Flood victims say FEMA is doing a heckuva job

[Tylergal]

By JIM SALTER, Associated Press Writer Mon Jun 23, 3:12 PM ET

EAST ST. LOUIS, Ill. - When floodwaters knocked out the water treatment plant in Mason City, Iowa, FEMA rolled into town and promptly set up an account with a Pepsi bottler to supply bottled water. Then FEMA officials moved into a vacant store and began handing out the stuff.
ADVERTISEMENT

"We saw different FEMA people in and out," City Administrator Brent Trout said. "We really started seeing FEMA people showing up to see what was going on in town and putting out the word on flood assistance."

Nearly three years after Hurricane Katrina turned FEMA into a punchline, many homeowners, politicians and community leaders in the flood-stricken Midwest say that so far, the agency is doing a heckuva job — and they mean it.

Up and down the Big Muddy, the Federal Emergency Management Agency is being commended for responding quickly and surely.

"The lessons we learned from Katrina we've taken very seriously," said Glenn Cannon, FEMA assistant administrator for disaster operations. He added: "We've changed the way we do business. We don't wait to react."

After Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast in 2005, FEMA came into New Orleans late and unprepared, and soon became a symbol of government bungling. President Bush's compliment to FEMA Director Michael D. Brown — "Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job!" — became a big joke.

Now, storms and flooding in the upper Midwest have left 24 people dead, driven tens of thousands from their homes and caused billions in damage.

After the rain started falling in early June, FEMA arrived with 13 million sandbags to pile onto the levees, 200 generators, and 30 trucks to haul off debris. Across the upper Midwest, the agency has delivered nearly 3.6 million liters of water and 192,000 ready-to-eat meals. About 650 inspectors are working in Iowa, Indiana and Wisconsin alone.

In Iowa, Indiana and Wisconsin alone, FEMA has received about 45,000 registrations for assistance from disaster victims. The agency has already handed out $81 million in housing assistance funds, said Carlos Castillo, a FEMA official.

Flooded-out homeowners said FEMA has been quick to dispense checks, and leaders in inundated towns in Iowa said the agency wasted little time in assessing damage. That is key to getting federal disaster declarations that trigger eligibility for assistance, including money to help repair or replace a home.

"They have been trying hard to be proactive throughout this crisis, and had people on site almost immediately after the flooding began," said Iowa Lt. Gov. Patty Judge.

Senators on both sides of the river, Missouri's Claire McCaskill and Illinois' Dick Durbin, Democrats who rarely miss a chance to criticize the Bush administration, are offering good early reviews of FEMA's response to this disaster.

"I think they've made a world of improvement both in terms of their preparedness and in terms of their attitude," McCaskill said. "My sense is they are no longer thinking they can deliver disaster relief from a cubicle in Virginia and are fully engaged on the ground."

FEMA has had a presence in the Midwest since December, when severe ice storms caused widespread damage in Missouri. Field desks were set up after torrential rains and flooding in Missouri in March, and after tornadoes devastated parts of several central states, including Iowa and Missouri, later in the spring.

Officials from the federal agency began arriving at Missouri flood sites such as Canton and Hannibal more than a week before the river's crest, serving as advisers to state and local emergency authorities.

"It just kept going. You had the tornadoes and then the floods," FEMA spokesman Jim Homstad said.

Still, the disaster is far from over. Keithsburg, Ill., Mayor Jim Stewart said the real test will be how the agency that bought out 108 properties after the Great Flood of '93 flood helps the town get back on its feet again.

"We need that help this time," Stewart said. "We're going to be begging and pleading for that help from FEMA."

In hard-hit Cedar Rapids, Iowa, where the bursting Cedar River forced 25,000 of the town's 125,000 residents to evacuate, the floodwaters swamped the home of 32-year-old Amber DeWald, and everything but the foundation will probably have to be demolished.

She said she heard from FEMA soon after she contacted the agency and is already on track to receive rental assistance and other benefits.

"They might not be visible out on the streets," she said, "but I feel they've been doing an excellent job."

Don Weaver's home in Cedar Rapids was condemned after the flood collapsed a wall. The FEMA employee he worked with told him that when his house was safe enough to enter, another inspector would come out and help him apply for assistance. In the meantime, Weaver, 54, has already gotten his first $100 FEMA rental-assistance check.

