The first thing I did when I woke this morning was check weather online in the cities where my sons attend college. Then I checked the news online, to see what damage Hurricane Sandy’s impacts continued to wreak through the night. I opened a window to access Facebook and read any messages from my boys.
They’re fine.
New Jersey? New York City? Not so much.
I quickly scanned news services to see where I might get the best updates on various areas in the Northeast. Having spent a significant amount of time glued to CNN last evening, I would rather read than watch at the moment.
All the services offered pictures and stories, but I went to the New York Times as I do most often, and an editorial which seemed (at first) in poor taste caught my eye.
This storm has been so crippling thus far that to make any political hay out of it for either presidential candidate feels like bad form. Still, this short opinion piece, “A Big Storm Requires Big Government,” makes for an interesting read.
The article describes the National Response Coordination Center as “the war room of the Federal Emergency Management Agency,” stating:
… officials gather to decide where rescuers should go, where drinking water should be shipped, and how to assist hospitals that have to evacuate… Disaster coordination is one of the most vital functions of “big government…”
At a Republican primary debate last year, Mr. Romney was asked whether emergency management was a function that should be returned to the states… “Absolutely,” he said. “Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that’s the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that’s even better.”
I recommend the full column at the Times.
Meanwhile, the morning news is confirming that airports, bridges, subways and highways remain closed. 16 (so far) are dead. Towns are flooding. Millions of homes and businesses are without power. Electrical fires continue to burn. Winds are tearing through states from Georgia to Canada. This is a massive disaster of unprecedented proportions.
I glance back at the Times editorial. When you even consider disaster relief to states in the midst of devastation, doesn’t that defy logic? How can a state initiate, coordinate, or take bids from the private sector to make service decisions for vast emergency operations when its communication, transportation, and other systems are damaged? When time is critical? When those who would make the decisions may, themselves, be impacted? When we’re most vulnerable to those who would profiteer and scam?
It doesn’t make sense – certainly not when dealing with anything of significant scale.
Might I add that we are a nation that instinctively reaches out to help a neighbor? Not for glory. Not for profit. Because it feels right.
As the Big Storm is all many of us in the U.S. can think of today anyway, then let’s think about the reasons our government exists. Don’t we all use national highways? National defense?
Natural disasters don’t respect state lines – or political parties, much less tax brackets. National governments can draw on expert resources regardless of location to provide coordinated services, just as national governments should set the standards and assure delivery of education and health care, regardless of state lines.
Isn’t this what a civilized country does?
And yes, I am willing to share the tax bill to pay for disaster relief (and health care and education) in other parts of the country. There but for the grace of God…
As for FEMA, let’s hope their services will help quickly and as well as they can, in an emergency of this magnitude and complexity. I for one am glad we have a national government that will do its best to help. I am also glad that we are fundamentally a nation of big hearts – those whose acts of everyday kindness and assistance are a way of life.
Now it’s off my soapbox and onto the business of being a mother and a friend, checking in periodically with my sons and their friends in the Northeast. I hope your loved ones in the affected regions are safe.
I imagine later this week we will begin the wrenching, arduous, and expensive work of rebuilding. Together. Because that’s what we do. That’s who we are. That’s the heart – the big heart – of this proud, conflicted, and I continue to insist – ultimately caring country.
Now all we need is for our politicians to think as clearly as you just did.
I’ve heard from all but one uncle. But power is out, so I’ll just keeping my thoughts with them.
Seeing the flooding, thoughts on the many many in harm’s way, I can only agree. Loudly. Well organized responses to events like this are fundamental to national security.
Was just now listening to the BBC and they mentioned that people are bringing this article to light, with the implication that this was somehow uncivil.
Well, Hello – That is that politician’s position on that issue, and in fact his world view! Why should we shy away from bringing it to light in a context which shows it’s appropriateness (or lack….)? It is long past due that we bring our discussions back to the subject of real world function, rather than form.
Dear BLW, once again I align with you, and how strongly! You know what really left me baffled? It is to think that something like 50% of Americans seem ready to vote for M. Romney! The funniest thing being that these voters are supposed to be massively Christians. How did they read the gospel, then? Holding their Bibles upside down? Where is the sharing? Where is the giving to the ones in need? Where is the human brotherhood?
You quote these words of Romney “…send it back to the states, that’s the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that’s even better.”
Well, let me go on and read the mind of this merciless selfish man: what comes next in his mind is surely “… And if you could let it go to each one dealing alone with what’s happening to him, and with his own personal means, even better!”
And US people should be ready to place their destiny in the hands of such a man? What is wrong with the USA? Are the notions of solidarity and social justice totally inaudible?
Let me end on this last observation:
USA represents hardly 5% of the world population and yet it’s responsible for 25% of the world total emissions of greenhouse gas (which means that projecting the US model around the world would simply destroy the planet). These gases are known to be clearly responsible for the global warming, which is now clearly linked to the aggravation of weather havoc around the world. Now, who among you has heard either of the candidates putting this major issue of reducing greenhouse gas emission on the table during his campaign?
Crazy world where we are dancing on a volcano, probably waiting for it to explode under our butt before we really start to pay attention to its threat.
