When a Government Won’t Own Up
Rescue and cleanup workers, who put their lives on the line in our nation’s darkest hour, weren’t given information about environmental risks and are now paying the price with financial hardship, illness, and even death.
Hundreds of thousands of people living on the Gulf Coast survived a horrific natural disaster and a failed government response, only to be placed in trailers that FEMA knew were at risk for dangerous levels of formaldehyde.
We are witnessing the cumulative impact of the Bush ideology: what columnist Paul Krugman called a “hostility to the very idea of using government to serve the public good.”
Last month, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil rights, and Civil Liberties, chaired by Representative Jerrold Nadler ☼, held a hearing entitled “the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Response to Air Quality Issues Arising from the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001: Were There Substantive Due Process Violations?”
It was revealed that scientists had informed the EPA of harmful air quality and dust at the disaster site that contained “dangerous levels of asbestos and other carcinogens.” A September 14 draft of an EPA press release sited elevated asbestos levels and, as Nadler wrote in a New York Times op-ed, “expressed concern for workers at the cleanup site and for employees who would be returning to their offices ‘on or near Water Street’ on September 17.” The White House deleted the warning and instead went with, “Our tests show that it is safe for New Yorkers to go back to work in New York’s financial district.”
Christine Todd Whitman, who was head of the Environmental Protection Agency at the time, testified that opening the stock market quickly was important: “We weren’t going to let the terrorists win.” As for revisions to public statements Whitman said it was critical at the time for the federal government to speak with “one voice.”
How about an honest voice? A Mount Sinai Hospital study that began last year showed that 70 percent of the first 9,000 workers examined reported some kind of respiratory problem after working on the debris pile. Retired Lieutenant Bill Gleason of the New York Fire Department said, “If [Whitman] had stood on the pile and told us how bad it was, she could have saved tens of thousands.”
According to Nadler, even the EPA’s inspector general has concluded that the early statements about air quality were “falsely reassuring, lacked a scientific basis and were motivated by White House concerns other than public health — and that, as a result, people were unnecessarily exposed to deadly contaminants.”
And when Hurricane Katrina hit the EPA still hadn’t learned its lesson. According to OMB Watch, a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report “found inadequate monitoring for asbestos around demolition and renovation sites,” and that “key information released to the public about environmental contamination was neither timely nor adequate, and in some cases, easily misinterpreted to the public’s detriment.” But far more damning is what has transpired with regard to FEMA-supplied trailers that an estimated 275,000 Americans are living in.
In March 2006, FEMA field workers began warning of health problems experienced by Hurrican Katrina survivors living in trailers with formaldehyde levels that were 75 times greater than the recommended workplace-safety level. One expectant couple was relocated, but then something that should be stunning, but sadly isn’t, happened: the FEMA Office of General Counsel recommended no testing of trailers because–as one logistics expert wrote–testing “would imply FEMA’s ownership of this issue.” Another FEMA lawyer wrote, “Once you get results and should they indicate some problem, the clock is running out on our duty to respond to them.” After a man who had complained of formaldehyde fumes was found dead in his trailer, “a 28-person, six-agency conference call took place.”
Again, FEMA opposed testing of the trailers. Meanwhile, as Amanda Spake reported in February of this year in The Nation, infants and children were being hospitalized with respiratory illnesses. Air sampling by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the open air at trailer holding stations revealed formaldehyde levels thirty to fifty times greater than the EPA recommendation. Pediatrician Scott Needle, of Bay St. Louis, Mississippi said, “I was seeing kids and families coming in with repeated, prolonged respiratory illnesses–sinus infections, lingering coughs, viral infections that didn’t go away. Over the course of three months, I saw several dozen families with these health problems. That’s really high, and this isn’t something I’d seen in my practice before. All of them were living in FEMA trailers.”
“We started testing in Alabama,” Becky Gillette, co-chair of the Mississippi Sierra Club, told Spake, “because we got reports from social workers there that so many elderly people living in the trailers were being hospitalized for respiratory conditions. And many of them were dying.” The Sierra Club found unsafe formaldehyde levels in 30 of 32 trailers tested.
There were complaints of choking, coughing, nosebleeds, mouth and nasal tumors, sick pets, complicated pregnancies, and deaths. But it wasn’t until last Wednesday–nearly a year and a half after the original warnings from field workers and right before a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing–that FEMA announced it would conduct random testing of trailers.
Committee Chairman Henry Waxman deemed FEMA’s non-action “an official policy of premeditated ignorance…. senior officials in Washington didn’t want to know what they already knew, because they didn’t want the legal and moral responsibility to do what they knew had to be done.”