One thing the Midwest probably won't see will be FEMA trailer parks similar to those that sprang up after Katrina. The agency said it believes there is ample existing housing for those whose homes will need extensive repairs or are beyond hope.

FEMA's grades are not report-card perfect. Mike and Jeanna White had deep floodwaters in the first floor of their Cedar Rapids home, so they called FEMA. More than a week later, they had heard nothing back.

"I know they're probably dealing with a lot of people and they're really busy," Mike White said. "I thought that after Katrina they'd be a lot more responsive, move a lot quicker to help folks."

Auto body worker Jeremy Schirm, 36, said floodwaters got within 7 inches of the ceiling in the basement housing his son's room. FEMA, he said, has been uncooperative.

"I'm still waiting to hear a response from them," he said. "I always thought FEMA was there to help out flood victims. But from kind of talking to them, they're not going to do nothing."

But in East St. Louis, city disaster services coordinator Rocco Goins said three FEMA inspectors arrived not long after questions started swirling about whether the levee protecting the impoverished city could withstand the surging Mississippi River. They checked the integrity of the levee, ensured it was sound and offered support.

"I very much give FEMA their props," Goins said. "What happened in Katrina didn't happen here. In my opinion, FEMA was totally on top of it."

COMMENT:  FEMA did a great job in Florida and has always done a great job in all disasters.  It is and was amazing to see the difference of opinion from one area to the next.  Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana.  Amazing that Alabama actually had more damage than Louisiana and yet there was no whining, no Shep ordering people around, no Geraldo interviewing the "victims."  The response to FEMA is totally different when the affected are not sitting on their hands, living on the dole.

[caesu]

yeah right, Alabama had more damage...

2 deaths in Alabama, 1577 in Lousiana.

your hatred for the peope of New Orleans is astonishing.
do you have any consience calling them whiners?

[Tylergal]

I am not talking about the old and infirmed, the children who suffered.  I am talking about the totally incompetent government officials who were duly elected to take charge of these situations and when push came to shove, they were too busy on higher ground at Seaside.

[Tylergal]

Yes, Alabama and Mississippi had has as much real property, more destroyed than Louisiana.  The difference was the people of Mississippi and Alabama heeded the warnings and their elected officials were quick to call for assistance in getting things done.  You cannot help people who will not help themselves.  They will drown you in the process of trying to save them unless they want help.

[caesu]

Yes, Alabama and Mississippi had has as much real property, more destroyed than Louisiana.  The difference was the people of Mississippi and Alabama heeded the warnings and their elected officials were quick to call for assistance in getting things done.  You cannot help people who will not help themselves.  They will drown you in the process of trying to save them unless they want help.

just stop spreading misinformation.
Lousiana had 49 times more property damage than Alabama.


http://lra.louisiana.gov/assets/December05/120105ExecDirReport.pdf

and please show some respect for the victims of that disaster.

[Tylergal]

Yes, Alabama and Mississippi had has as much real property, more destroyed than Louisiana.  The difference was the people of Mississippi and Alabama heeded the warnings and their elected officials were quick to call for assistance in getting things done.  You cannot help people who will not help themselves.  They will drown you in the process of trying to save them unless they want help.

just stop spreading misinformation.
Lousiana had 49 times more property damage than Alabama.


http://lra.louisiana.gov/assets/December05/120105ExecDirReport.pdf

and please show some respect for the victims of that disaster.

I see you are getting your information from the same moneygrubbers that took advantage of the situation. The whole Gulf Coast of Alabama was destroyed, businesses, residences.  The same with Mississippi.  It's amazing that a $2500 shanty in NOLA turned into a $300,000 residence in the end.  That's how they arrived at these stats. 

[caesu]

Yes, Alabama and Mississippi had has as much real property, more destroyed than Louisiana.  The difference was the people of Mississippi and Alabama heeded the warnings and their elected officials were quick to call for assistance in getting things done.  You cannot help people who will not help themselves.  They will drown you in the process of trying to save them unless they want help.

just stop spreading misinformation.
Lousiana had 49 times more property damage than Alabama.


http://lra.louisiana.gov/assets/December05/120105ExecDirReport.pdf

and please show some respect for the victims of that disaster.

