What next? They'll be complaining about all the "Jacksons" we're sending their way? Pffft!
Posted on 01/26/2006 12:14:03 PM PST by iPod Shuffle
La. Leaders Dissatisfied With U.S. Grants
White House Grants to Rebuild Gulf Coast Fall Short, La. Officials Say
By LARA JAKES The Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Multibillion-dollar grants the Bush administration distributed Wednesday to hurricane-ravaged states left Louisiana far short of the federal aid it wants and divided Gulf Coast lawmakers who have been working together to win more assistance.
The details of how the previously announced $11.5 billion would be distributed to five states followed word that the administration was rejecting a $30 billion redevelopment plan for Louisiana that state officials considered the cornerstone of their hopes for rebuilding.
"My dad used to tell me, 'Cheer up, things could be worse,'" said Rep. Richard Baker, R-La., the architect of the $30 billion plan to jump-start his state. "So I cheered up and things got worse."
By rejecting his plan, Baker said the White House "is basically saying to Louisiana, 'If you want to rebuild, you have to find resources of your own.'"
Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said officials were told Baker's plan was "too expensive."
The White House rejection "demonstrates a continued lack of understanding for the magnitude of the devastation and the immense rebuilding task our state faces," Landrieu said.
Asked about Louisiana's concerns that the grants would not help tens of thousands of people mostly in low-income and working class neighborhoods around New Orleans federal Gulf Coast redevelopment officer Donald Powell said states can use the money to satisfy their most urgent hurricane relief priorities.
Once the grants are depleted, Powell said, "We are very open to going back and asking for more money."
The bulk of the $11.5 billion $6.2 billion would go to Louisiana. That falls short of what Louisiana officials said was necessary to help an estimated 200,000 homeowners return and rebuild their communities.
But Mississippi officials hailed the grants that would bring $5 billion to their state and help up to an estimated 50,000 households that were walloped by flooding caused by Hurricane Katrina.
"It's huge," said Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., who has worked closely with Louisiana lawmakers over the last four months to ensure that Congress continues sending assistance to the region.
Under the grant program, Florida is eligible for $83 million, Alabama for $75 million and Texas for $74 million.
Gulf State officials have been grappling with sustaining White House and congressional interest in helping the devastated region at a time of huge federal deficits, costly wars abroad, and other federal expenses.
Congress has so far appropriated $67 billion to help the region get back on its feet. The White House has estimated the federal government has provided at least an additional $18 billion in flood insurance and other assistance.
Baker had proposed creating a federally supported Louisiana Recovery Corporation to buy large tracts of storm-damaged homes in Louisiana by borrowing up to $30 billion in U.S. Treasury bonds. The corporation would repair the homes and resell them either to developers or to the original homeowners.
But the White House said no to the program. Instead, the administration for now will focus on uninsured homeowners who lived outside designated flood plains, many of whom now face mortgage foreclosures that would almost certainly prevent them from rebuilding.
"This is an investment in long-term recovery and rebuilding lives," said Housing and Urban Development Secretary Alphonso Jackson. "Working with these states and their citizens, it is our hope that the families who once had a home can return to their home."
Baker estimated the federal grants won't help 180,000 families 140,000 of which lived in flood plains but behind more than 200 miles of levees.
"They gave us a ladder to reach our housing needs, but the top rungs are missing," Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco said in Baton Rouge. "Louisiana's housing needs are not complete without Rep. Baker's bill."
Still, Louisiana redevelopment officials said they would consider creating the corporation on a state level, although they made clear that some sort of federal loan guarantee would likely be necessary.
The Gulf Coast was slammed by the triple-whammy of hurricanes that began with Katrina on Aug. 29, followed by Rita on Sept. 24 and Wilma on Oct. 24.
The grants were announced as officials agreed at a Senate hearing that the federal flood insurance program, currently broke because of Gulf Coast hurricane-related claims, must be restructured to make its rate structure more rational and trim unreasonable government subsidies for homeowners who rebuild in flood-prone areas.
The program "has only encouraged people to place themselves in harm's way and continue to build and rebuild in flood-prone areas," said Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.
You seem focused entirely on the movement of the port activities of New Orleans. Right now, that's not where the problem is. The problem is with those who are stuck with property that is worthless as it now stands but might have revitalization value if given the time to do so. They need help getting out of worthless mortgages in order to rebuild their lives. This is a real-world problem that they have been forced to live with day in and day out for five months now. Lets help them in solving this real-world problem first, then worry about where the next port will be. The plan being proposed is a loan to an agency that will buy these properties at 60% of pre-Katrina value and work to make it attractive enough to be resold to redevelopers. It will pay for itself in that regard. The homeowners don't get squat extra. In fact, they lose 40% of their pre-Katrina property valuations. Most of them are currently being screwed by their insurance companies. What they do get is a chance to start over. Right now, due to the slow-moving forces of the system, they are being held in limbo. Let's help them.
My big picture is focused on helping them have the ability to move on with their lives. The location of the port is another issue entirely. I just don't think anyone could convince Americans that it would be worth the moving expenses. That's why I say it isn't going to happen. New Orleans is already in place. You might believe that it's going to sink into the gulf within the next century or so, but not everyone would agree. It might be there another thousand years for all any of us knows. Without this certainty, it doesn't make sense to base decisions one way or another on it's chance of occurring.
I offer my sincere apologies to you if you have felt offended by my remarks concerning whether or not you care about what happens to us here in Louisiana. We should not be arguing this point. Both of us need to join together in an effort to improve our temperments on behalf of all of those along the gulf coast who need help. I'll drop my anger and frustration over what I see as "inaction" if you'll drop your anger and frustration with those requesting it.
And I will say to them what I also say to those on the Mississippi coast. At the most basic level, if they want taxpayer help, it needs to be to move out of harm's way.
For the Misssissippi coast, I am willing to use tax dollars to move people inland. If they wish to rebuild in areas where surge destroyed their properties, no tax dollars should be used for rebuilding.
Likewise, I do not want to hear about rebuilding or redeveloping the 9th Ward. If taxpayer dollars can be used to help property owners extracate themselves from the current situation to safer ground, I'm in favor of that.
But when I see this wrapped up in a plan to redevelop, I have a problem with that. Because redevelopment implies setting up the bowling pins all over again.
I am willing to spend more money to address all the problems that a port on the lower Mississippi faces. And education is a big part of getting others to go along with that. Few Americans understand that the Mississippi in our lifetimes could change course. If that were to happen, this discussion about NOLA becomes moot.
My desire, in a nutshell, is to preserve the historic parts of NOLA, which is a lot more viable then trying to preserve the rest of the city that flooded.
Work to revive the industrial base that got wiped out.
And then develop a plan to move the port upriver in anticipation of a diversion of the Atchafalaya by nature.
That's a ten to fifteen year plan. But it also respects much of what you have said about the importance of a port on the lower Mississippi.
The reason for the current location of NOLA is no longer valid - the need for a portage to Ponchatrain. Instead, the compelling long-term reason to site a port becomes the Atchafalaya. I am willing to support MORE tax dollars being spent to deal with that problem now. That is not the mark of someone who is looking for an excuse not to help Louisiana.
Uncle Sham, they can't give you that committment. You had levees that were "supposed" to hold up to Cat 3 and they failed. You didn't get hit with a Cat 4, it was much less than that. In order to build something stronger it's going to take more than a few months to engineer and MUCH longer than that to build. What do the people do in the meantime?
What next? They'll be complaining about all the "Jacksons" we're sending their way? Pffft!
That was pointed out to me in a previous post. But thanks anyway.
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.