The Governor of LA requested federal help on Friday, two days before the storm hit. :(

FEMA's own exercise called Hurricane Pam in 2004 demonstrated that local and state resources would be overwhelmed immediately; that FEMA would have to move in immediately. In that study, it was determines that city and state could not get about 100,000 people out of New Orleans; that FEMA would have to assist before the storm struck.

Futhermore, FEMA is about avoiding damage before that damage can occur. A most famous case is Evansville and Graphton IL where FEMA moved the towns. Other lesser know examples include FEMA's campaign to convince AL homeowners in flood-prone Elba area to sell their homes and relocate. FEMA in the 1990s demonstrated how it is better to solve problems before they happen - which is a well proven William Deming concept.

Such programs were ongoing in CT, DE, CO, IL, MA, MN, MS, MI, MO, ND, SD, WY, UT, TX, and PA when something happened.

These 'mitigation activities' by FEMA were terminated in about 2001 - about the same time that professional disaster managers were being replaced by political appointees.

Meanwhile, Hurricane Pam demonstrated that another Hurricane Andrew scenario would happen if FEMA did not act before disaster struck. Remember, FEMA did zero - no response - to Hurricane Andrew for five days. A famous quote is from that lady county commissioner who said, "Send everything now. People will be dying in hours." Once that soundbyte got carried on network news, only then did FEMA start sending aid. That was the worse case scenario that caused FEMA to change in the 1990s.

As Jefferson Parish demonstrates, FEMA literally stopped and turned back rescue assistance that local officials requested. NYC police refused to be turned back when they knew who had asked for them - Jefferson Parish. However assistance from western NC counties was turned back.

FEMA did nothing effective knowing full well from Hurricanes Andrew and Pam that they had to respond before Katrina hit. FEMA also stopped a convoy of four hundred air boats requested by Jefferson Parish. They turned back four 18 wheelers of water shipped by Wal-Mart saying the water was not needed as people were dehydrating in the Superdome.

In that Ted Koppel interview some three days after Katrina, Brown finally admitted that the only reason they did not try to get people out of New Orleans was that they could not find vehicles. Whereas Koppel then says that you take every flatbed and tractor trailer and haul those people out. Brown does not respond.

FEMA knew that local officials would not have resources to respond to the disaster. But it gets even worse. When local officials organized volunteer assistance, then FEMA turned back that assistance. This has been documented too many times.

Brown did not know that so many people were in the Superdome? Bull. He met Mayor Nangins in the Superdome where thousands were waiting without any food or water. Brown says he did not learn of conditions in the Superdome until two days after he had seen it (or should have seen it) for himself. But then his staff was nothing more than political appointees.

Bottom line - FEMA knew the disaster would only be worse if they did not respond early. Brown himself was bragging that weekend how FEMA had supplies already propositioned in adjacent states just waiting to move. He was braggin about preparations days before Katrina struck. Well how many days did it take to get food to the Superdome and Convention center? Four. Four days to move only a few hundred miles. And then we have a fully functional international airport that remained totally unused except as a hospital in its terminal buildings. No waves of aircraft flying in aid for most of a week. All this because FEMA did not start their response until exposed by the press - including Geraldo Rivera. All of this made only worse because FEMA did not respond before disaster struck. Made worse because top FEMA people were replaced with political appointees.

I'm pretty sure that's just one of the talking point excuses that made the rounds in the aftermath, and isn't really true.

Nixon's problem was that some Republicans were more patriotic rather than loyal. Loyalty at the expense of partiotism is a hallmark of the George Jr administration. But something has happened. What was obvious is, well, from the NY Times of 13 February 2006:

Part of this was the fact the the Democrats stayed away because they were tired of having any criticism by them labeled as partisan. In effect, they challenged the Republicans to issue a non-partisan report or appear as spineless hacks.

To my surprise, the Republicans actually rose to the challenge. Nice job, guys.

Of course we are coming up on an election year, and covering up for the adminstration would have a political cost in the next elections.

In an earlier post, I thought Chertoff had nothing to worry about. However, not for one minute did I expect this from any Republicans. From the Washington Post of 12 Feb 2006: Remember what Chertoff is. He is a lawyer. Another example of a well proven guideline: 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management.

I think you might be right. I can't help thinking that he's the Dubya Admin's version of Oliver North.