I see you are getting your information from the same moneygrubbers that took advantage of the situation. The whole Gulf Coast of Alabama was destroyed, businesses, residences.  The same with Mississippi.  It's amazing that a $2500 shanty in NOLA turned into a $300,000 residence in the end.  That's how they arrived at these stats. 

sure, i should take your information without any source provided for a fact and AIR Worldwide / Louisiana Recovery Authority has got it all wrong. 
you seem to have created an alternative reality on a range of topics.
you could have done well in Hollywood, writing fiction.

[WhiskeyGirl]

Hurricane Katrina -

"The Storm We Always Feared"

Hurricane Katrina struck the New Orleans area early morning August 29, 2005. The storm surge breached the city's levees at multiple points, leaving 80 percent of the city submerged, tens of thousands of victims clinging to rooftops, and hundreds of thousands scattered to shelters around the country. Three weeks later, Hurricane Rita reflooded much of the area. The devastation to the Gulf Coast by these two hurricanes has been called the greatest disaster in our nation's history.

http://www.nola.com/katrina/

http://www.bushclintonkatrinafund.org/
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2005/katrina/
http://katrina.com/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9107338/

Bush takes blame for Katrina response-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/14571386#14571386

Is a natural disaster any less devastating if it happens to just one person instead of one hundred?

Is there an instruction book that includes every possible natural and human-made disaster?

[WhiskeyGirl]

Where have all the dollars gone, long time passing?  Long time ago?

I found an interesting editorial today, some snips ~

Pork Or Priorities?
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 6/24/2008

Politics: A flap over flood prevention shows it's Barack Obama who is firmly for business-as-usual in Congress and that John McCain stands for real change.

When the levee breaks, you see lot of toxic sludge left behind. Some of it comes in the form of campaign rhetoric, such as Obama's charge last weekend that McCain "opposed legislation to fund levees and flood control programs, which he considers pork."

McCain did oppose the 2007 Water Resources Development Act, and that bill, passed over President Bush's veto, does fund flood-control projects. The trouble is that it funds so much else.

What Obama failed to point out is that McCain and a small bipartisan group of senators actually tried to fix the water bill's most glaring flaw, its choice of pork over priorities.

McCain co-sponsored an amendment by Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold that would have set up a commission to rank projects based on national need. The Senate voted 69-22 against this constructive idea, with Obama joining the "nays."

That vote is significant for the current campaign, because it clearly shows who stands for politics-as-usual and who stands for change.

(Go Russ!)

The Feingold amendment promised real change in the corrupt culture of earmarks. (Corrupt, because it's a form of vote-buying from local and state interests at the expense of the national good). It would have steered money and effort toward the most pressing needs, such as stronger levees. It might even have helped restore the public's trust in Congress.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=299200516372689

What was in that pork?

May 15, 2007

The Water Resources Development Act of 2007: A Pork Fest for Wealthy Beach-Front Property Owners

by Ronald D. Utt, Ph.D.
WebMemo #1458

On April 19, 2007, the House passed the pork-laden Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (H.R. 1495) and sent it to the Senate, where it has acquired additional earmarks. Some of these earmarks would require the Army Corps of Engineers to finance a series of costly projects that benefit the rich and influential who can afford a lobbyist with access to Members of Congress and committee staff.

$ $ $ List of Pork Projects  $ $ $

Although the beach resort people represent only one of many factions attempting to divert Army Corps of Engineers money to their personal benefit, they do offer a useful case study of how the growing influence of today's lobbying and advocacy profession can lead to policies that undermine the safety and security of the American people. Much of the responsible policy focus has been on how best to use the federal resources available to secure from danger many of the nation's key metropolitan areas and crowded commercial centers, but the ASBPA uses what political clout it has to divert those resources to recreation and the protection of seasonal vacation homes and businesses.

There you have it: No earmarks, No sand! While we do not know for certain the President's views on "turtles, birds, plants and other forms of marine life," we do know that his budget priorities focus on a life form missing from Mr. Simmons's complaint: people. And we know from sad experience that incompetence in Washington's oversight of, and resource allocation for, the Army Corps of Engineers contributed to the disaster in New Orleans when hurricane Katrina passed by on August 29, 2005.

