Skip to comments.Nation faces unprecedented choices : How far should U.S. go in making New Orleans whole?
Posted on 09/12/2005 8:25:57 AM PDT by george76
The U.S. government is settling into its familiar role of fixing up big public works after a major disaster.
River channels are open, highways are being rebuilt, railroads are opening and airports are back in operation.
The private sector...working hard to restore power, communications and transportation networks in the New Orleans area. Oil and gas production and distribution are coming back.
All that may turn out to be the easy part.
Recreating...the greater New Orleans community... hundreds of billions...
Ultimately, the decision on how much government effort will be put into the rebuilding of the city will be a political one, laced with the complications of partisan politics, class, race, geography and economics.
The contours of the debate are already developing.
...some harsh fiscal and physical realities.
"But we're already running a pretty big deficit, and as we go forward it's going to potentially start conflicting with other priorities. And that's where there may be some reaction."
Federal spending on Katrina already has dwarfed the $7 billion spent on recovering from the Northridge, Calif., earthquake in 1994 or the $20 billion in relief and recovery from the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist moved this week to postpone a planned vote on a proposal to repeal the estate tax. House GOP leaders have delayed action on measures to cut entitlement spending by around $35 billion over five years, as well as on extending 2003 cuts in the tax rates on capital gains and corporate dividends.
They insist these issues will be revisited, but Democratic strategists contend a bleak fiscal picture exacerbated by hurricane-related spending could crimp Republican efforts to extend Bush's first-term tax cuts, while concerns about the hurricane's victims could derail efforts to trim spending in entitlement programs...
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
My answer: not too far. If NO couldn't even come up with the matching amount required in one of the Fed grants for funding to protect its levees, I'd say LA/NO folks are not very committed to the city themselves.
Don't give away public funds for dubious projects to replace a city that was not functional for a great part of its population. Let private industry in, give tax and wage breaks, and see what happens.
There. That's better.
How about some type of Hyper Habitat for Humanity thingy where the welfare people actually HELP build their OWN homes and neighborhood???
THAT IS IT, nothing more!
Make it a tax free zone.
It'll be rebuilt in a year.
Politicians from both partys will do whatever it takes (and costs) - to buy those votes.
Ok to lend a helping hand temporarily, but I can see Mayor Dumber and his cohorts salivating over the money for their own personal gain. I've even heard some say there should be compensation paid individually to everyone who lost loved ones, homes and businesses (which I guess would be the entire population). Sounds like the on again-off again proposal to compensate all the descendants of slavery.
More welfare we don't need. What we need is responsibility -- individual responsibility.
The federal government is not the automatic insurer of every home and every municipality in this country. The federal government offered very cheap flood insurance. If people didn't get it, they're on their own.
The question is "How far does the federal government have to go to help YOU if you have a house fire or a burst pipe in your attic?"
The federal govt only should repair the necessaties for the interstate commerce and military/security requirements. Roads and other lines of communications.
ALL else is the responsibility of the community - the city - the state! in that order. I intentionally left out CHURCH in this case. I don't want to encourge the bigots.
AFTER all else is depleted then the federal govt can go in and help personally.
Whole or hole?
The fact that the Feds are giving NO ab around $1000 of my money does not motivate me to give more.
How far should the US go? We have already gone too far. It is not the Federal government's responsibility or place to be building cities, particularly in a flood zone. If there should be a city there, one will grow there...and probably will, because of the port.
The Cesspool called New Orleans is Dead!!! Bury the Corpse!!!
Both sides of the aisle are using this as a golden opportunity to expand the budget and expand the government. The GOP can claim to have tried to reduce taxes, spending, etc. but that Katrina made that impossible. It'll be a line of crap from a crappy party.
If they decide to rebuild below sea level, NONE of MY money should go for that at all. Let NOLA and LA residents pay for it.
Even if they decide to move out of the bowl, I'm not sure much federal money should be spent.
The government spent 15 billion trying to build a *tunnel* below sea level in Boston and it already has hundreds of leaks. Makes sense to build an entire city below sea level. NOT
Did you intentionally leave out the bald faced LIE at the opening words of this article?
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Initially caught flat-footed by Hurricane 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.