Friday, July 6, 2007

Broadening Katrina's Lens

Listen to podcast.

This is the first in a series to help the Democratic Party, particularly its presidential hopefuls, to get the framework right, to broaden its lens through which it views Katrina, what’s stopping recovery, what will speed up a vibrant recovery, and how Katrina affords us to transform the basic quality of life for all Americans.

Last week’s Democratic presidential debate really rubbed me the wrong way. From the question posed to the answers given, everyone just marched right along with a recitation of the media’s “one-size-fits-all” frame for discussing who Hurricane Katrina impacted, what that impact was, and a bevy of insufficient solutions offered as a result of this faulty way of viewing this catastrophe. The one-size-fits-all approach goes something like this.
  1. Katrina = New Orleans = levees.
  2. Problems stemming from Katrina are the same for New Orleans, the Mississippi Gulf Coast, and the areas Katrina impacted that were as far as 200 miles inland from the Gulf Coast.
  3. Katrina impacted mostly the most poor among us, and they were primarily located in the 9th Ward of New Orleans, Louisiana.
  4. The ineptitude stemming from the Bush White House and FEMA comes out of a racist lens alone.
  5. Solutions for the city of New Orleans and its levees will solve all the problems stemming from Katrina, which really are about Bush’s immense callous ineptitude about poor people who could not leave New Orleans before Katrina.
  6. Talking about Katrina recovery in New Orleans is shorthand for talking about, addressing, understanding, and solving the multitude of issues regarding recovery for everything inside and outside of New Orleans.

Do these ring a bell? Of course, they do. The media played these images and talked only of New Orleans and the levees over and over again until they became seared in our brains. The framework became installed. Katrina = New Orleans = levees = racist/classist betrayal.

Unfortunately, these are all, indeed, true, but the picture is incomplete and encourages otherwise intelligent individuals to ask questions that miss the mark and offer solutions that are insufficient to address all of the problems we face. Read more . . .

13 comments:

  1. Be intellectually honest here.

    While you give credit to Landrieau and Taylor for trying to close the anti-trust loophole, you ignore Jindal who actually SPONSORED the legislation and had been catching hell from the business community over it.

    Also, you ignore the fact that the La. COngressional delegation damn near killed Mississippi's chances for getting recovery aid when it first asked for $250 BILLION dollars in aid for a package that was filled with boondoggles.

    Last, but not least, you can't have any discussion on the recovery without a criticism or two about Blanco's Road home program.

    My take on Katrina is there is enough blame to go around for everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  2. one other thing. I'm sick of seeing in the media how only the ninth ward suffered. Alot of people in Lakeview were left homeless and jobless.

    Alot.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The impetus for the series is the emphasis on the 9th to the exclusion of plenty of other Katrina impacts, especially the apparent wholesale invisibility of thte Mississippi Gulf Coast--with the exception of CNN's Kathleen Koch's 2 fantastic documentaries.

    Regarding intellectual honesty, Kingfish, your sentence structure indicates that Jindal sponsored the anti-trust loophole. Has the Senate Bill received a companion bill in the House? By all means, tell me the number for I am unaware of it. I looked on Thomas to find all the bills that Jindal sponsored and nothing along this line is there. Here is the website. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery.

    As long as we're talking about intellectual honesty, perhaps you would assist me with being a bit more grammatically clear so that I can better comprehend the honesty of which you so eloquently wrote. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Regarding your disappointment that I deliberately focused on Mississippi and stayed away from focusing on Louisiana, help me to become clear.

    The point of my series is to focus attention on the Mississippi Gulf Coast because scant attention has been paid to it. The point of your criticism is that I didn't focus on Louisiana be it the Road Home program or a Republican Congressman. Hmmmm.

    This is a bit of an ironic criticsm, don't you think? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hehe touche. ;-)

    It was the Ninth Ward part that threw me off about it being focused on Mississippi.

    As for Jindal, his website says so for starters. A quick search of yahoo using jindal antitrust insurance search terms reveals a plethora of listings. Also give some credit to Lott as he has helped Landrieau on this issue and had introduced a similar bill.

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-03-07-insurance_N.htm

    http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2007/02/15/77000.htm?print=1

    Companion, bipartisan legislation has also been introduced in the House by Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), Gene Taylor (D-Miss.), Bobby Jindal (R-La.), Charlie Melancon (D-La.), Rodney Alexander (R-La.), and Walter Jones (R-N.C.).

    ReplyDelete
  6. Kingfish - you make a few valid points, certainly there are some Repubs like Lott that have gone after the insurance thugs, but probably in his case only because as proof of their power and arrogance they said to him after the storm "no check for you", Senator! Jindal seems to be a somewhat decent guy who has tried to do the right thing in regards to recovery, even though his voting record rubber stamps Bushco most of the time. At least we haven't found 90 grand in his freezer yet!

    ana maria - You make some very valid and excellent points, it seems that Katrina is and has been viewed as a "one size fits all" situation, I think once the Dems can take back the WH in 08 and 09 then we will see a Prez who sets up a program to deal with the whole disaster in a different and more in-depth kind of way. At least I hope so! I am forwarding your stuff to some friends who work in the main campaign offices of some of our top candidates.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jindal showed what a leader he was after Katrina. He didn't wait for Blanco.

    Good read:

    http://www.redstate.com/stories/elections/2007/bobby_jindal_saves_louisiana



    By the way here is a great piece from a liberal rag about the government and Katrina recovery:
    http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=9511

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think if you read his Katrina experience you will see why he is opposing Bush etc.