One former army officer living in a trailer with his wife testified, “We have lost a great deal through our dealings with FEMA, not the least of which is our faith in government.”
How many Katrina survivors might have been saved had testing begun a month ago? Or six months ago? Or a year? Or if people had been listened to and relocated?
How many workers who showed heroism after 9-11, who this administration praised but then left to fend for themselves, would still be healthy today if had they been properly warned?
The Bush government legacy is this: sacrificing proclaimed heroes, and turning its back on our most vulnerable citizens. We have fallen far indeed.
Katrina Vanden Heuvel is editor of The Nation.
© 2007 The Nation
The latest chapter of this sad saga is unfolding before our very eyes. The I35W bridge collapse in Minneapolis.
MN governor Tim Pawlenty is the rising star of the republican party. He hitched a ride on the John McCain bandwagon. Oops! Now he’s head of the US Governors Ass’n. The Bushes will be appearing with him soon all over the news networks.
But wait! Us rubes out here in Minnesota are hopping mad and wide awake. It didn’t take us long to say “No new taxes=crumbling infrastructure.” Just check out the letters to the editor in today’s Minneapolis Star Tribune at www.startribune.com. For in depth analysis listen to Kerry Miller’s show yesterday morning on Minnesota Public Radio. It’s archived at www.mpr.org.
Ah! The Sleeping Sheeple Giant begins to awaken!
This is just another example of the Reaganesque mindset of the republican party that you can profit from everything, and don’t ever have to pay for anything. They have been short changing things that gov’t previously took responsibility for ever since 1981.
The fact that FEMA wouldn’t even look to find the problem they KNEW existed tells you that their whole goal is to do everything without costing themselves a thing. The fact that they waited until someone actually DIED from it tells me that this is criminal neglect. If only someone would actually be found to be accountable for it, but we all know THAT won’t happen. They will most likely get a medal before they are charged with negligent homicide like they should be.
Republicans have this idea that they can just keep taking and taking while they make their children and grandchildren pay for their malfeasance. They need to be held accountable for their actions in destroying this country, and ruining our government’s ability to do anything of value.
Please don’t moan me off when I mention depleted uranium here. Please give me a chance to write this and I do hope you read it before scrolling down.
The large, heavy tail counter weights on both of the 757 aircraft that struck the twin towers, were made with solid depleted uranium. In the ensuing fire those DU counter weights burned. There would have been trillions of microscopic specks of deadly uranium isotopes present in the air at the scene of the disaster.
If only ONE of those microscopic isotopes is inhaled, lung cancer is a certainty. Over a long period of time, three to five years, the symptoms of raiation poisoning will begin to appear and the person will eventually die from internal atomic radiation.
The risk of a male transmitting altered DNA to a fetus is also a probable additional problem and a baby born with defects may be the result. Children whose father inhalded DU dust are often born with brain damage, heart deformities, autism, missing arms, legs, eyes, sex organs, etc.
If the government was aware of the DU danger, on 9-11 it is most unlikely they would have notified anyone of the extreme hazard of being in the area. There is no gas mask filter made, that can prevent microscopic specks of DU from entering a person’s respitory system. The gold bars and other precious items banked at the twin towers scene were far too important to not recover them. Of course once those had been recovered, the search and rescue effort was over.
It is our government’s desire and forced will, to deny that DU is a threat to humanity. Naturally after using it for weaponry, they will deny it is dangerous, they seldom if ever admit a mistake. This mistake of DU use for any reason is the worst mankind has ever made.
For example, radiation levels in Baghdad are 2,000 times normal. There is not a single person there or any who ahve been there durng the past five years who will not die of radiation poisoning.
Our cost of the war with Iraq will exceed two trillion dollars before we pull out of that disasterous mess. Imagine what we could have done with two trillion dollars in repairing our nation’s interustructure. We cold have used that money to repair roads, bridges, dams, power grids, cleanikng our laes and rivers. The list of necessities is long, but only a list. For the money went to fight the Bush war___ and someday he and the others who are equally guilty will pay for it. As siouxrose tells all, Karma is not a myth.
I posted my take on the 35W issue in the “August Alert” article, but I can add to the commentary here that there’s terrible framing going on with regard to bridge maintenance. It seems to be solvable solely through: (a) tolls/privatization or (b) a gas tax.
They’ve gotten the Democrats to parrot “we want a gas tax”, since it’s much better than the framed alternative.
