The Hits Just Keep On Coming
Lawmakers have to ask themselves if it’s worth sinking possibly billions of federal dollars into rebuilding New Orleans, a low-lying city which would remain a vulnerable hurricane target even after clean up, House Speaker Dennis Hastert said Wednesday.
“It doesn’t make sense to me,” said Hastert during an interview with the Daily Herald editorial board. “And it’s a question that certainly we should ask.”Congress’ most powerful Republican undoubtedly wasn’t the first to think such a thought, but as the man at the head of a chamber charged with approving federal disaster aid legislation, he knows the potentially taboo topic won’t go away.
“First of all your heart goes out to the people, the loss of their homes,” said Hastert of Plano. “But there are some real tough questions to ask about how you go about rebuilding this city.”
Hastert said his office worked nine weeks straight putting together the disaster relief for New York City following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. This could take even longer, he said.
“We help replace, we help relieve disaster,” Hastert said. “That is certainly the decision the people of New Orleans are going to make.
“But I think federal insurance and everything goes along with it and we ought to take a second look at it,” Hastert added.
“But you know we build Los Angeles and San Francisco on top of earthquake fissures and they rebuild, too. Stubbornness.”
Link to the story here.
Comments on "The Hits Just Keep On Coming"
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
"[A] foolish man ... built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it." (Matthew 7:26-27.)
If the man who first built his house on the sand was "foolish", how should we characterize the man who RE-built the house on the sand AFTER the floods came and the house fell?
Humanitarian aid, relocation aid, transition aid?--yes. Rebuilding the house on the sand (or, in this case, rebuilding the city on the sub-sea-level swamp)?--no, alas.
Slate has a very good article explaining the circumstances of New Orleans still-important location, particularly when it comes to global commerce. Put simply, there is no real better option for the economy than to build a city precisely where New Orleans is: on the Gulf of Mexico, still at the mouth of the most important commercial river in the world. Sorry, DG, but it ain't foolish - it's necessary.
Slate's story here.