Bush Admin Debated Invoking Insurrection Act

[fwbbreeze]

I never stated my opinion on this issue (even though I started the thread); however, I will now.

I do not believe at all in states rights as I believe we are <b>ONE NATION</b>, not a federation of 50 independent states. It is the incompetence of some of the officials in not acting that causes me to have these views. I would have liked to have seen an immediate invocation of this act and had decisive action taken immediately. Would the situation have been better? That is something that could have beend ebated for a while; however, we would have fared better than what happened, especially preventing the Red Cross from entering the convention center

I know that's what you would like but we ARE a federation of 50 independent states.

thats exactly right MF!!

http://www.free-definition.com/Federation.html

fwbbreeze

[stormie_skies]

I never stated my opinion on this issue (even though I started the thread); however, I will now.

I do not believe at all in states rights as I believe we are <b>ONE NATION</b>, not a federation of 50 independent states. It is the incompetence of some of the officials in not acting that causes me to have these views. I would have liked to have seen an immediate invocation of this act and had decisive action taken immediately. Would the situation have been better? That is something that could have beend ebated for a while; however, we would have fared better than what happened, especially preventing the Red Cross from entering the convention center

I know that's what you would like but we ARE a federation of 50 independent states.

thats exactly right MF!!

http://www.free-definition.com/Federation.html

fwbbreeze

Yeah, but lets face it - we have given an awful lot of power to the central government over the years for things we considered to be "the common good." I can think of few things that serve the common good as much as saving lives and maintaining order in the wake of a catastrophe....

[fwbbreeze]

I never stated my opinion on this issue (even though I started the thread); however, I will now.

I do not believe at all in states rights as I believe we are <b>ONE NATION</b>, not a federation of 50 independent states. It is the incompetence of some of the officials in not acting that causes me to have these views. I would have liked to have seen an immediate invocation of this act and had decisive action taken immediately. Would the situation have been better? That is something that could have beend ebated for a while; however, we would have fared better than what happened, especially preventing the Red Cross from entering the convention center

I know that's what you would like but we ARE a federation of 50 independent states.

thats exactly right MF!!

http://www.free-definition.com/Federation.html

fwbbreeze

Yeah, but lets face it - we have given an awful lot of power to the central government over the years for things we considered to be "the common good." I can think of few things that serve the common good as much as saving lives and maintaining order in the wake of a catastrophe....

Sorry but I still refuse to believe that the federal government needs to invoke its authority whenever it feels like it. Its up to local and state governments to protect their own in a crisis such as Katrina (my opinion). When they can't they need to ask for help from the federal government...not just assume that it will be there to cleam up the mess!!!

fwbbreeze

[mf_dolphin]

What I don't understand is why the only people that seem to understand how bad the State Gov screwed up are people from Louisiana! Last year we had 4 storms hit the state of Florida and yet we didn't have any such farce. I understand that combined they didn't equal Katrina but yet the response for the most part was timely. Could it be that the Gov of Florida and the local emergency management folks did their job the right way? It's something to think about

[stormie_skies]

Sorry but I still refuse to believe that the federal government needs to invoke its authority whenever it feels like it. Its up to local and state governments to protect their own in a crisis such as Katrina (my opinion). When they can't they need to ask for help from the federal government...not just assume that it will be there to cleam up the mess!!!

fwbbreeze

A federal state of emergency declaration is contingent on the governor of the affected state assessing the situation, believing that state and local governments cannot handle the situation on their own, and writing a letter asking the President for the federal governments assistance.

That was done two days before Katrina made landfall.

How much more asking do you think the state should have to do? Don't you think all that formal crud just mucks up the system??

[mf_dolphin]

The state should have mobilized it's own guard like they are supposed to but didn't. That would have prevented the days of looting and allowed the volunteer organizations and FEMA civilians to do their job early in the crisis. The first responders are supposed to come from state resources. That's the way both the state and federal plans are written and exercised. If we want or expect the Federal Goverment to be the first responders then why not do away with the National Guard altogether. We do that and Derek will get his wish......

[stormie_skies]

The state should have mobilized it's own guard like they are supposed to but didn't. That would have prevented the days of looting and allowed the volunteer organizations and FEMA civilians to do their job early in the crisis. The first responders are supposed to come from state resources. That's the way both the state and federal plans are written and exercised. If we want or expect the Federal Goverment to be the first responders then why not do away with the National Guard altogether. We do that and Derek will get his wish......

I am not going to comment too much on the NG issue until I can find the answers to some of the questions I posted above.... there is so much I do not know that I don't feel I can fairly assess what was bad luck and what was just plain screwed up.

That said, why can't we have both? I am not saying that the entire state government/NG model has to be scrapped ... but what exactly is wrong with giving the federal government the power to step in when it is clear that, in a life or death situation, the state government is failing? We aren't talking letting the feds play cop anytime they feel like it - we are talking about catastrophe scenarios (be they natural or man-made).

I cannot understand how or why we would be willing to submit to federal drug laws, federal criminal laws....and yet not want the government to save our lives if the locals screwed up, were disabled or simply didn't have the resources.

For me, personally.....I would be mad to the point of insanity if someone I loved died because people in the government were worried about stepping on each others toes. Thats just not something I am willing to sacrifice for state sovereignty. Worry about the people first, and the red tape later.

Thats why the feds should have mobilized faster, IMHO....