But while there are merits of consumption taxes, they are regressive — taking a much greater piece of the poor/working-class’s pocketbook that wealthy people with money to burn (literally). Particularly at a time when homes in localities closer to work are well out of the pocketbook of the remnant middle-class. People in my demographic (under-40, children, stay at home spouse) simply have to live further out in order to find affordable housing. A gas tax will hit us the worst.
So I offer a third solution: make the income tax more progressive. As our former esteemed senator Paul Wellstone liked to say, “The wealthy should pay their fair share.”
Given enough time, I’ll learn how to edit here. I hope!
I attempted to correct the spelling errors in my previous blog, I screwed it up. I had also added. Please read these websites which concern DU. They are only two of 1,300,000 about DU availabe on the web. Beware of those who deny DU is not safe, they have monetary reasons, our government and others hire “experts” to write denials.
This website is from a nurse in Hawaii, only one of many states who have a very serious problem and most of us are totally unaware of it.
www.protecthawaii.ws/page2.html
This site is a very good article about depleted uranium, its use and the extreme and deadly dangers DU poses.
http://usinfo.state.gov/media/archives/2006/jan/12-623470.html
You can read the “August Alert” article? Only the first 3 years come up on my computer. I emailed the editors here at commondreams this morning, but still can’t load the whole article.
America: Greatest country on Earth.
We’re #1
We’re #1
We’re #1
We’re #1
… yeah right.
Peace to you and yours.
Those FEMA trailers remind me of the disease-laced blankets the Interior Department handed out to the Indians in the early days of this country.
Paul, your comments about the “taxing” framne are very astute. I would like to suggest two things:
1) the expenditures for repairing the infrastructure should come out of the DEFENSE BUDGET.
We can substantiate this by equating “protecting” American citizens with true “defense” or “security.”
2) I would like to suggest a graduated consumption tax. For example:
- food (staples–not Beluga caviar!) would be exempt
- health-related items—also exempt
- gasoline - the first $15 purchase exempt (i.e. encouraging energy conservation by rewarding people who drive cars with a higher MPG). If you drive a hummer or gas-guzzling SUV add a 5%tax (i.e. your gas purchase is going to exceed the $15/tax exempt
amount).
- autos—no tax on energy-saving cars
- everything else can be taxed as for example:
- items costing less than $20–no tax
- items costing between $20-$50—1%
- items costing between $50-$100—-1.5%
- items costing ” $100-$200—2%
(you catch the drift….)
- the $1000 dress….30%
- the $2000 leather bag —35%
- the $300 bottle of wine —10%
- a $10,000 watch….50% tax
- the ferrari, the yacht—-90%tax (if you can afford the ferrari, you can surely afford the tax!)
Just wanted to show that we don’t have to throw away the proverbial baby with the bathwater. A progressive consumption tax that takes into consideration the true costs
of lower and middle class incomes is worth taking a look at. In tandem, the income tax should be drastically reduced on families with incomes of $75,000 or less.
I would like to recommend a book called “PLan B” by Lester Brown. One chapter deals with new models of taxation, among other business matters toward an earth-friendly economy.
Sadly the Australian conservative government has been taking us down the low tax small government path like America. We created the Murdoch monster so I guess we deserve to suffer too. I wish we would all follow the humanitarian ways of some European countries.
pavroviandog,
I agree — indeed, Eisenhower’s vision (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway) for better or worse, put defense/transportation into the same boat, part of the national infrastructure, ability to defend against foreign threats, etc.
So money spent on highways/bridges is critical to the defense of the US. But the system is so terribly corrupted that I think the m.i.c. prefers projects which are easier to boondoggle, very lightweight with regard to deliverables, easy to cost-overrrun, black budget, less oversight, etc. They’re so corrupt that something with tangibles or critical up-time (like the manned space program, national transportation infrastructure, etc.) is probably less desirable from a theft perspective. Better to charge that same amount for a missile defense system that everyone already knows — and expects — won’t work. And the public will never get a chance to scrutinize it up close (like a bridge) to see if their money was well-spent.
Less is Less!
The Republican Party (Their Motto: “Survival of the Richest” - J. Todd) is the party of “Less Government”. They don’t like government. Because they don’t like government they aren’t good at governing and shouldn’t be governing. (o.k. I’m paraphrasing Bill Maher)
Don’t forget people, this government is YOUR governemnt (…of the people, for the people). What these Republicans (and some Democrats) want is for you to have less control of your country, its laws, and its expenditures.
At present we are throwing away hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq, producing nothing tangible, yet these same Republicans want to cut taxes, and cut government programs back here in the USA. I’ve read that the estimate for retrofitting/updating our bridges in this country is $180 Billion, a fraction of what the Iraq war will end up costing.