François,
I wouldn’t presume to read Mitt Romney’s mind nor the minds of those who call themselves Christians. I have my own opinions about certain factions and my own bafflement at the lack of logic in what Christianity teaches and how individuals actually lead their lives. There is often a startling disconnect.
But I do know this not to be true of many individuals who genuinely live their beliefs.
As to my own dismay when I consider that many may vote against the very principles they profess to believe in, that they will truly be voting against their own best interest (in my opinion), that they cannot take a longer view (your example of climate / energy issues is a perfect case in point) – well – I imagine my position is clear.
I’m not thrilled with the way the past four years have gone, but I don’t ask if “I” am better off than I was four years ago. Point of fact – I am.
But I ask if I have more faith in the integrity and intentions of the man currently president than in his opponent. And I do. I also look at communities, not just myself. I look at the next four years and what will be set in motion should supreme court justices change, just as an example.
Will we, as a nation, be worse off four years from now with Romney in leadership? I believe so. Hey – I’m a firm believer in capitalism. But that doesn’t change the fact that government is necessary for certain fundamental services and among them, our security as a nation and our infrastructure. That cannot and should not be “outsourced” to states or the private sector. Then again, Mr. Romney would put government in my bedroom and my doctor’s office – where it surely does not belong!
Again, I will say that I believe in the integrity and intentions of President Obama, whose view doesn’t discount the most vulnerable or put them out to “bid for services.” I cannot say the same for the Republican candidate.
I think you and Francois are both right. If we collect Federal Taxes our government is responsible for taking care of us for emergencies. The states have their own issues but they could never do the work of the the Federal Government. I believe Romney doesn’t give a shit about the mass majority of the American People. He thinks the middle class is $250,000, and he plans to divide the country even more. I am so fearful that if he gets in our country will go back to the 50’s with coat hanger abortions, and women’s rights set back to levels that I fought hard for to get rid of. I really don’t know what I will do if he wins. I love America but Romney will kill whatever progress we have made.
BLW,
Well yes, me too, I believe in the integrity and intentions of Obama, and of course there is no comparison to be made with Romney who is another G.W. Bush (could be even worse) who will have prayers recited in the oval office, while more and more Americans will live under the poverty line (46 millions of Americans now).
But that’s not enough. That’s not enough because in my opinion, democracy in America is just an illusion. There are two different parties (which is surely not enough), but the view from France is they are not so different. None of them is, even remotely, what we call “a Left party in France”. They both go with sensibly the same grid for reading a system of society, and when they argue on issues, the real issues concern a way of governing which would lead to some elementary social justice that is not even on the table.
Some Americans share this vision I have, like Noam Chomsky or these who disappeared much too soon: Howard Zinn or Georges Carlin who knew so well how to point out the plain and sad facts, while still making us laugh in the process. I totally share the point of view he defends in this show:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q
I understand all too well, François. Especially having lived in France. Je comprends votre point de vue. On est plus ou moins d’accord, nous deux. Quelle tristesse, n’est-ce pas ?
Mais oui, c’est bien triste BLW, mais le pire de l’histoire est dans le fait que: In France today we are going more or less to the same kind of system. I mean, only two parties are sharing the power and if one is called “Parti Socialiste” it’s in fact a pure illusion. All those who know the history of this party are perfectly knowing that it constantly betrayed the people that so called “left” parties are supposed to represent.
They were involved exactly the same in colonialist wars in Vietnam or Algeria, and they are the ones who (in the 80s) made everything in matters of laws and economic rules so that an unbridled and merciless capitalism could thrive in France. The deregulation of the stock market in France (leading to the same aberration as subprimes and so forth…) it’s them!
So it’s very sad to understand now that the only moment when a balance had been restored a little, I mean in matters of social justice, security etc. was in the immediate period after war with the CNR (Conseil National de la Résistance), and in the times when the Général de Gaulle was governing. Not that I was a big fan of the man, but at least he had a sense of integrity, fairness and honor, all things in process of total disappearance now.
Now I would end in pointing a really distressing fact, striking fact as you will see of the situation today in France. In 1789, France made a revolution in which the main purpose was to abolish all the privileges and make citizens equal in rights, bla bla bla … But you know what? With this unbridled capitalism that both of our big parties complacently go along with, the gap between the poor and the rich in France has come down to exactly the same as what it was before the revolution! In short, the French revolution? Much ado about nothing!
The rich get richer with no limit while more and more people are living under the poverty line. There was a time when even big capitalist managers had a sense of social decency. Henry Ford was wisely proposing that a boss could not be paid more than 40 times what his workers were earning. And let’s admit that it was always a big gap. But in France today, the big bosses are nothing else than pharaohs, exactly like in the USA, and they are paid not 40 but 300 times the French legal minimum salary!
Yours is a very reasonable and powerfully stated argument for one of the fundamental components of our civilization. Thank you for speaking up. More people need to find their voice. We may not be totally in the ditch yet if intelligent people begin to speak up.
Tim
We all have a different view on the world, don’t we, Tim. I hope people will truly search their hearts in the next week, and think about the far-reaching repercussions of their choice next Tuesday. It’s so much bigger than any one individual, and four years, always. Thank you for adding your voice to the discussion.