Criticism of the government response to Hurricane Katrina
Criticism of the government response to Hurricane Katrina[1] was a major political dispute in the United States in 2005 that consisted primarily of condemnations of mismanagement and lack of preparation in the relief effort in response to Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. Specifically, there was a delayed response to the flooding of New Orleans, Louisiana. (See Hurricane preparedness in New Orleans for criticism of the failure of Federal flood protection.)
Within days of Katrina's August 29, 2005 landfall, public debate arose about the local, state, and federal governments' role in the preparations for and response to the storm. Criticism was prompted largely by televised images of visibly shaken and frustrated political leaders, and of residents who remained in New Orleans without water, food or shelter and the deaths of several citizens by thirst, exhaustion, and violence, days after the storm itself had passed. The treatment of people who had evacuated to registered facilities such as the Superdome was also criticized.[2]
Criticism from politicians, activists, pundits, and journalists of all stripes has been directed at the local, state, and federal governments.
New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin was also criticized for failing to implement his flood plan and for ordering residents to a shelter of last resort without any provisions for food, water, security, or sanitary conditions. Perhaps the most important criticism of Nagin is that he delayed his emergency evacuation order until less than a day before landfall, which led to hundreds of deaths of people who (by that time) could not find any way out of the city.[3] Adding to the criticism was the broadcast of school bus parking lots full of baby blue school buses, which Mayor Nagin refused to be used in evacuation. When asked why the buses were not used to assist evacuations instead of holing up in the Superdome, Nagin cited the lack of insurance liability and shortage of bus drivers.[4]
New Orleans has been classified as a non-regime city. Regimes involve governmental and non-governmental cooperation, a specific agenda, a recognized problem, and resources to deal with the problem. New Orleans only had a temporary coalition to deal with Hurricane Katrina, which led to the ineffective, temporary, and inefficient evacuation and provision of resources. Organizations such as the Red Cross attempted to form coalitions, but the various actors could not agree on a specific solution, and this failure to cooperate led to instability and misunderstanding between governmental and non-governmental actors.[5]
Criticism of the evacuation process[edit]
New Orleans was already one of the poorest metropolitan areas in the United States in 2005, with the eighth-lowest median income ($30,771). At 24.5 percent, Orleans Parish had the sixth-highest poverty rate among U.S. counties or county-equivalents.[6] The 2000 U.S. census revealed that 28% of New Orleans households, amounting to approximately 120,000 people, were without private mobility. Despite these factors preventing many people from being able to evacuate on their own, the mandatory evacuation called on August 27 made no provisions to evacuate homeless, low-income, or sick individuals, nor the city's elderly or infirm residents. Consequently, most of those stranded in the city were the poor, the elderly, and the sick.
It has been stated in the evacuation order that, beginning at noon on August 28 and running for several hours, all city buses were redeployed to shuttle local residents to, "refuges of last resort," designated in advance, including the Louisiana Superdome.[7] They also said that the state had prepositioned enough food and water to supply 15,000 citizens with supplies for three days, the anticipated waiting period before FEMA would arrive in force and provide supplies for those still in the city.[7] Later, it was found that FEMA had provided these supplies, but that FEMA Director Michael D. Brown was greatly surprised by the much larger numbers of people who turned up seeking refuge and that the first wave of supplies was quickly depleted.[7] A large number of deaths were a result of the insufficient response and evacuation before Katrina's arrival, primarily due to city and state resistance to issuing an evacuation order and risking "crying wolf" and losing face should the hurricane have left the path of the model prediction. Had contra-flow on highways been initiated sooner and more buses begun evacuating families (including the idle school buses that were not used at all) the numbers of stranded New Orleans occupants would have been significantly less, making the initial wave of FEMA supplies adequate and even excessive.
State and local government[edit]
Louisiana[edit]
Chief among those criticisms is that state National Guard troops, under the command of Governor Blanco, were responsible for quelling civil unrest in advance of humanitarian relief efforts, yet they failed to do so in the first few days after the hurricane.
Notably, federal troops are generally prohibited from directly enforcing state laws (e.g., controlling looting or riots) by the Posse Comitatus Act, with some exceptions. The President can assume command of state troops under the Stafford Act, but in this "federalized", or "Title 10" status, the federalized National Guard troops become unable to enforce laws directly, just like other federal troops. However, the Posse Comitatus Act does not apply to National Guard troops under the command of a state governor.
