat and donations from religious groups are bringing hope and new homes to many residents in this tiny community, still struggling two years after Hurricane Katrina left much of the Mississippi Gulf Coast in ruins.

Adolph Harris, who watched his house get washed away while he clung to a nearby tree as the storm roared ashore, will move this month into a new home built with money and volunteers from a Kempton, Ind.-based Christian organization.

Adolph Harris poses for a photograph in front of his new home as he talks about taking refuge in a tree next to his home during Hurricane Katrina in Pearlington, Miss. Wednesday, Aug. 15, 2007.(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Standing outside his new home, one of 35 new homes built by the International Disaster Emergency Service, Harris said he often thinks about the miracle of his survival.

"I was up the tree from 8:30 that morning until about 7:30 that afternoon," he said. "If that tree had fallen that I was in, I would have been in that water — 25-30 feet of water — with all those moccasin snakes and, you know, it was just a scary, scary situation to be in."

While the memories of metal flying like missiles off neighboring homes still haunt him, Harris said his prayers have been answered.

Volunteers also helped bring back the West Hancock County Volunteer Fire Department.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency made a lot promises, "but we got tired of waiting," Fire Chief Kim Jones said.

"So, we went ahead and took what little insurance money we had and donations from other fire departments and church organizations and individuals and rebuilt our station," said Jones, 52.

FEMA also provided $216,464 in public assistance to help replace the fire department's equipment, clothing, and a radio system, agency spokesman Eugene Brezany said.

The rebuilding also has changed the lives of the volunteers.

Ron Loomis, disaster assistance relief training supervisor, with the Indiana group said he initially came to Pearlington on a short mission trip in June 2006. He decided to leave his North Branch, Mich., home four months later and continue the Pearlington rebuilding effort on a permanent basis.

"God touched me. I owned my own business. I closed it and found jobs for my employees before returning to Pearlington," said Loomis, 48, who travels back to Michigan to visit his family.

A group of volunteers from Christ Church in Mandarin, Fla., weathered the August heat to build houses on behalf of IDES.

"We basically came here as open books, letting them teach us what we needed to learn," said 21-year-old Sarah Kolbe of Jacksonville, Fla. "I had no knowledge of how to do anything as far as house building goes. I've learned how to put in laminate floors and they showed us how to do it and we've done three so far."

Volunteer Courtney Jeselsohn from Christ Church in Mandarin, Fla., looks out the window of a home she is helping to build in Pearlington, Miss. Wednesday, Aug. 15, 2007. Before Katrina, Pearlington had 1,680 residents said Kim Jones, chief of the West Hancock County Volunteer Fire Department,but that number has dwindled to about 800. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

She and her University of North Florida roommate Courtney Jeselsohn, 20, are the only women on the team.

Kolbe said "being around the people and seeing how their lives were affected and seeing how many people are still living in trailers and really suffering makes me realize how much I do have and how much they've lost."

Pearlington has dwindled to about 800, half its population since the storm hit on Aug. 29, 2005.

Harris, 61, a retired financial aid director, is still waiting on funds from a Homeowners Assistance Grant Program from the Mississippi Development Authority. He said he hopes the funds will come through soon to help him continue rebuilding his life.

Ron Loomis left from North Branch, Mich., talks with Adolph Harris in the home that Loomis and other volunteers built for Harris in Pearlington, Miss. Wednesday, Aug. 15, 2007.(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

"Hopefully, 10 years from now Pearlington will be a prospering little community again and it will get back to normal."

Original Associated Press article published on September 2, 2007.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home