| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Fred Stone" |
| Date: |
04 Sep 2005 10:29:05 AM |
| Object: |
NYTimes on Flood Control Projects |
http://eurota.blogspot.com/2005/09/msm-in-their-own-words-
continuing.html
MSM: In Their Own Words, A Continuing Series
Given the hysteria enveloping the editorial pages of the NYT due to
hurricane Katrina, what have they had to say on natural disasters in the
past, via Lexis-Nexis:
Remember the 1993 floods in the midwest, the NYT editorialized on 14
July 1993:
For the longer term, Washington and flood-prone areas must reconsider
the pro's and con's of flood control projects and flood insurance.
The billions of Federal dollars spent to construct dams and levees have
doubtless prevented billions of dollars of damage to the areas they
serve. But a dam or a levee in one place creates problems somewhere
else. Also, by offering protection, they encourage people to live and
work and develop farming in flood plains that are inherently risky.
Budget constraints and environmental concerns have slowed new flood
control projects in recent years. Congress should resist pressure to
spend more now because of this year's floods; these projects need closer
evaluation than they've gotten in the past.
Likewise flood insurance. Less than 20 percent of those eligible for
federally subsidized flood insurance buy it -- because they can't afford
it, or think they're not at risk, or figure aid will be forthcoming
anyhow if disaster strikes. Before the rivers rose this year, there was
a move in Congress to expand flood insurance coverage, either by
regulation or incentives, rather than have taxpayers at large foot the
bill through direct aid. But flood insurance can encourage reckless
development.
Flood plains are risky territory, as the Mississippi and its tributaries
are proving again. Federal policy needs to control the risk, not just
the rivers.
The 1997 Floods in North Dakota, 24 April 1997:
There will be time in the months ahead to assess whether something more
might have been done to make the flood predictions more accurate so that
official planning could have fashioned more effective defenses.
On making flood control projects more complicated and costly, praise on
9 May 1997:
In the last session of Congress, a small band of Republican moderates
organized by Representative Sherwood Boehlert of New York succeeded in
blocking nearly every attempt by their right-wing colleagues to gut the
country's basic environmental statutes.
Fortunately, Mr. Boehlert and his friends are still wide awake. On
Wednesday, in the first major environmental battle of the new Congress,
the moderates and like-minded Democrats beat back a bill that would have
permanently exempted any flood control project from the requirements of
the Endangered Species Act.
While now currently in love with the Army Corps of Engineers, how did
the NYT editorialize the Corps techniques in the past, 28 April 2001:
The famous Wilkes-Barre flood of 1972 and the Mississippi River flood of
1993 led to fierce criticism of the Army Corps of Engineers, whose
traditional methods of flood control were found to have made matters
much worse than they might have been. But the Corps has never abandoned
its blind faith in dams and levees that, when overused, constrict the
river's natural flow, invite overbuilding and end up doing more harm
than good.
And back where we started with midwestern floods, this time in 2001, 25
April 2001:
No one welcomes a flood. No one wants to do away with flood prevention.
But it is no surrender to recognize, as many Midwesterners have done,
that there is something profoundly elemental in the spring rising of the
Mississippi and its tributaries, an adherence to a law that is still
greater than almost anything the Army Corps of Engineers can throw in
its way. The Mississippi is powerful enough on an ordinary summer's day.
But to see it in spring, overflowing into Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa and
Illinois, is to witness one of the inarguable boundaries to human
existence. The river lends out its flood plain wordlessly and takes it
back without argument.
Is there something profoundly elemental in the summer/fall rising of
hurricanes as well?
I will leave you with this NYT editorial on 24 June 2003:
The House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has a rare
opportunity tomorrow to strike a blow for both fiscal sanity and the
environment. Before the committee is a bill that would bring a measure
of discipline and independent oversight to the Army Corps of Engineers,
an incorrigibly spendthrift agency whose projects over the years have
caused enormous damage to the nation's streams, rivers and wetlands.
And this one from 13 April 2005:
Anyone who cares about responsible budgeting and the health of America's
rivers and wetlands should pay attention to a bill now before the Senate
Committee on Environment and Public Works. The bill would shovel $17
billion at the Army Corps of Engineers for flood control and other
water-related projects -- this at a time when President Bush is asking
for major cuts in Medicaid and other important domestic programs. Among
these projects is a $2.7 billion boondoggle on the Mississippi River
that has twice flunked inspection by the National Academy of Sciences.
The Government Accountability Office and other watchdogs accuse the
corps of routinely inflating the economic benefits of its projects. And
environmentalists blame it for turning free-flowing rivers into lifeless
canals and destroying millions of acres of wetlands -- usually in the
name of flood control and navigation but mostly to satisfy Congress's
appetite for pork.
This is a bad piece of legislation.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I think if we had a three-word message right now it’d be, ‘We can do
better.’
- Howard Dean
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
