Hastert: Rebuilding below sea level senseless

AP via WWLTV ^ | 09/01/2005 | AP

[El Gato]

They been talking about fixin' it for just as long. Those damn sneaky french

When the French owned the place, it was above sea level (and somewhat closer to the ocean via the river too.)

[undeniable logic]

Nobody has addressed this, but I know that if I were a terrorrist and I am watching what is going on in New Orleans right now, a major light bulb would be going off. Look at what they could have done if they sent one of the airplanes to a levee in NO instead of the WTC. I bet the levees could be breached with a bomb. They would have to be nuts to rebuild, not just because of the risk of another hurricane, but any city protected by levees is a terrorist target right now.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

I remember reading about that. I can't recall all the details, but I don't believe the government was involved. It seems like they found soem creative ways of funding it though. This was before the day and age of entitlements. I know most of the work was done by the citizens themselves. It's a very interesting part of history. Really, lots can be learned from it in this situation. I know that they required every able bodied man to aid in clean up. They were provided with all the liquor they could drink. I imagine the stench was intolerable. And, they applied that age old rule without mercy, shoot looters on site! Very, very interesting historical study.

[MARTIAL MONK]

Huge amounts of fill are being washed by NO daily in the form of silt in the Mississippi. If it could be recovered would it be adequate to build on? NO could be rebuilt in sections on reclaimed ground, much like San Francisco was.

[MayflowerMadam]

"Hastert: Rebuilding below sea level senseless"

Ya THINK???

[af_vet_rr]

I think it will be political suicide for the R's, however to push this point. NO will rebuilt exactly where it is. You and me will pay the taxes to insure the insurance companies against loss in the next hurricane. Watch it happen.

I was in Louisiana in 1965 when Betsy came through the region, and 1969 when Camille came through. My dad was in the Air Force at the time and I hadn't started college yet. In '69 he had to go down to the coast to do S&R.

He called me the other day and said "I told you so". He was referring to a conversation we had after Camille, when he said they were going to rebuild the area, and it'll get hit again, and more people will lose their lives.

You are absolutely right - you and I will pay the taxes and the insurance companies to help the people of New Orleans when the next hurricane comes through the area.

You and I will not have blood on our hands though. The politicians stumping for the next election, that want to rebuild New Orleans, will have blood on their hands. They won't care though, because they will be long gone from office, or everybody will have forgotten them, or they'll use it as a new opportunity for the next election.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

Galveston lost most of its prominence upon the completion of the ship channel. There's a lot of speculation about Galveston's decline, also very intersting. some contribute it to the hurricane, and some to the Houston ship channel. The majority of Galveston's decline was in the late teens, early 1920's. This is another interesting theory. Apparently the were a few families that held places of prestige in Galveston society. The fledgling oil industry originally looked to Galveston as it's base, being that Galveston had a flourishing harbor. There was the question of space though. It's an island, only so much land to go around. The politicians feared this new industry, and their places of prestige to other wealthy businessmen, so apparently there was somewhat of a conspiracy to buy up as much land as possible, thus making it impossible for the oil industry to find a suitable location to build their operation. So, the oil industry then looked to Houston, and it's newly completed ship channel. I guess Galveston's decline is something we can never be certain about. I imagine that all of these things contributed, but it really is interesting. I'm very fascinated by the city. Can you tell!

[The Red Zone]

I'd think that crashing a jumbo jet into a levee wouldn't do squat. It took the power of a storm wave to do that.

[ModelBreaker]

If we rebuilt it right, I wouldn't mind. Basically, we have to bulldoze the entire city, landfill it so that it is above sea level and the level of Ponchartrain, and then rebuild it. There is a reason NO is there--it is located at one of the most geopolitically important spots in the US, no, the world. It is valuable that it is there. But it is not good that it is below the level of the Lake and the Mississippi and the Ocean. There is a way to fix that. If we are going to rebuild, we should do it right.

[GW and Twins Pawpaw]

In my view, a national airspace system and publicly owned airports are matters of National Security and should be publicly funded as such...

[af_vet_rr]

Nobody has addressed this, but I know that if I were a terrorrist and I am watching what is going on in New Orleans right now, a major light bulb would be going off.

That's because nobody wants to talk about a terrorist attack or even the next hurricane. People in this country (at least the politicians) love to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that nothing bad will happen, or they'll say what the people want to hear, even if it goes against reality, and the last 75 years of history.

Here's the real kicker about rebuilding New Orleans: Chances are, many people who can afford to move somewhere else are going to do so. The majority of people left are going to be mostly poor.

We saw this with Camille in '69 - we saw a lot of people, and quite a few businesses move out.

Anybody who has ever been to New Orleans, and has strayed from the entertainment/convention districts knows that many parts of the city were very poor.

When you watch the news, notice the people that stayed behind this time - most of them, if not all, are poor.

[af_vet_rr]

Basically, we have to bulldoze the entire city, landfill it so that it is above sea level and the level of Ponchartrain, and then rebuild it.

You do realize that that area has been sinking for centuries, and will continue to do so, and that the Mississippi has slowly been rising (due to silt, etc.), as well as the Mississippi will eventually change course, with possibly drastic effects, and last, but not least, hurricanes themselves.

You would be simply buying time until the next major distaster.

I understand where your coming from - it is geopolitically important, but that's not an excuse to put more lives in danger (even if they do it voluntarily).

Remove the entertainment district, what do you have - the port and its shipping, and the oil and gas.

The city doesn't necessarily have to go away, but moving the people 10 or 15 or 20 miles away from the area under water would make a major difference, and would save lives and money in the future.

[logician2u]

I suspect Speaker Hastert's reasoning is based more on practicality than on the Consitution, unfortunately.

Perhaps one of his consituents will send him this as a gentle reminder:

Not Yours To Give

(Couldn't find any current threads, so this is the best we can do for now.)

[RightWhale]

one of the most geopolitically important spots in the US, no, the world

That's right. Harvest is coming up, too. Can they get enough of the docks back in operation in time for those grain barges? Who will commute 200 miles a day to work there?

[Schwaeky]

wooden a-frame homes and the such sure, but much of it is brick, stone, etc, and will hopefull come out of this like they did any previous hurricane. some stuff torn down, some stays... little to none of what was there when the french first settled is either there now (fire and past hurricanes) before and definitely not now), what is called the "french quarter" was actually built during the era of spanish control...

concrete and brick structures though, as I said, are quite resilient and will probably be repairable...

[Schwaeky]

its one of our cities, and a national treasure, to not rebuild it would be a stab in the back to the American spirit, and to the taxpayers/citizens that live in New Orleans.. My family left there for better opportunities elswhere, but we still call it home, and if the GOP chooses to abandon one of the few charming cities in this country to mother nature and leave its citizens hanging, I, as conservative as I am, will leave the GOP..

[Schwaeky]

you anti-rebuilding types need to take your opinion and shove it (like Teraaaayyyzaa said--shove it)... it is one of the few cities left that has any charm and to betray it to mother nature is a crime against civilization.

[evad]

Do you want a Democratically controlled state government to come in and pull the "eminent domain" deal they just got in New England?

NO

Won't that be exciting!

NO

[Schwaeky]

It's not going to move for ten thousand years, and even if it did sooner, manmade excavation can keep it where it is now...