The Katrina disaster, the water main explosion in New Jersey, and now the bridge collapse in Minnesota, show that cutting taxes and government services, at the expense of governmental services is dangerous and irresponsbile on the part of our “leaders”. Is it moral for the party of “family values” to cut programs here in the USA that benefit the poor and our society as a whole?
Sure, taxes in most other Western Nations are higher than ours, but so is their quality of life: Universal health care for all citizens, more public transportation, greater longevity, more vacation time, etc.
happystead August 3rd, 2007 2:04 pm is right on. We are not #1 by any stretch. We rank low for what I believe are basic things in a modern society like quality of health care, and education. We rank incredibly high for things like obesity, energy use, military spending, and infant mortality. In order to be a great nation, we need to spend money on ourselves, our infrastructure, and universal health care. We need to stop funding the Military complex that President Eisenhower warned us about in his farewell address, and giving handouts to Corporations like the Drug Industry (The New Medicare Drug Program) and the Oil Industry (subsidies to help search for oil. isn’t that what they are supposed to do with their profits?).
Paul Bramscher you can’t coddle the people who do all the consuming. Should the mega rich be getting tax cuts, of course not! But it’s lower and middle class people inside those SUVs we see all over. A gas tax would not be regressive, it would help curb excessive consumption and expose americans to the reality that the rest of the world deals with when it comes to petro.
Ha anyone here every heard of Henry George’s single tax? About a hundred years ago, he wrote a book about taxes called “Progress and Poverty.” He proposed taxing land and only land. Places close to a heavy population center get taxed highest and those out in the boonies much less. No taxes on your home or any improvements you may have made to it; no taxes on income or sales. You basically pay rent for the use of your land.
It reminds me of the Amerind saying, “We don’t own the land; the land owns us.”
It has been tried and it does work.
“We weren’t going to let the terrorists win.”
Win? Win what? Nearly 3000 killed on 9/11 and now ten thousand sick and dying. Was there a chance America would surrender to the terrorists after a couple of skyscrapers went down? What else would constitute a “win?”
Oh, sorry, forgot - we’re talking about a gang of insane murdering liars who hate America more than “they” do. Hey, here’s an idea - more illegal spying on American citizens to make sure the terrorists continue not winning………..
It is good to see everyone is on the subject, ___ of when there is a disaster, our elected leaders either do little to assist, or lie about what they did or didn’t do about the situation.
As long as capitalism is the cornerstone of our non-society, such sociopathic actions will remain standard operating procedure.
Endless profit for the aristocracy, regardless of the cost in death and destruction, is ALL that matters.
It couldn’t be simpler. What part of this don’t you understand?
FASCISM sux: You raised the issue that hit me, too. Who approved these trailers laced with heavy metals/chemicals? Where is the chain of accountability on this boondangle? No doubt another Republican big contributor got this contract… can you imagine approving hundreds, if not thousands of these little death traps in the “service” to human beings during their most fragile, vulnerable times (having lost homes, family members, etc). This means OUR tax dollars went to contractors who built these things probably using substandard parts. It reminds me of an old Arthur Miller play where a father cuts costs on tools used on aircraft. The karma comes full circle in that his own son dies in such a plane due to its faulty engineering. In this case, the innocent suffer. WHO built these things, and where is any action against the company? Is any attorney suing on behalf of the residents forced to live in these subhuman little metallic boxes?
The Decider (GW) is a sleazeball. Why has he not been convicted of criminal wrongdoing?
Luckily, most of those “highly overpriced” trailers, were never used. There were and still are, several thousand in storage near Hope Arkansas. FFEMA would not allow anyone to use one, if they lived in a flood plane. It was alright for stranded families to live in abandoned cars, under overpass highway bridges, or in half blown down buildings, in hot, humid weather, with no electical power though. We are the best?___ Wow! Can’t we smell the graft, paybacks, deals, buddyism?
Siouxrose:
Instead of karma, perhaps turnabout as fair play?
How about forcing those responsible for unsafe or hazardous items or conditions to live in/drive/work with them?
Perhaps the Bush twins ought to have been handing out coffee to the workers at the Trade Center.
The liars/enablers at FEMA could have been forced, along with the manufacturers, to swap their homes with those living in the FEMA trailers.
You’d see how quickly the officials in government agencies and the heads of large corporations would be inspired to show great regard for the public welfare.
There needs to be a major reduction in the spoils system. More officials need to have terms of office that do not end with the President’s term. There is no reason to have everything routed through the short term occupant in the White house.
Bridge inspections for example could be a 5 year appointment with an annual review in public of all data like on the Internet.
