The problem with the repair was that many even within the department disagreed with the project entirely. Rebulking the current sitting levees (not a redesign, a reset & repair) was something that even those within the USMS had some oppossition to.. the current weight and buttressing of the sitting levees was creating infrastructure problems (or at least they contended) and the continual enhancement of them was causing the nearby land area to "sink" even more then doing nothing; so, the Army Corp of Engineers proposed that such projects were "fools errands" and they argued that they were not the solution, they were the problem.. they contended that spillways and secondary runoffs were the most viable solution.
Now, this doesn't mean that there assessment was right. But a lot of people on both sides did by into it, and -some- of the secondary spillway money was approved (though it won't see any impact until about 2007) so the largest amount spent in almost 30 years went to reconstructing secondary spillways. At the same time, efforts to rebuttress the current levees did diminish - in proposal, with the cuts taking direct impact in the FY 2006 budget. Note that here: -----Original message----- From: "Analyst" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 11:56:08 -0500 To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: RE: [H] It's bad, really bad - Katrina > > Chris, > > > > I think if you read through the ACE report to the senate in 1997, they > > argued (and several argued against) that without a complete > > reconstructure of upstream levees and a redesign of spillways, there > > was very little with the ground given.. outside of massive imminent > > domain claims as city projects were built too close to current levees. > > > > Many argued this was the wrong way to look at it, but four times this > > was proposed. > > > > I do agree with those who say "hey, just because people protested" > > that's right, occassionally the government has to do what is > > politically unpopular. But let's be honest, with so many groups > > protesting, and so many in office in the senate / house on both sides > > living and dying off of the goodwill of the people who support those > > causes, no one had the testicular fortitude to do the right thing. > > But you're still referencing the future plans to REDESIGN the entire > infrastructure, and I assume there was plenty to argue about on that count. > > The issue is that the repair, maintenance, and beefing-up of the levees, the > very levees that broke through, was STOPPED in 2004, for the first time in 37 > years, because of the > Bushies massive budget cuts. > > > Vince > >