[Derek Ortt]

Nagin and Blanco showed their incompetence. I would rather have, in the future, a "dictatorship" in the form of a central gov't that can overrule the states for the purpose of saving lives in an emergency, than ever allow the state of Louisiana to show its incompetence again

Then again, thats just me speaking and what I would like. I know not everyone goes along with my thinking, though I NEVER want to see a Katrina again

[mf_dolphin]

I am not going to comment too much on the NG issue until I can find the answers to some of the questions I posted above.... there is so much I do not know that I don't feel I can fairly assess what was bad luck and what was just plain screwed up.

That said, why can't we have both? I am not saying that the entire state government/NG model has to be scrapped ... but what exactly is wrong with giving the federal government the power to step in when it is clear that, in a life or death situation, the state government is failing? We aren't talking letting the feds play cop anytime they feel like it - we are talking about catastrophe scenarios (be they natural or man-made).

I cannot understand how or why we would be willing to submit to federal drug laws, federal criminal laws....and yet not want the government to save our lives if the locals screwed up, were disabled or simply didn't have the resources.

For me, personally.....I would be mad to the point of insanity if someone I loved died because people in the government were worried about stepping on each others toes. Thats just not something I am willing to sacrifice for state sovereignty. Worry about the people first, and the red tape later.

Thats why the feds should have mobilized faster, IMHO....

So you're willing to criticize the Federal Government for not being there quicker and yet the first responders under direct State control and located in the state of the disaster you won't? Where's the logic in that? I also find it humourous that you seem to be able to find all kinds of documents but yet you can't find out who the other state guard units report to? hmmmmm

[stormie_skies]

So you're willing to criticize the Federal Government for not being there quicker and yet the first responders under direct State control and located in the state of the disaster you won't? Where's the logic in that? I also find it humourous that you seem to be able to find all kinds of documents but yet you can't find out who the other state guard units report to? hmmmmm

Now, now .... I never once said I wasn't critical of the state efforts. I am, very much so - it sounds like it was disorganized and chaotic at best. But the federal government does have more resources, and their resources were less likely to be hampered by the storm.... I think they have to shoulder some responsibility. But only some, of course.

I am trying to find out more about the NG situation....I just started Googling it this afternoon. I started a thread about it and posted one article so far .... hopefully I will be able to come up with more. I wasnt asking those questions rhetorically , I really do want to know who all screwed up....

[mf_dolphin]

Now....I am a bit confused in regards to the whole National Guard thing. I understand that Gov. Blanco was in charge of her own state's National Guard, but did she have the authority to mobilize the NG of other nearby states as well?

Answer: State's sign cooperative agreements with one another for this very purpose. In this case LA had agreements with several states for assistance. In at least one case the agreement in place did not allow the oither stste's national guard to perform law enforcement duties. This was corrected but did cause a delay. Michigan was ready to send guardsmen as well but Blanco made the request a day after Mississippi did thus delaying their arrival.

How long does it typically take a state's NG to mobilize (IOW, did she need to give them advance notice, or could they have been there in 12-24 hours)?

Typically they can be mobilized in 48 -72 hours. In this case they were already under alert so they should have been there immediately after the storm.

Did she turn down the aid of the NG, or did she simply underestimate the number of people that would be needed? Couldn't somebody have a sit down with her and explain that more people were needed?

The inital request I saw was for 900 LA Guardsman. That came from an interview with someone from the LA EOC.

I guess the whole situation seems odd to me, frankly. I mean, she was proactive about declaring a state of emergency....and by Wednesday she was screaming for soldiers.....was she asking for active duty soldiers before she even called up the NG? How much of the Louisiana NG had not been utilized up until that point?

Good questions that I hope she has to answer. It's hard to know at this point since she imposed the gag order on her own National Guard......

[jburns]

I never stated my opinion on this issue (even though I started the thread); however, I will now.

I do not believe at all in states rights as I believe we are <b>ONE NATION</b>, not a federation of 50 independent states. It is the incompetence of some of the officials in not acting that causes me to have these views.

We are a federation of independant states. That's why we have a federal government. Sadly incompetence has not proven to be only a state function.

[RichG]

Democratic government is inherently inefficient. We have local governments and states, which are the first responders, and we have federal government. We have checks and balances at all levels, again horribly inefficient. But this system we have developed has served us well for more than two centuries. We can adjust the margins however we will never have the form of government envisioned by Mr. Ortt or so I pray. Presidents have the "power" to declare a state in insurrection however, any President should view it as an anathema to do so. It the very last thing we as citizens would want to see happen. Even in the break down in the state and local government control, which we saw two weeks ago, the better thing to have happen would have been to get the governor to resign and let her lieutenant governor step in and let the food and water to get to those people in NO. Any President who would so quickly “take over” from state and local control would be setting most dangerous precedent. It would have been a much better thing to see the people evacuated before the storm using sane and planned evacuation methods then to change our constitution through precedent. Lack of preparation by the locals should not relegate the United States to a quasi dictatorship or the threat of one via precedent in the future.

[streetsoldier]

"I would rather have, in the future, a "dictatorship" in the form of a central gov't that can overrule the states..."

Derek,

Your tailor called; the brown shirts are ready.

[kevin]

Derek is a fascist, and it wasn't brought on by the storm. He's been a fascist for some time.

It puzzles me why someone would want to destroy the constitution which has served our nation for over 200 years.