Our nation and all Americans would benefit greatly in every way, if our congress and senate were all linited to eight year terms. An election every two years for twelve of the states and fourteen states once every eigth year. The pay should be equal for all, $100,000 a year,__ tax free.
No other benefits, except a fair housing allowancce for living away from home for eight years, at age 65, two thousand dollars a year for life. If deceased, their spouse would recieve a thousand a year for life. They would have to work in Wshington DC, 240 days a year. Lobbying would be illegal.
They could have two secretaries, and two aids. Their pay would be the same as the average type who works at any large law firm in DC and a fair houssing allowance also.
Campaigns would be grass route only and no television or radio advertisemets permitted.
Campaign donations would be limited to $50.00 from any individualor family, any business and no more than a set ammount allowed to be collected or spent for a campaign.
This would insure a decent health care program for all Americans, a third or forth party candidate would have a fair chance and graft and corruption would be greatly reduced. The elected would not be spending any of their time, running home to raise money for their next election,__ as is done now. That is about all most of them they currently do, and that is why we are in the mess we are in now and have been in for years.
EDIT!!
“…our faith in government.”
Brings back fond memories of “the good ol’ days” growing up in America, pre-Nixon era, when one *believed* they could actually trust their government to protect them from unseen enemies.
Katrina v. H. is right…”how far we have fallen.”
ASCOT: I like your suggestion. There’s no “rule” that says karma can’t be instant!
PAVROVIAN DOG & PAUL BRAMSCHER: No question the money should come out of defense. If citizens are buying a contract (taxes paid to government qualify) then we should GET something of tangible use for the money delivered. All the treasure spilled in the senseless debacle of Iraq means our ports, nuclear plants, bridges, cities and water supply are far less secure. It is patently insane that instead of using “defense” dollars to indeed DEFEND “the homeland,” it’s being hemorrhaged elsewhere! What a travesty! “That thinking men/women could think so wrongly.”
IrishGawdess: “Father knows best… till father turned out to be a fascist.”
U.S. soldiers ask “Should We Stay or Should we Go.
http://newssophisticate.blogspot.com/2007/08/us-soldiers-ask-should-we-stay-or.html
This administration only recognizes two things–$$$ and power. That is it in a nutshell, except our Prez claims to be a C student. How, exactly, does one pass the GRE, be accepted by Yale and then, Harvard? DOES NOT HAPPEN!!! Sad to know that you are so dumb that Daddy’s money only gets you a C. What can we expect, more “dumb and dumber.”
Why can’t people separate science and religion?
In additon to that, everyone elected NOW should be voted OUT of office and all new ones elected from NOW through the ‘08 election.
Siouxrose, how right you are.
(Love your name, BTW.)
C Potts and Paul Bramscher—- please respond to this one: Place some substantial tax on Gasoline— Say $.50 or $1.00/ Gallon. Yes it would hurt and it would be regressive— Demand would fall.Marketplace competition kicks in, The oil companies would lower prices and compete for market share. (A tiny fall in consumption will cause a disproportionate drop in prices.) or so most market analysts claim. The oil companies blame recent upticks in demand for increased prices at the pump. Prices end up where they are now, and the tax monies (to be designated to Debt reduction) go to the treasury and the good of the people rather than to Oil company profits. We call the tax “The George W. Bush War Deficit Tax”.
Fuel consumption falls—-Carbon emissions fall—-The revenue stream enables a buy down on the deficit and the evils it will place on our children and their children. It might even free up some money to repair our infrastructure (if we stop starting stupid wars.)
Donkey Hote, many believe in the theory of economics and especially the supply and demand chapter. Your idea should be pretty fair, there will be varied opinions.
However, the oil companies have their private economic theories___ and they do manage to make excellent profits. They knoow how to B/S us too.
If the demand falls, they raise the price. If demand raises they raise the price. They know how much they want to recieve for every single gallon of fuel and they get it. And if anyone believes they don’t price fix, I have a new bridge for sale in Alaska.
Every so often the price of gas soars, for us here in America anyway. After a time, they lower it a few cents and we are tickeled to death that it has dropped, and now it is only $2.85 or so a gallon. When they are ready, it will go back up and the next time higher than before. They continue their one sided game and we keep on bitchin and truckin and they keep on laugin__ all the way to the banks they own.
Donkey Hote,
I don’t think demand would fall that much. Most people probably drive most of the time to get to work — not for pleasure. My only optional driving is for travel, so while higher prices will hurt the tourism industry — and raise the cost of imports/goods, gas is for the most part not an optional tourist commodity like consumer electronics subject to wide range of demand-side fluctuations.