    Crisis's do have a way of changing people.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Kingfish,

    First off, you're use of the name Kingfish would indicate you to be a HUGE Huey P. Long fan. However, given your continual raising of the Rethuglican banner, I gather that your name is smoke and mirrors. A bit dishonest, dear. The Real Kingfish was quite the populist and a Democrat with a big D.

    Next subject, The American Spectator is a right wing magazine. Perhaps you accidentally wrote liberal? (Yes, I'm being charmingly, though poignantly, sarcastic.)

    Next, regarding Lott helping Landreiu on the issue of closing the insurarnce industry's anti-trust loophole, you must be joking. Darling, Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy--chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee--sponsored the legislation that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senator Landreiu co-sponsored along with Specter and Lott. Come again on the helping part?

    Hey, I'm glad that you're reading my stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I was merely going by the stories posted in the USA Today and insurance journal about Lott. Your gripe is with them, not me. However, the WSJ slammed Lott and Jindal for their participation in these bills.

    I was being sarcastic about the American Spectator. Actually, that article, if you read it, was VERY critical of the Bush Administration. VERY. Read it. I think you will agree with most of its points. SOmetimes I will refer to mags like The Nation as right wing rags.

    As for Huey, I like Huey to some degree. He was more far sighted than most of those who opposed him and saw the need to build up LSU. My favorite book about him is the classic bio by T. Harry Williams. I don't like his more radical days but when he was governor, he tried to do more for the state than the Old Regulars who were totally opposed to even connecting N.O. by bridge to the rest of the state.

    I wish he had been governor during Katrina. He would've either made Nagin carry out his job right or he would've had a court declare him incompetent or something, taken over, and run the whole recovery and relief effort himself. Huey would've seen that as his opportunity to shine and launch himself towards better things.

    Rethuglican? Come on. Now have I used similar insults towards Democrats or about them? I've pretty much just debated the points with you and everyone else. Come on. You argue pretty well without a rhetorical device such as that.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I did read the American Spectator article and was delightfully surprised at its critique.

    I believe thte the modern day Republican Party is a bunch of thugs therefore I refer to them all as ReTHUGlicans.

    You raise their banner and it is the banner to which I was referring as ReTHUGlican. If you yourself are a member of that party, oh well . . . Let's be clear, you take on the identity of one of the most beloved populist politicians of last century from the state where EVERYONE in my family was born and raised with the exception of yours truly and my younger brother. . .and our grandparents who came from Sicily.

    Kingfish would rather be dead than to have his name tarnished with anyone or anything that aligns him or herself with a party (GOP) that has been hell bent on betraying our nation, ripping apart our constitution, destroying every ounce of goodwill inside the international community that men and women have fought for centuries to attain.

    My dear young friend, if you do not like being tarnished with the same brush with which I cheerfully and excitedly brush George Bush and Company, then choose not to align yourself with them.

    However, if you do align yourself with them, then be strong enough to understand that it is your choice. Furthermore, when you take on the personna of a man as great and as America loving as the late Kingfish but you fail to uphold his values, then understand that when you come across a creature like me who has been perfectly blended between the great history of Louisiana--in particular New Orleans--and the Gulf Coast.

    What does that mean? It means that I have plenty of chutzpah to use expertly my penetrating analytical skills coupled with traditinal New Orleanian sarcasm and wit. If you are looking for a wilting magnolia, uh, well, that is a desciption for someone else. ;)

    Besides, Kingfish was tough. You should at least take on THAT part of him. ;) Nite Nite.

    ReplyDelete
  12. My dear young Ava,

    I do like the Kingfish. I like him prior to going to Washington D.C. I don't like his politics after he pretty much became a socialist and I think any legitimate economist would tell you that most of his schemes he promoted as part of his share the wealth society would have been disasterous for the country.

    Like I said, looking at the state then and the opposition, which by the way was not really Republicans at the time, it was really Huey v. the New Orleans machine, I'm glad we had Huey. True, he was a tyrant but at that point representative government had failed the people completely and Huey stood up for the citizens. He was simply brilliant.

    One thing he was VERY farsighted on was race. He thought Bilbo was a f'n idiot and wanted everyone educated, not just whites. He tried to avoid the racial strife that plagued the South as he was smart enough to see through it and the long range problems it would cause. Excellent discussion in Williams book on that issue.

    Having said that, I didn't vote for Bush and although conservative, I have a large libertarian and populist streak as well. In fact, I voted Libertarian in the last two elections although the last candidate was a nut.

    By the way, I got news for you. Huey would SPIT on the current Democratic Party as well along with the labor movement.

    And by the way, I can be very tough and enjoy a good exchange. Don't fool yourself for one second as any glance at my posts on other blogs will tell you. I just thought that you were making very good points without the rethugery labels. I don't think Dem's are all evil and I don't think Republicans have all the answers. People like Moynihan I had tremendous respect for.

    As for my blogging, I take pokes at everyone. I'll compliment on a good post even when I disagree with it and clarify when I think its needed and disagree as need be. I have no ax to grind and am not a hack for a party. period. I am capable of having my mind changed believe it or not. I think on Katrina issues, you and I would agree on probably 80% of the issues. In fact, most of it has totally disgusted me as I grew up in BR and spend literally half my time in N.O. and BR.

    ReplyDelete