Shortly before midnight on Friday, September 2, the Bush administration sent Governor Blanco a request to take over command of law enforcement under the Insurrection Act (one of the exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act), but this request was rejected by Blanco.[72] Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi also rejected a similar request.
Governor Blanco did make a request to the Federal government for additional National Guard troops (to be under her command) to supplement the 5,700 Louisiana National Guard troops available in Louisiana at the time.[73] However, the necessary formal request through the federal National Guard Bureau was not made until Wednesday, a full two days after the hurricane hit and when much of the city was already underwater; Blanco explained that she didn't understand specific types and numbers of troops needed to be requested.[69] By comparison, on September 2, when Louisiana had only a few hundred National Guardsmen from other states, Mississippi's National Guard reports having "almost division strength (about 10,000 troops)" from other states' National Guards.[74] Blanco also failed to activate a compact with other states that would have allowed her to bypass the National Guard Bureau in a request for additional troops.
International criticism[edit]
Several foreign leaders have expressed frustration that they couldn't get a go-ahead from the Bush administration to administer help. Bush said on the ABC News program Good Morning America that the United States could fend for itself, "I do expect a lot of sympathies and perhaps some will send cash dollars," Bush said of foreign governments.[95]
The immediate response from many nations was to ask to be allowed to send in self-sustaining search and rescue teams to assist in evacuating those remaining in the city. The first to respond was Venezuela, offering tons of food, water, and a million barrels of extra petroleum. France had a range of aircraft, two naval ships, and a hospital ship standing ready in the Caribbean. Russia offered four jets with rescuers, equipment, food, and medicine, but their help was first declined before later being accepted. Germany had offered airlifting, vaccination, water purification, medical supplies including German air force hospital planes, emergency electrical power, and pumping services; their offer was noted and they received a formal request three days later. Similarly, Sweden had been waiting for a formal request to send a military cargo plane with three complete GSM systems, water sanitation equipment, and experts. The Netherlands offered help out of the island Aruba in the Caribbean Sea. Cuba offered to send 1,586 doctors and 26 tons of medicine[96] but this offer was rejected.
British Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott linked the global warming issue to Katrina, criticizing the United States' lack of support for the Kyoto Protocol, "The horrific flood of New Orleans brings home to us the concern of leaders of countries like the Maldives, whose nations are at risk of disappearing completely. There has been resistance by the US government to Kyoto - which I believe is wrong."[97] Ted Sluijter, press spokesman for Neeltje Jans, the public park where the Delta Works are located, said, "I don't want to sound overly critical, but it's hard to imagine that (the damage caused by Katrina) could happen in a Western country, It seemed like plans for protection and evacuation weren't really in place, and once it happened, the coordination was poor."[98]
In China, the People's Daily, criticized President Bush's handling of the crisis, calling the slow response time to the unfolding events, "negligence of duty".[99]
An article in the April 29, 2007, Washington Post claimed that of the $854 million offered by foreign countries, whom the article dubs "allies," to the US Government, only $40 million of the funds had been spent "for disaster victims or reconstruction" as of the date of publication (less than 5%).[100]
Additionally, a large portion of the $854 million in aid offered went uncollected, including over $400 million in oil (almost 50%).[100]
The U.S. House of Representatives created the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina. On February 15, 2006, they released their final report.
The Executive Summary states (among other things) the following:[3]
Discrimination against non-U.S. citizens[edit]
There was some criticism by tourists that rescue crews were giving preferential treatment to American citizens first. For example, some British tourists trapped in a New Orleans hotel accused the authorities of preferential treatment for Americans during the evacuation as Katrina approached.[119] Australian tourists reported a similar experience, compounded by the federal government's refusal to admit consular officers to the New Orleans area and failure to notify the Australian embassy that one missing tourist was in a correctional facility on minor charges.[120] South African tourists also reported that tourist buses were commandeered by federal officials, and the tourists told to walk back. Later on, they were driven back by warning shots after waiting near a bridge blocked by armed forces.[121]
In the days before the storm, Mayor Nagin was particularly blunt in regards to foreign tourists, stating, "The only thing I can say to them is I hope they have a hotel room, and it's a least on the third floor and up. Unfortunately, unless they can rent a car to get out of town, which I doubt they can at this point, they're probably in the position of riding the storm out."[83] Hotel managers also criticized the treatment of tourists, with one noting they were treated worse than the people in the Superdome.[121]
However, there were also some reports that portrayed the overall generosity of the American people. Some Irish tourists were touched by the "infinite kindness" shown to them by "complete strangers."[122]