Should an independent commission investigate the response to Katrina?

[Kay Henderson]

I tried to post this yesterday, but the BB was crotchety, and it didn't make it.

Hillary Clinton has proposed that an independent commission (akin to the 9/11 commission) be appointed to investigate the role of local, state and federal officials in the response to Hurricane Katrina and the subsequent flooding of New Orleans. The main reason she gave in the short sound bite I saw was that it is difficult for government to objectively investigate itself.

I think she is onto something. There is also the issue of cost. It is my understanding that the executive branch and both houses of Congress are planning hearings. With the massive amount of work coming up dealing with the hurricane, appointments to the Supreme Court, Iraq, and many other issues, having a separate commission take on this important task would concentrate resources.

It seems to me that if the co-chairs and executive director of the 9/11 commission would be available, they should be considered for similar roles in a Katrina investigation. They would be able to take advantage of the mechanisms they developed to gather and interpret large amounts of information. A process that is thorough but timely would be to everyone’s advantage. As many have pointed out, we may or may not be subject to further terrorist attacks on our soil, but we most certainly will experience calamitous natural disasters every few years.

What do you think?

Kay

[jmarie]

Well, if it does as much good as the 9/11 Commission....I say we may as well waste more money.

[Melman]

I totally agree that there should be an independent investigation!! I saw in a report yesterday that Bush said he would head up an investigation into the numerous issues concerning the disasters in NO. How objectively could he look at things since so many people are wanting to know what happened from his office...or from agencies that report to his office.

Besides, if the White House handles the investigation, everyone disagreeing with this whole administration will forever question the validity of the results. It has to be INDEPENDENT.

[Valerie226]

I support the idea. the agencies supposed to cope failed miserably, even in a regular event for the region. How many hurricanes strike every year and how could the reponse be so slow and inadequate? This needs to be done with the purpose of improving the response, not necessarily with firing people. so a bipartisan commission, similar to 9/11. Lee hamilton & who was the other gentlerman?

[luv2run]

I totally agree that there should be an independent investigation!! I saw in a report yesterday that Bush said he would head up an investigation into the numerous issues concerning the disasters in NO. How objectively could he look at things since so many people are wanting to know what happened from his office...or from agencies that report to his office.

Besides, if the White House handles the investigation, everyone disagreeing with this whole administration will forever question the validity of the results. It has to be INDEPENDENT.
I definitely agree with an investigation--independent and bipartisan. Actually meeting some of the evacuees, I think we should take whatever means possible to make sure this never, ever happens again.

Debbie

[Kay Henderson]

Joyce --

I'm interested in your take on the 9/11 commission. I thought it was very useful myself, but I'm sure there is another side.

It is interesting how the role of such a commission differs from that of a jury in a lawsuit for damages. They both have the responsibility of evaluating large amounts of information. They differ in that a jury needs to assess blame (20% responsibility, etc.), whereas the role of a commission is to state the facts and make recommendations as to what worked well and what should be done differently. It is then the role of the decision-makers (elected and appointed) to carry out or not carry out the recommendations.

I would enjoy hearing you expand on your thoughts.

Kay

Some added musings --

I think there are a number of areas which would profit by serious consideration by SOMEBODY.

1. Communication. Two serious failures in four years (apparently total in Katrina) makes me wonder if we may need to think outside the box. Would a satelite based emergency communication system be practical?

2. Planning. Exactly who at the federal level should have the responsibility to work with state emergency offices? As I understand it, FEMA has been stripped of this responsibilty, but the eventual agency in charge (not yet clear asChertoff has proposed a major restructuring of Homeland Security).

3. Responsibility. It might be useful to clarify the responsibility of the individual, the locals, the states, and the feds, though it probably differs depending upon how large, organized and wealthy the area "hosting" the natural disaster is.

[Tizzylish]

I think the money would be better spent on rebuilding and its a waste of resources that are desperately needed in other areas. What do you need a media circus to tell us what we already know? A catergory 5 hurricane hit a city below sea level and the losses were massive and tragic. The state and local government had no plan, twiddled their thumbs, and did nothing to help their constituents.

BUT if there is to be a commission, it would be best served on the local level, poke around the feds if you like, but IMO, the local level failed here miserably. :(