Katrina Realities
The reality of the catastrophic events caused by hurricane Katrina will be long-lasting not only for those that were hit the hardest by the storm, but also by every American in every corner of the 50 states. While the tragedy that has befallen thousands of people from the regions hit by the storm is being broadcast daily, the other shoe that has dropped with a loud bang is the reality that our government has failed in its most fundamental of duties: the duty of protecting us.
The preamble of the Constitution reads:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Our collective local, state and federal governments have failed to ensure domestic tranquillity. The failure of these governmental bodies, and the people running the show, to properly plan, prevent and provide for emergencies, including natural disasters, civil defense, homeland security and terrorist acts has become apparent.
The tragedy of 9-11 revealed the lack of preparedness to us in uncertain terms. Thereafter we have heard report after report that the tools and methods being applied to "defend" us against terror and disaster are wholly inadequate, except in terms of hindering us from daily activities, travel, genuine security and prevention of future terrorist attack. The 9-11 Commission revealed to us so many areas where there was a lack of effective planning, procedure and provisioning. Still, our government leaders are doing nothing that is effective for our security. The proof of our unprepared state is everywhere. We are detaining a lot of people. We are slowing down our ability to travel. We are infringing our civil liberties. But we are not preparing in earnest. An examination of where and how "homeland security" funding is being spent gives us evidence that the whole process has evaporated into another pork barrel approach to making it look like we are doing something. Our whole approach is lip service to help keep our politicians in the game.
Further, with all the money that has been spent on homeland security, we have evidence from the hurricanes that have struck over the past two years, including Katrina, that what is really missing in the approach is genuine infrastructure projects and effective methods of dealing with disaster.
Rush Limbaugh, a conservative loud-mouth that gets too much media attention because he plays to our weaknesses and fears, recently attacked those in the public eye that have focused their ire regarding Katrina on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Limbaugh's argument is that it is not FEMA's responsibility to be a first responder to such emergencies. Yes, well, Limbaugh is correct. But what Limbaugh has done is typical of politicians, loudmouths, and attention-seekers from either extreme (conservative or liberal). He has ignored the prima facie mandate of FEMA to properly plan at the federal level, assist and train at the state level, and coordinate at the interstate level. While it is not FEMA's sole responsibility for the post-Katrina failures, what has occurred demonstrates the failure of FEMA--and all governmental bodies--to do its fundamental job.
Katrina has taken the band-aid off of the gaping holes in our latent incompetence. We have all had moments where we have shook our heads at the way government has not worked well. In our daily lives we deal with our governmental failures by surrendering to the "system." We argue, often with ourselves, that the system will eventually work. We surrender to the incompetence, make jokes about the manner in which government is often ineffective, gnash our teeth at the politicians that walk a teetering line of corruption, and complain that we don't have the time, power, influence or money to make a difference.
The problem is that we accept things the way they are and have always been. We have come to believe that the inertia of our governments is not only "normal," but also acceptable. We are led to believe that our tax dollars are being spent in an acceptable manner. We are misled into believing that everything is evaluated on a case-by-case basis and that the general, but profound, principles of government delineated in the constitutional preamble are merely ideals, not words to live by. We are also led to believe that it is not our collective duty to care for those that are unfortunate in life.
The US government will spend in excess of $180 billion dollars a year intervening for the sake of democracy in Afghanistan, Iraq, Bosnia, Sudan and other countries around the globe, but forsakes the least able in our own country to a ideology that mandates self-reliability to all, even those without the tools, capacity or opportunity. The state governments will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on mandatory standardized testing to judge school performance, but severely restrict money that has proven effective in making schools better. We allow money to be spent on the sexual habits of fruit flies, but deny money for the prevention of disease, teen pregnancies and violence.
We are now focusing a lot of our security efforts on video and other forms of general surveillance, but ignoring the fundamental principles of good security. We let our neighborhoods deteriorate, we allow "crime areas" to exist in our communities, permit communities to linger in economic hardship for decades, cut costs for municipal EMS/police/fire resources, ignore our decaying infrastructures, but focus on implementing strategies and technologies that do not provide genuine results. Video surveillance technologies are less effective in preventing security breaches, terror, natural disasters and crime than effective community building.
Let's face it. Which is more effective in preventing a security problem, a video camera network or citizens that take responsibility and act when there is a problem? What is more effective, a metal detector at every school entrance, or building a school community built on community values? What would have prevented the assault and rape of people in the shelter areas of New Orleans, cameras or better-planned shelters? What is more effective in making a neighborhood safe, video surveillance or a neighborhood where people genuinely care about each other?
Our governments have lost the capacity to care. The focus of our politicians-at all levels of government--is on power, influence and wealth, not the needs of the average citizen, the needs of those with limited abilities and capacities, or the needs of our communities. We don't care to take an active interest in our government because we are given the impression that we cannot beat down the special interests, the corporations, or even navigate the rigmarole that our leaders have created to hamper citizen involvement.
As the reports from Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, Arkansas, Tennessee, Florida, Georgia and other areas roll in on us, we are overwhelmed by the disaster, the failures of our governments to adequately serve, and the disruption of our lives. On the other side of the spectrum, we are also overwhelmed by the willingness and capacity of our citizens to render aid in these circumstances. We are literally seeing private citizens, organizations and corporations render aid in ways we could not have imagined before the catastrophic events of Katrina. We saw the same level of aid rise up in the face of the hurricanes that hit Florida, and again in the face of the events on 9-11.
Why can't we rise to the same level of aid in making our government work on behalf of its citizens on a daily basis? Why aren't the ideals that cause us to render aid in an emergency put into play every day? Why are pessimism, influence peddling, power brokering and apathy the principles of operation in a non-emergency state? Have we really abandoned the principles and ideals that are encompassed in the preamble of our greatest governmental document? What should we do next? What are we going to do to make sure that our governments return to the fundamental purpose of serving the people?
