One of the most televised subjects these days happen to be in our home state. I am talking about the widespread wildfires taking place down in Southern California. As the fires still blaze and thousands of acres of land are being destroyed, I can say I am proud of how our State and National government is handling the evacuations and sending the plenty of resources to deal with the fires in a timely manner. It is good to hear the Federal government has sent "12 Defense Department firefighting teams,... and more than 17,000 National Guardsmen are potentially available if needed" according to Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense, Paul Mchale. (Read more at http://www.newsweek.com/id/61533/page/1 ) California has shown its ability to handle times of crisis having effectively evacuated 800,000 California residents, with only seven deaths. As we well know, nobody (especially the Bush Administration) wants to see a repeat of a Hurricane Katrina crisis and luckily this situation has yet to escalate to that level yet. It is nice to see the government has learned their lesson and now try to act accordingly to deal with disaster. Do you believe these disasters should be solely state issues or should the national government intervene? (and to what extent).
BTW: Clever title is attributed to Mike Kuo
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
The national government should intervene because the national government has more resources. The idea of FEMA is good - to protect US citizens in the case of disasters, but it was clearly flawed in its actions. Right now in the fire stricken area, FEMA is working. They are helping these citizens cope with their losses, eat, and continue to survive.
However I think you should mention the difference between Katrina and Los Angeles. Although Katrina was one of the first times the United States suffered from a huge economic disaster, the delay of refuge was unacceptable. In Southern California, many of the evacuees are rich, mid to upper class citizens, whereas those in Katrina were not. Is this America learning from experience or an America divided by favoritism?
I dont think that katrina was one of the first times that the U.S. has suffered from a huge economic disaster. The U.S. has dealt with many others, namely the Great Depression. But in terms of the remark concerning the governments increased action for wealthy citizens, i think that Noelle makes a very valid point. one could argue that the U.S. government is showing favoritism towards the upper class, but in reality, the fires are much easier to respond to effectively. in the case of Hurricane Katrina, the disaster was completely unexpected and unavoidable, whereas with the fires, we have many preventative methods. it is also much easier to evacuate when there arent roadways completely blocked off by water. so i think that the government isnt showing preference to the upper class, but is rather better able to respond to wildfires than to a hurricane.
The government should always be able to protect it's citizens. The fact that the national government is interfering in LA is a reassuring sign. But, I think Katrina was more than just a economic disaster. I guess the reconstruction cost would consitute as an economic strain. Plus, the US had to deal with many different economic disasters in the past. The biggest one was the Great Depression, but a more recent example would be the Stock Market "Crash" at the beginning of this century. Although, I'm interested to see the relative costs of governemnt spending in these two situations(Katrina and the wildfires, although Katrina is probably a lot more)
Don't think that our governments (state and federal) are doing everything. This was an article in the Daily Journal a couple days ago:
http://www.smdailyjournal
.com/article_preview.
php?type=wnews&id=82470
and this article, also from the Daily Journal, implies that it is the people that live in Southern California donating to evacuees that is really making the response so positive, instead of national government involvement.
http://www.smdailyjournal
.com/article_preview.php
?id=82458
So maybe the difference between Katrina and this is that unaffected people have the means to donate, and not just that the national government doesn't care.
I agree that while the national government is doing more in this disaster than they did in Hurricane Katrina, a lot of the help has come from the citizens of the Southern California area. I read an article describing neighbors helping one another evacuate, people donating resources to the evacuation centers etc. I do, however, appreciate that in this time of crisis the government has sent national Guardsmen. This hopefully has prevented looting in the area, something that was a wide spread problem in the Hurricane Katrina crisis. As to Garrick's question, I think that the national government needs to intervene and help the state as much as possible in these times. Why would the state not want help? I would even go as far to say that other states should help as well. I have read that some of the near by states have sent some squadrons of fire fighters to help with the fires.
I agree with Garrick, the state is doing a good job at fighting these fires and keeping the crisis under control. I also think that the national government is trying their best to help to. I attribute this mostly to the fact that they do not want a repeat of Katrina. Anyways i love to see how people are coming together to help each other get through this crises. I've heard stories of neighbors helping neighbors and people from other states reaching out to help with the evacuees. I aslo read that the Mexican governmetn has sent firemen over the border to help out. It is great to see that in the face of adversity we can all work together to get through it.
Well, large fires can potentially hurt a much larger area than the local area where the fire is actually burning happening. It's possible that another state coulb be affected in some way. Yeah, it sounds silly, but remember when there was that fire not too far from here and the wind blew the smoke all the way over to San MAteo and turned the sunlight creepy for a while. Yes, most of the smoke from this fire will be blown out to sea, either way, the government should help.
Post a Comment