Rebuilding NOLA?

The Times presents a dire picture of the rebuilding in New Orleans in its editorial today. It should. Things aren't going to progress because of fundamental problems that directly affect whether anyone would ever want to come back to New Orleans.

The problem for the Times is that it presents this as a choice between a war that the Times has repeatedly stated it was against at all costs - and one that is central to the Administration's global war on terrorism or rebuilding New Orleans.

That's disingenuous. At best.

And it forgets what the Times' position about rebuilding after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Let's review what's happened in four years since 9/11. Lower Manhattan was devastated by the terrorist attacks and President Bush asked for a figure to cover rebuilding and the NY delegation provided a nice round figure of $20 billion. Well, we're four years later and one would have to look real hard to see any of that money in a tangible and permanent structure. There is no permanent structure within the bathtub, and the Times itself has been against rebuilding all of the office space downtown because it claims that there are changed circumstances that should not call for rebuilding.

In fact, there are now growing questions over how portions of that money was spent. It appears that hundreds of millions may have been steered towards companies with questionable background, some companies profitted from government payments that were designed to assist businesses affected by the terror attacks when they were completely unrelated to the attacks.

And there are continuing questions over whether all the remaining Liberty Bonds will be spent on downtown reconstruction or siphoned off to other projects. There's billions at stake, but the rebuilding of downtown is up in the air because the local politicians (Bloomberg) and the Governor (Pataki) are at odds over rebuilding, not to mention the Assembly Speaker (Silver).

But the Times has to admit that many of the problems are self-inflicted by the state and local level [and that should begin to sound familiar].

Of course, New Orleans's local and state officials must do their part as well, and demonstrate the political and practical will to rebuild the city efficiently and responsibly. They must, as quickly as possible, produce a comprehensive plan for putting New Orleans back together. Which schools will be rebuilt and which will be absorbed? Which neighborhoods will be shored up? Where will the roads go? What about electricity and water lines? So far, local and state officials have been derelict at producing anything that comes close to a coherent plan. That is unacceptable.

The city must rise to the occasion. But it will not have that opportunity without the levees, and only the office of the president is strong enough to goad Congress to take swift action. Only his voice is loud enough to call people home and convince them that commitments will be met.

And should we really speed the rebuilding of the levees until we know how and why they failed? Does that even enter the minds of those at the Times? We shouldn't pour billions into a levee system - from the physical levees themselves to the bureaucracies that spawned the flaws in the first place? Apparently the Times thinks that speed is of the essence (perhaps they should keep that in mind in NYC as well?

Maybe America does not want to rebuild New Orleans. Maybe we have decided that the deficits are too large and the money too scarce, and that it is better just to look the other way until the city withers and disappears. If that is truly the case, then it is incumbent on President Bush and Congress to admit it, and organize a real plan to help the dislocated residents resettle into new homes. The communities that opened their hearts to the Katrina refugees need to know that their short-term act of charity has turned into a permanent commitment.

Fact is that the private sector is already adjusting for the failures of the state and local governments. Property developers are putting forward plans for building new homes throughout the Gulf Coast, including some of the biggest developers in the country. Property developers aren't going to pour money into New Orleans until they see the government - at all levels- meet the needs, but they're not waiting for the government agencies to get their acts into gear - especially in Louisiana.

To be fair to NY, they put together a relatively fair plan to rebuild, though its morphed over the past four years to include projects that weren't originally considered. Meanwhile, the Lower Manhattan redevelopment is slow in coming.

The Louisiana delgation, on the other hand, has been thorougly inept. They initially considered a rebuilding cost of $200 billion, which included everything and the kitchen sink. Instead of focusing on the infrastructure, they were looking to spend on pork and nothing but the pork. That was part of the problem that got them into trouble in the first place.

Technorati: flood aid; hurricane katrina; katrina aid; hurricane rita; slidell; biloxi; gulfport; pascagoula; nagin; blanco; barbour; hurricane rita; hurricane wilma.