September 12, 2005
The preamble of the Constitution reads:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Our collective local, state and federal governments have failed to ensure domestic tranquillity. The failure of these governmental bodies, and the people running the show, to properly plan, prevent and provide for emergencies, including natural disasters, civil defense, homeland security and terrorist acts has become apparent.
The tragedy of 9-11 revealed the lack of preparedness to us in uncertain terms. Thereafter we have heard report after report that the tools and methods being applied to "defend" us against terror and disaster are wholly inadequate, except in terms of hindering us from daily activities, travel, genuine security and prevention of future terrorist attack. The 9-11 Commission revealed to us so many areas where there was a lack of effective planning, procedure and provisioning. Still, our government leaders are doing nothing that is effective for our security. The proof of our unprepared state is everywhere. We are detaining a lot of people. We are slowing down our ability to travel. We are infringing our civil liberties. But we are not preparing in earnest. An examination of where and how "homeland security" funding is being spent gives us evidence that the whole process has evaporated into another pork barrel approach to making it look like we are doing something. Our whole approach is lip service to help keep our politicians in the game.
Further, with all the money that has been spent on homeland security, we have evidence from the hurricanes that have struck over the past two years, including Katrina, that what is really missing in the approach is genuine infrastructure projects and effective methods of dealing with disaster.
Rush Limbaugh, a conservative loud-mouth that gets too much media attention because he plays to our weaknesses and fears, recently attacked those in the public eye that have focused their ire regarding Katrina on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Limbaugh's argument is that it is not FEMA's responsibility to be a first responder to such emergencies. Yes, well, Limbaugh is correct. But what Limbaugh has done is typical of politicians, loudmouths, and attention-seekers from either extreme (conservative or liberal). He has ignored the prima facie mandate of FEMA to properly plan at the federal level, assist and train at the state level, and coordinate at the interstate level. While it is not FEMA's sole responsibility for the post-Katrina failures, what has occurred demonstrates the failure of FEMA--and all governmental bodies--to do its fundamental job.
Katrina has taken the band-aid off of the gaping holes in our latent incompetence. We have all had moments where we have shook our heads at the way government has not worked well. In our daily lives we deal with our governmental failures by surrendering to the "system." We argue, often with ourselves, that the system will eventually work. We surrender to the incompetence, make jokes about the manner in which government is often ineffective, gnash our teeth at the politicians that walk a teetering line of corruption, and complain that we don't have the time, power, influence or money to make a difference.
The problem is that we accept things the way they are and have always been. We have come to believe that the inertia of our governments is not only "normal," but also acceptable. We are led to believe that our tax dollars are being spent in an acceptable manner. We are misled into believing that everything is evaluated on a case-by-case basis and that the general, but profound, principles of government delineated in the constitutional preamble are merely ideals, not words to live by. We are also led to believe that it is not our collective duty to care for those that are unfortunate in life.
The US government will spend in excess of $180 billion dollars a year intervening for the sake of democracy in Afghanistan, Iraq, Bosnia, Sudan and other countries around the globe, but forsakes the least able in our own country to a ideology that mandates self-reliability to all, even those without the tools, capacity or opportunity. The state governments will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on mandatory standardized testing to judge school performance, but severely restrict money that has proven effective in making schools better. We allow money to be spent on the sexual habits of fruit flies, but deny money for the prevention of disease, teen pregnancies and violence.
We are now focusing a lot of our security efforts on video and other forms of general surveillance, but ignoring the fundamental principles of good security. We let our neighborhoods deteriorate, we allow "crime areas" to exist in our communities, permit communities to linger in economic hardship for decades, cut costs for municipal EMS/police/fire resources, ignore our decaying infrastructures, but focus on implementing strategies and technologies that do not provide genuine results. Video surveillance technologies are less effective in preventing security breaches, terror, natural disasters and crime than effective community building.
Let's face it. Which is more effective in preventing a security problem, a video camera network or citizens that take responsibility and act when there is a problem? What is more effective, a metal detector at every school entrance, or building a school community built on community values? What would have prevented the assault and rape of people in the shelter areas of New Orleans, cameras or better-planned shelters? What is more effective in making a neighborhood safe, video surveillance or a neighborhood where people genuinely care about each other?
Our governments have lost the capacity to care. The focus of our politicians-at all levels of government--is on power, influence and wealth, not the needs of the average citizen, the needs of those with limited abilities and capacities, or the needs of our communities. We don't care to take an active interest in our government because we are given the impression that we cannot beat down the special interests, the corporations, or even navigate the rigmarole that our leaders have created to hamper citizen involvement.
As the reports from Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, Arkansas, Tennessee, Florida, Georgia and other areas roll in on us, we are overwhelmed by the disaster, the failures of our governments to adequately serve, and the disruption of our lives. On the other side of the spectrum, we are also overwhelmed by the willingness and capacity of our citizens to render aid in these circumstances. We are literally seeing private citizens, organizations and corporations render aid in ways we could not have imagined before the catastrophic events of Katrina. We saw the same level of aid rise up in the face of the hurricanes that hit Florida, and again in the face of the events on 9-11.
Why can't we rise to the same level of aid in making our government work on behalf of its citizens on a daily basis? Why aren't the ideals that cause us to render aid in an emergency put into play every day? Why are pessimism, influence peddling, power brokering and apathy the principles of operation in a non-emergency state? Have we really abandoned the principles and ideals that are encompassed in the preamble of our greatest governmental document? What should we do next? What are we going to do to make sure that our governments return to the fundamental purpose of serving the people?
September 12, 2005
posted by Jim Downey at 7:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home