Posted on 09/17/2005 7:04:29 PM PDT by John Jorsett
Down the rabbit hole went half a million dollars that Congress ordered FEMA to use to come up with an evacuation plan for New Orleans eight years ago. The AP story devotes quite a bit of time to suggesting we blame the federal side of FEMA, but buried deep down is the nugget that should be the lead:
FEMA typically contracts its studies to private or government entities. Kinerney, the agency spokesman, said it appeared the money went through the Louisiana government. State emergency and transportation officials said they did not recall it.
The money went to the state, and the state obviously didn't use it for its intended purpose. In fact, it seems to have gone for a study of some sort:
The $500,000 that Congress appropriated for the evacuation plan went to a commission that studied future options for the 24-mile bridge over Lake Ponchartrain, FEMA spokesman Butch Kinerney said.The hefty report produced by the Greater New Orleans Expressway Commission "primarily was not about evacuation," said Robert Lambert, the general manager for the bridge expressway. "In general it was an overview of all the things we need to do" for the causeway through 2016.
Lambert said he could not trace how or if FEMA money came to the commission. Nor could Shelby LaSalle, a causeway consulting engineer who worked on the plan.
It seems quite a bit of money that the feds sent to the Bayou State got sunk in places it was never intended for. Money for the levees went to fountains and Mardi Gras. This bucket of money was for evacuation plans but got diverted at the state level. That's a story, but don't expect the MSM to do much with it. Such a story will point, as it should, at the corrupt political machine that has run Louisiana practically since Reconstruction, and which deserves the lion's share of the blame for the Katrina disaster. But the MSM doesn't want to go there. "Democrats lied, people died" stings a bit.
Now that we're set to start a second reconstruction, it would be wise to cut that currupt Louisiana political machine, made up entirely of Democrats, out of the picture. But don't expect that to happen either.
By the way, this story is about evacuation plans. What photo would be more relevant to such a story than the famous AP photo of those flooded buses, a photo that shows how badly the evacuation plan went awry when disaster struck? That's not the photo that accompanies the story, though. AP chose to run some shot of levees being repaired.
Hm.
(thanks to Chris and Peg)
ANd now another $200 billion is going to buy a lot of hot tubs, yachts, and luxury office furniture for local government workers.
bump for the truth..good read
NO already had an evacuation plan and it was the local and state government's responsibility to implement it. it was revieved in 1998 and revised in 2000 in fact.
But, we will never see MSM and terrorist supporters like AP actually report the truth.
It seems quite a bit of money that the feds sent to the Bayou State got sunk in places it was never intended for.
-----
That FACT is beyond question at this point. The question now is WHO IS ACCOUNTABLE for all that taxpayer money and the deaths and destruction that were caused, that might have been prevented if the money was used CORRECTLY...??
Did someone say, "NAGIN AND BLANCO...??"
Sad thing about that is it's the truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't leave out the Landrieu clan.
The Howard Dean Suck-ups in the press have been very careful to "not get serious" about this fact.
If you're in business, and you give money to consultants, don't you make sure you see the results? I blame the Federal Government for not following up.
With each passing day, the reason for the DemocRATS' hysteria over Katrina is becoming more and more apparent. The 'RATS and their toadies in the Liberal MSM knew their scams were about to be exposed by a hurricane. The jig was up. Throwing the race card early like they did only delayed the inevitable.
John / Billybob
A Pataki Overseer of Safety Is Removed at Indian Point
By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA
October 29, 2002
ALBANY, Oct. 28 — One of the people who has been heading Gov. George E. Pataki's safety review of the Indian Point nuclear plant was removed from the project today after The New York Times inquired about his links to the Entergy Corp., the plant's owner.
The man is a former official of Entergy. James Lee Witt, who is leading the safety review, said he wanted there to be no doubts about the integrity of the process.
On another front, a group of state lawmakers and environmentalists sued the state today, charging that the Pataki administration had broken the law by dallying for years on new permits to cut Indian Point's water use. Entergy and the administration called the suit baseless.
The Sept. 11 attacks invigorated the movement to close Indian Point, in northern Westchester County, with opponents claiming it could be a terrorist target. It has become an issue in Mr. Pataki's re-election campaign.
