Replies

So is your reply. If the assertions are false, then refute them.

Just a few - but it's not my job to be fact checker for every bogus article that comes down the pike.

The governors of those states had a already signed on to federal help and relief was pouring in. Governor Blanco was the lone holdout. She had still not made a decision.

050827 KBB - Request federal relief for cleanup: http://www.gov.state.la.us/Press_Release_detail.asp?id=976
050828 KBB - Request additional federal relief: http://gov.louisiana.gov/Disaster%20Relief%20Request.pdf

Blanco finally signed Executive Order KBB-2005-23, giving permission for the federal government to enter Louisiana with military assistance.

That order (http://www.state.la.us/osr\other\kbb05-29.htm) suspends a bonding requirement normally imposed on people deputized into Louisiana law enforcement duty. It has absolutely nothing to do with authorizing entry of federal military assistance.

In the first 12 hours after Governor Blanco relinquished control of the rescue and relief effort in New Orleans ...

AFAIK, she never relinquished ultimate control.

By Friday September 2, the federal relief effort was in full swing. Gen. Honore was now totally in charge and the effects of a firm leader were evident. A convoy of about 50 military vehicles arrived at the Convention Center where 7,000 storm survivors had waited for 4 days without food or water.

That convoy was a National Guard convoy, and not under Honore's command and control.

Walters said she was outside of the center when the convoy of about 50 military vehicles carrying National Guard troops and police arrived.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/02/katrina.impact/

There are other errors, many of which are of the "so what" variety. In general the piece is a sloppy mishmash of fact, error and inference. It is not helpful in unangling the reality of coordinated disaster relief.

Oops ... there are two Executive Orders by Blanco that waive bonding requirements for LA deputized law enforcement. One dated August 31, another dated September 3rd.

http://www.state.la.us/osr\other\kbb05-23.htm <- KBB 2005-23
http://www.state.la.us/osr\other\kbb05-29.htm <- KBB 2005-29

Just the same, neither of these give federal authority to take over. The guts of them is approximately this ...

SECTION 1: Pursuant to the Louisiana Homeland Security and Emergency Assistance and Disaster Act, R.S. 29:724, et seq., and more specifically R.S. 29:724(D), the requirement of persons issued a special officer's commission by the superintendent of state police to be bonded shall be suspended.
SECTION 2: The only requirement of R.S. 40:1379.1 which shall be suspended is the requirement of the bond and proof thereof, all other requirements shall remain in full force and effect;

The later order rescinded the earlier one.

Here is another snippet that results in an utterly false impression:

Meanwhile Blanco had her own advisors insisting that the President was actually making a request for federal takeover of the Louisiana National Guard, and asking to put Louisiana State Police under federal control. They were concerned that this would be the same as martial law and lead to abuse of power by the federal government.
The next day, August 27 ...

There is no way that President Bush would have been seeking to federalize activity in Louisiana on August 26th. The auther misreads a WaPo article of September 4th, that describes a meeting between Blanco and Bush on a Friday - many readers misinterpret the article as saying the meeting was on Friday AUgust 26, when in fact, the meeting referred to was on Friday, September 2nd.

Behind the scenes, a power struggle emerged, as federal officials tried to wrest authority from Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D). Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans, a source within the state's emergency operations center said Saturday.
The administration sought unified control over all local police and state National Guard units reporting to the governor. Louisiana officials rejected the request after talks throughout the night, concerned that such a move would be comparable to a federal declaration of martial law. ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/03/AR2005090301680.html

Here is another one that misses the boat.

Under the Emergency Management Assistance Compact, which was revised after 9/11, the Federal Government and FEMA are not allowed to interfere with local operations unless they are authorized by state and local leaders.

I agree that obtaining Federal Assistance depends on a state asking for it (See Stafford Act, 42 USC; and the regulations that flow from it, i.e. FEMA rules at 44 CFR), but the author is saying the Emergency Management Assistance Compact is what governs this relationship. It does not.

EMAC, the Emergency Management Assistance Compact, is a congressionally ratified organization that provides form and structure to interstate mutual aid. Through EMAC, a disaster impacted state can request and receive assistance from other member states quickly and efficiently, resolving two key issues upfront: liability and reimbursement.
http://www.emacweb.org/

Here is another, the author says "By Tuesday, August 30, the federal relief effort began shipping food, water and medical supplies toward Louisiana for use in New Orleans," yet it is evident from news accounts that relief supplies were prepositioned INSIDE Louisiana before Katrina made landfall.

Here is one that is indefinite ...

The Department of Defense sent search and rescue experts, doctors, nurses and support personnel. FEMA was there to help as much as they could but local and state officials would not allow them to participate because Governor Blanco still had not given her permission.

The phrase "would not allow them to participate" is indefinite. Participate in what, exactly? FEMA was working, obtaing damage assessments, order repositioning of supplies, starting the process of coordinating outside resources, etc.

I do know that the Red Cross and other FEMA-driven agencies were denied permission to enter NOLA, by state and local authorities, because the thugs were active and because Blanco figured starving the people would encourage them to leave. The author should have been more specific here.

Anyway, the article simply paints a grossly inaccurate picture of the way Blanco mismanaged the situation. It fails to separate asking for $$ from ceding control of a rescue and relief effort. It asserts that KBB 2005-23 is somehow the device that "turned a switch" between FEMA/federal inaction and action. In the first place, there is no single "switch" of that nature. The governor's requests for assistance must be precise. And in the scond place, as noted above, KBB 2005-23 has absolutely nothing to do with the relationship between LA and federal assistance.

Like I said, there are some facts in the article, but as a whole, it needs to be taken with a pound of salt.