How much of that disaster was due to the diversion of resources that Mr. Simmons and others continue to urge is something worthy of a more detailed examination to ensure that another New Orleans–type disaster never happens again.[10] Until then, these low-priority projects should be stripped from H.R. 1495.  If they are not, the President should give serious consideration to vetoing any bill that includes them.

http://www.heritage.org/research/budget/wm1458.cfm

[WhiskeyGirl]

From another site ~

Veto – Channeling Ike on WRDA

Categories: Water Resources
Tags: Bush Administration, Steve Ellis, veto, Water Resources Development Act
Pub Date: Nov 02, 2007

It’s a Friday afternoon, but I thought you might be interested in another veto statement from a few years back. The WRDA bill was called the Rivers and Harbors Act until the 1970s. I guess we’ve been here before. But it looks like there may be a different outcome. Truman, Carter, and Reagan all had their fights with Congress over the Corps of Engineers.

“I cannot overstate my opposition to this kind of waste of public funds,” with respect to projects that “have no economic justification.” – President Eisenhower vetoing 1958 Rivers and Harbors Act. The veto was sustained and Congress came back with a more responsible bill. It was one of two vetoes of Rivers and Harbors bills that he did before he finally signed the third.

“American taxpayers should not be asked to support a pork-barrel system of Federal authorization and funding where a project's merit is an afterthought.” President Bush vetoing 2007 Water Resources Development Act.

--

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

(Columbia, South Carolina)

­

For Immediate Release November 2, 2007

TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 1495, the "Water Resources Development Act of 2007."

This bill lacks fiscal discipline. I fully support funding for water resources projects that will yield high economic and environmental returns to the Nation and each year my budget has proposed reasonable and responsible funding, including $4.9 billion for 2008, to support the Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) main missions. However, this authorization bill makes promises to local communities that the Congress does not have a track record of keeping. The House of Representatives took a $15 billion bill into negotiations with a $14 billion bill from the Senate and instead of splitting the difference, emerged with a Washington compromise that costs over $23 billion. This is not fiscally responsible, particularly when local communities have been waiting for funding for projects already in the pipeline. The bill's excessive authorization for over 900 projects and programs exacerbates the massive backlog of ongoing Corps construction projects, which will require an additional $38 billion in future appropriations to complete.

This bill does not set priorities. The authorization and funding of Federal water resources projects should be focused on those projects with the greatest merit that are also a Federal responsibility. My Administration has repeatedly urged the Congress to authorize only those projects and programs that provide a high return on investment and are within the three main missions of the Corps' civil works program: facilitating commercial navigation, reducing the risk of damage from floods and storms, and restoring aquatic ecosystems. This bill does not achieve that goal. This bill promises hundreds of earmarks and hinders the Corps' ability to fulfill the Nation's critical water resources needs -- including hurricane protection for greater New Orleans, flood damage reduction for Sacramento, and restoration of the Everglades ‑‑ while diverting resources from the significant investments needed to maintain existing Federal water infrastructure. American taxpayers should not be asked to support a pork-barrel system of Federal authorization and funding where a project's merit is an afterthought.

I urge the Congress to send me a fiscally responsible bill that sets priorities. Americans sent us to Washington to achieve results and be good stewards of their hard-earned taxpayer dollars. This bill violates that fundamental commitment. For the reasons outlined above, I must veto H.R. 1495.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

November 2, 2007

http://www.taxpayer.net/search_by_tag.php?action=view&proj_id=745&tag=Veto&type=Project

[WhiskeyGirl]

What did New Orleans get?

Port of New Orleans Businesses Bank on $160M From 2007 Water Resources Development Act

Posted on: Monday, 29 October 2007, 03:00 CDT

By Guillet, Jaime

Maritime businesses and state and local officials are waiting for a decision on the 2007 Water Resources Development Act, which includes $160 million for Port of New Orleans facilities and business affected by the loss of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet's deepdraft access.

WRDA, which authorizes up to $7 billion in Louisiana projects, faces a promised veto from President Bush but Democrats say they have the votes to override the veto.

Louisiana projects tally $3.6 billion out of the $23-billion federal outlay, although the Congressional Budget Office estimates Louisiana projects are authorized at $7 billion or 30 percent of the WRDA budget. The CBO's estimates are derived from U.S Army Corps of Engineers' estimates, not specific figures included in the bill text.
(snip)

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1120799/port_of_new_orleans_businesses_bank_on_160m_from_2007/index.html

The other $19 billion went where?