In August, Mr. Pataki hired Mr. Witt, former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to review the plant's safety. Since then, the governor, who had previously said the plant should remain open, has said he might try to shut it down if that is what Mr. Witt recommended. Mr. Witt's draft report is due in December.
H. Carl McCall, the Democratic candidate for governor, says the plant should be put out of business. Tom Golisano, the Independence Party candidate, disagreed at first, but then backtracked, saying he was open to all options.
The governor and his aides have said that James Lee Witt Associates is conducting the review, but in fact, it has been a joint effort of that firm and Innovative Emergency Management, or I.E.M., of Baton Rouge, La., which specializes in emergency preparedness studies.
An Aug. 15 I.E.M. news release says the company "has been selected by the State of New York" to conduct the study. Mr. Witt said that I.E.M. was a subcontractor to his firm, hired with the knowledge and consent of the governor's office, an account confirmed by Robert Hinckley, a Pataki spokesman.
The person heading the effort for I.E.M. has been Gary Scronce, according to Mr. Witt and others involved in the project. The company's Web site says that before joining I.E.M., Mr. Scronce was "an engineering manager" at an Entergy nuclear plant in Louisiana.
Mr. Witt said that today, in response to The Times's inquiry about Mr. Scronce, he contacted Madhu Beriwal, president of I.E.M.
"I told her that he has to recuse himself from this project and this report, and anybody else who had any Entergy connections must be recused, because I don't want there to be any questions about the integrity of the effort," Mr. Witt said. Ms. Beriwal consented, he said.
Mr. Hinckley said the governor's office was not aware of Mr. Scronce's history at Entergy.
Two calls to I.E.M. today were not returned. Mr. Witt said that he remained confident about the ability and integrity of I.E.M. as a whole, and that the company would remain on the project.
The lawsuit filed today against the state in State Supreme Court here centers on Indian Point's use of two billion gallons of water per day from the Hudson River. Plaintiffs include Assemblymen Richard L. Brodsky and Adam Clayton Powell IV, the environmental group Clearwater, and Pete Seeger.
Environmentalists say that the water use kills many fish and damages the ecosystem by heating the water and altering tidal flows. Entergy Nuclear, the Entergy subsidiary that owns the plant, says the fish kill and other environmental effects are negligible.
The state's Department of Environmental Conservation last issued water use permits for the plant in 1987. In 1992, the owners of the two reactors, Consolidated Edison and the New York State Power Authority, applied for new ones. That process is still under way 10 years later.
The suit charges that the department was legally required to act on the new permits by May 2000. "That's simply not correct," said Jennifer Post, a department spokeswoman.
The plaintiffs say that under federal law, the new permits would have to order severe reductions in water use. But Jim Steets, an Entergy spokesman, said new permits might mean no reduction at all.
"This is just another attempt by antinuclear activists to close Indian Point," he said.
http://www.nytimes.com
I remember that, seemingly seconds after the announcement of Witt's appointment, there was some kind of press release emphasizing that Witt had nothing to do with any of those contracts. NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING! I recall thinking, "Something's up with this. Nobody goes to this kind of trouble issuing a denial before anyone has even raised the question unless they know it looks fishy." I'll be interested to see what you uncover.
Don't you think that if a Category 5 hurricane with 175 mile per hour winds (which it was on Sunday morning) was bearing down on you, you would just go to a pre-made emergency plan on how to deal with such a crisis.
It is really bizarre that they didn't.
Are we just wasting our money with all of these studies/plans?
Evidently yes, in a lot of cases. It looks like having a "plan" is just a mandatory checkbox that has to be ticked off, and then the "plan" just goes on a shelf never to be consulted again. At least, not until after a disaster and the media starts asking why it wasn't followed.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/sfl-femacoverage,0,6697347.storygallery?coll=sfla-news-utility
Amazing stories of massive waste and fraud. FEMA paid out millions in fraudalent claims,read it and weep. Tons of stories of people filing claims and getting paid in FL. Just imagine $200 BILLION to FEMA for Katrina.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.