The Devastation Caused by Hurricane Katrina - Coursework Example

Hurricane Katrina Policy analysis on the legislative bill number H.R 4197 (Hurricane Katrina Recovery, Reclamation, Restoration, Reconstruction and Reunion act of 2005) Introduction The devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina is estimated at more than $75 billion. This does not include the additional damage done to the economy due to the sudden jump in oil prices before the hurricane struck the city. In terms of human lives it cost more than 1600 people, the bodies of which were still being recovered more than 3 months after the disaster. The scenes and events that took place during and after the hurricane show both the darkest and brightest side of the human nature. The recovery process itself was charged with political debate and a lot of finger pointing to shift the blame from one party to the other. There have been several bills introduced in the house to aid the recovery process and legislative bill number H.R 4197 (Hurricane Katrina Recovery, Reclamation, Restoration, Reconstruction and Reunion act of 2005) is just one of many. Even though the bill is designed to help people in recovering from the aftermath, there are important issues which the bill does not take into account and could therefore become less efficient than it should be. Social Problem The simplest way to define the overall problem is that the lawmakers are divided on how to go about helping people at the grassroots levels. The New York Times editorial on March 16, 2005 says that “There are frightening signs coming from Washington that legislators may shortchange distressed homeowners, playing politics as usual with relief funds” (NYT, 2006, A20). President Bush has already stated that the legislatures have reduced funding for the reconstruction of the damaged levees by $1.5 billion and if the reductions continue as they have, there will soon be no money for the deserving victims. In fact, the victims’ definition of the problem is the easiest to understand. Hurricane Katrina was one the deadliest and the more devastating natural disasters to hit American soil in recorded history. It made landfall in southeast Louisiana on August 29 as the worst hurricane seen in the region. The coastlines of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama were hit by the storm, and the surge created by it caused the levees of Lake Pontchartrain to breach. The water from the river and the storm combined to completely flood more than 80% of New Orleans destroying homes, offices, schools and any semblance of civilized life. The victims would like to see their lives restored as much as possible. At the same time, there is another issue which must be looked at i.e. who deserves what amount and who decides to give these funds. Pear (2006) reports that President Bush has asked Congress to give Louisiana the total amount of $4.2 billion in housing aid. There are other states which suffered due the hurricane as they would like a part of this pie as well and do not wish to be left out in the cold. When the disaster struck, all eyes and cameras were on New Orleans but after the legislators have had a chance to think matters through, they have realized that people across the southern states were hurt by the storm. In social terms, Louisiana might have hurt their own case by asking for $250 billion in federal aid which seems to be an impossible amount. The appropriations committee accepted the request for $4.2 billion but did not designate it for Louisiana exclusively. The committee said that the money would be distributed based on need under a formula designed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Even though Louisiana is assured of getting a large portion of these funds, the state is willing to fight if any part of the money is split for other states (Pear, 2006). The cause of other states seeking money is justified since Texas absorbed thousands of fleeing residents and is still educating nearly forty thousand children from Louisiana at a cost of $6,000 per child while getting about 2/3rd of that sum from the federal government. Law makers also say that until the state of Louisiana shows some practical plans/methods and comprehensive, accountable recovery systems on how they intend to use the money, giving them the money would be premature (Pear, 2006). The Goal As stated in the objectives section of the legislative bill number H.R 4197 the primary goal of the bill is to: “Provide compensation to any individual (or relatives of a deceased individual) who sustained economic or noneconomic losses as a result of Hurricane Katrina such that the individual (or relatives of a deceased individual) are restored as nearly as possible to their condition prior to the hurricane (Library of Congress, 2005, P. 1).” There are secondary goals of the bill as well e.g. environmental provisions which protect the environment from excessive damage due to the recovery efforts. Additionally, there are health provisions for maintaining access to and availability of health sources as well as provisions for housing and community rebuilding. Finally, the bill includes provisions for the maintenance of education services and voting rights for the victims (Muhammad, 2005). Beyond these goals, it seems clear that there are political motivations behind the presentation and support of the bill. For instance, the Congressional Black Caucus strongly supports the bill and demands the maximum support possible to the areas affected by the hurricane. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) is a members of the CBC (Congressional Black Caucus) and used strong words to show his support for the African American victims by saying that if the houses of whites are restored then the government must pay equal attention to the houses of African Americans (Muhammad, 2005). It would certainly seem that the support of African Americans from the CBC is not without political motivations. Policy/Legislation The policy of the government appears to be suffering from sympathy fatigue and questions are being raised as to what level of support is optimal for the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the suffering states. A part of the various attempts for coming to a mutual agreement is the bill number HR 4197 called the Hurricane Katrina Recovery, Reclamation, Restoration, Reconstruction and Reunion Act of 2005 (Library of Congress, 2005). The short name of this bill is Hurricane Katrina Victim Restoration Fund of 2005 and it has the central objective of restoring the victims of Hurricane Katrina to a position which is more or less similar to the one they were in before the disaster. There are secondary objectives as well e.g. protection of the environment, education, housing and development etc. On the whole, the bill focuses on giving some comfort in terms of money and aid to the victims who suffered a lot of pain and misery during the hurricane (Library of Congress, 2005). In terms of hidden agendas, it would appear that most of the representatives in Congress are more concerned with the development of their own constituencies than in the recovery effort. The majority of people who suffered losses were financially poor African American and Hispanic minorities who could not or did not evacuate the area before the hurricane as well as the low lying areas of New Orleans where most of the damage took place (Simms, 2006). Amongst the most ardent supporters of the bill are Democrats from the region who obviously demand that the bill be accepted without modification and aid should start pouring into the area. The Congress Black Caucus (the group that first introduced the bill) are especially vocal about their support for the bill and have said that this bill is necessary for the recovery process and not passing it would be a grievous crime against the minorities and the financially poor people of the region (Simms, 2006). At the same time, there are those who oppose the bill in the form it is presented and wish that modifications should be made or the plans for the recovery efforts are developed further before any money changes hands. The majority of this group comes from the Republican side of the house and their intentions appear to coincide with the actions of the President. Fishman (2006) says: “The president and Republican-controlled Congress arrogantly pushed through a budget that cut the very social service programs needed in the name of financing Katrina relief while continuing to spiral the national debt out of control for military operations. This issue will figure large in elections, as grass roots support demand grows to enact the Hurricane Katrina Recovery, Reclamation, Restoration, Reconstruction and Reunion Act, HR 4197 (Fishman, 2006, Pg.1)” On the other hand, the president has been reported to give great importance to helping the victims of Hurricane Katrina and even his wife, Laura Bush appears to be doing her part by gathering money and book collections for the school libraries which were destroyed in the hurricane (Pear, 2006). It would appear that there is a difference between words and deeds the reasons for which could be seen as the republican base support of the President which wants to be careful with the handing out of aid. Another argument strongly connected with the Katrina relief efforts is the pull out of American troops from Iraq and Afghanistan which is costing the government billions of dollars. Other than money, the cost to America in terms of human lives lost on foreign soil is also enormous. Democrats have said that the money could be better utilized by helping the victims of the hurricane than supporting American international adventures (Simms, 2006). The issue is hotly debated at all levels of government and in the media regarding which issue is more important and what deserves the attention of the government more than the other. Simms (2006) also gives examples of public opinion polls which show that the majority of Americans support the idea that the government should finance the reconstruction of the hurricane battered states by pulling out of Iraq as soon as possible. Implementation While no social programs have been implemented as of yet, the plans for the social programs which could be created out of this legislation are significant in the terms that they would cover any post insurance losses as well as give large sums of money to those who lost family members in the hurricane. The first program to be established under this bill would be the Victims Compensation Program. This would be run by a Special Master (Appointed by the Attorney General) or the deputies nominated by the Special Master. The effectiveness of the program can only be judged once they are in action. However, even before they begin, there have been concerns voiced from the Republican side about the effectiveness of the method prescribed by the bill. It has been said that the bill leaves little room for accountability and does not have a strong enough plan which can be used to help the victims. These are also the major weaknesses of the program as suggested by Pear (2006) and the New York Times (2006). The CBC points towards the strengths of the bill since it requires monetary help to be given to a claimant within 20 days of the claim approval so the person does not have to wait for long. It focuses on all income brackets and only deducts those amounts which have already been covered by insurance (Muhammad, 2005). This means that a large number of minorities and financially depressed individuals who did not have insurance at the time of the hurricane would have hope of rebuilding their lives if the program is initiated. Affected Populations As reported by Dewan (2006) the majority of the population who were affected most by the hurricane were the African American, Hispanic and Asian communities living in New Orleans. Simms (2006) reports several incidents of racism as well as discrimination against the poor citizens or minorities in the events following Katrina. African Americans who could not evacuate before the hurricane were left stranded for days and the issue of poverty has become more important the issue of terrorism. Since the policy is supposed to help those who were not covered by insurance or those who are in particularly dire situations, it can be presumed that the minorities would be the ones who would benefit most from this bill. It must be remembered that when the hurricane struck, government response was very slow in the initial stages (Marek & Kaplan, 2006). This led to wide spread panic and discontent amongst the minority population of the region who thought they had been forgotten by the rest of America when bodies were still floating in water six weeks after the hurricane (Dewan, 2006). At the very heart of the support for the bill is the reason that it has been brought forward by minority leaders to help the minority populations which were the worst victims of the disaster. Intended or actual Impact The policy will change the relief program by giving money to those who lost their property or loved ones without the benefit of insurance. It is supposed to rebuild lives, property, infrastructure and the environment of the areas affected by the hurricane and the intended impact of the bill is to restore the areas to the state they were in before the disaster. The intent is also geared towards helping the minorities of the area which were left on their own for a long period of time during which the government bodies appeared to be dazzled or overwhelmed with the task of recovery (Young, 2006). The actual impact of the bill can be difficult to predict since it would depend significantly on how the programs launched through the bill are carried out. If the real victims of the hurricane manage to find the aid they need and deserve the impact would have been positive and it would be a satisfactory move on the part of the government. However, if the process of getting the aid to the right people is made complicated or even impossible due to government bureaucracy then the policies would lose their meaning and the bill would nothing more than a piece of paper. Conclusion There are no more dead bodies floating in the water covering the streets of New Orleans nor are there people who are begging for food or drinking water. The situation has significantly improved from what it was a few months ago and it is improving on a daily basis. However, a lot remains to be done and HR 4197 is certainly a step in the right direction. While the Democrats have presented a strong case for why this bill should be passed quickly, I believe that the republicans are right in supporting and recommending debate on the topic before money starts changing hands. The plight of the victims is understandable and seeing congress debate on what money to give to whom might be frustrating for them but they must realize that the American government runs on the principle of due process. If debate is allowed on the bill there may be a chance that the amounts given by the bill are not seen as sufficient and more aid may be given to the victims. Additionally, the case of bordering states that helped Louisiana in her time of need must not be overlooked since they too must be compensated for what they did. Finally, I believe more studies need to be done in the disaster area to find out what can be done to eliminate poverty and the inability to evacuate from the area while the residents had a change. That would certainly help in preventing the loss of life as it happened in the case of Hurricane Katrina. Clearly, there is no way to prevent a natural disaster like a hurricane but there are certainly ways to get out of its way or avoid being caught in one. In this case it can certainly be said that an ounce of evacuation is worth a pound of recovery. Word Count: 2,853 Works Cited Dewan, S. (2006, Feb 17).  For Want of Money, Remains of Some Hurricane Victims Are Not Collected. The New York Times p. A20(L) Fishman, J. (2006). Come Together: A United Strategy for Election 2006, Retrieved April 2, 2006 from PoliticalAffairs.net website: http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/3062/1/159/ Library of Congress. (2005). Hurricane Katrina Recovery, Reclamation, Restoration, Reconstruction and Reunion Act of 2005, Retrieved April 4, 2006. from The Library of Congress website: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:1:./temp/~c109XaRJBu:e13825 Marek, A and Kaplan, D. (2006). Katrina’s Ongoing Fury. U.S. News & World Report, 140(6), 38-39. Muhammad, A. (2005). CBC champions Katrina relief, Retrieved April 4, 2006 from FinalCall.com News website: http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_2270.shtml NYT, New York Times Editorial (2006, March 13). To Save a Crippled City. The New York Times, p. A20(L) Pear. R. (2006, March 9). Bush Insists on Approval Of Full Aid for Louisiana. The New York Times, p. A14(L). Simms, M. (2006). Will It Be a Prosperous New Year for Katrina Survivors?, Retrieved April 3, 2006 from The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies website: http://www.jointcenter.org/publications1/focus/FocusDetail.php?recordID=543 Young, I. (2006). Katrina: Too Much Blame, Not Enough Responsibility. Dissent, 53(1), 41-46. Read More