Bush Administration Seeking To Blame Environmentalist Groups

[dr. what]

E-mail suggests government seeking to blame groups

Federal officials appear to be seeking proof to blame the flood of New Orleans on environmental groups, documents show.

The Clarion-Ledger has obtained a copy of an internal e-mail the U.S. Department of Justice sent out this week to various U.S. attorneys' offices: "Has your district defended any cases on behalf of the (U.S.) Army Corps of Engineers against claims brought by environmental groups seeking to block or otherwise impede the Corps work on the levees protecting New Orleans? If so, please describe the case and the outcome of the litigation."

Cynthia Magnuson, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department, said Thursday she couldn't comment "because it's an internal e-mail."

Shown a copy of the e-mail, David Bookbinder, senior attorney for Sierra Club, remarked, "Why are they (Bush administration officials) trying to smear us like this?"

The Sierra Club and other environmental groups had nothing to do with the flooding that resulted from Hurricane Katrina that killed hundreds, he said. "It's unfortunate that the Bush administration is trying to shift the blame to environmental groups. It doesn't surprise me at all."

Federal officials say the e-mail was prompted by a congressional inquiry but wouldn't comment further.

Whoever is behind the e-mail may have spotted the Sept. 8 issue of National Review Online that chastised the Sierra Club and other environmental groups for suing to halt the corps' 1996 plan to raise and fortify 303 miles of Mississippi River levees in Louisiana, Mississippi and Arkansas.

The corps settled the litigation in 1997, agreeing to hold off on some work until an environmental impact could be completed. The National Review article concluded: "Whether this delay directly affected the levees that broke in New Orleans is difficult to ascertain."

The problem with that conclusion?

The levees that broke causing New Orleans to flood weren't Mississippi River levees. They were levees that protected the city from Lake Pontchartrain levees on the other side of the city.

When Katrina struck, the hurricane pushed tons of water from the Gulf of Mexico into Lake Pontchartrain, which borders the city to the north. Corps officials say the water from the lake cleared the levees by 3 feet. It was those floodwaters, they say, that caused the levees to degrade until they ruptured, causing 80 percent of New Orleans to flood.

Bookbinder said the purpose of the litigation by the Sierra Club and others in 1996 was where the corps got the dirt for the project. "We had no objections to levees," he said. "We said, 'Just don't dig film materials out of the wetlands. Get the dirt from somewhere else.' "

If you listen to what some conservatives say about environmentalists, he said, "We're responsible for most of the world's ills."

In 1977, the corps wanted to build a 25-mile-long barrier and gate system to protect New Orleans on the east side. Both environmental groups and fishermen opposed the project, saying it would choke off water into Lake Pontchartrain.

After litigation, corps officials abandoned the idea, deciding instead to build higher levees. "They came up with a cheaper alternative," Bookbinder said. "We didn't object to raising the levees."

John Hall, a spokesman for the corps in New Orleans, said the barrier the corps was proposing in the 1970s would only stand up to a weak Category 3 hurricane, not a Category 4 hurricane like Katrina. "How much that would have prevented anything, I'm not sure," he said.

Since 1999, corps officials have studied the concept of building huge floodgates to prevent flooding in New Orleans from a Category 4 or 5 hurricane.

Although the Federal Emergency Management Agency in 2001 listed a hurricane striking New Orleans as one of the top three catastrophic events the nation could face (the others being a terrorist attack on New York City and an earthquake in San Francisco), funding for corps projects aimed at curbing flooding in southeast Louisiana lagged.

U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., has said the White House cut $400 million from corps' requests for flood control money in the area.

In fiscal 2006, the corps had hoped to receive up to $10 million in funding for a six-year feasibility study on such floodgates. According to a recent estimate, the project would take 10 years to build and cost $2.5 billion.

"Our understanding is the locals would like to go to that," Hall said. "If I were local, I'd want it."

link

[Gil Hamilton]

That's nice, except for the fact that it was the Federal Government and not environmental groups that hamstrung the Army Corp of Engineers trying to reinforce the levees in New Orleans. Of course, conservatives will by this because it's an excuse to blame environmentalist groups for something.

[The Yosemite Bear]

hey nero had to blame the christians for the great fire. despite spending money on great games, and fatal charades, instead of working on making any sort of fire prevention measures for rome....

[JME2]

And just when you think the Administration can't surprise you any further, something like this happens...

[Braedley]

Didn't Bush say he took (partial) responsibility for what happened in New Orleans? Or maybe that was after the fact.

[RedImperator]

I think we're looking at the birth of the next right wing talk radio meme.

[SPOOFE]

That's nice, except for the fact that it was the Federal Government and not environmental groups that hamstrung the Army Corp of Engineers trying to reinforce the levees in New Orleans.

If the actions of environmental groups changed public opinion, that is a legitimate concern to be acknowledged now so as to avoid it in the future.

It's important to look into every aspect of this tragedy, not just the that paint the President in the worst possible light.

[Keevan_Colton]

Split K's bullshit.

[1123581321]

That's nice, except for the fact that it was the Federal Government and not environmental groups that hamstrung the Army Corp of Engineers trying to reinforce the levees in New Orleans.

If the actions of environmental groups changed public opinion, that is a legitimate concern to be acknowledged now so as to avoid it in the future.

It's important to look into every aspect of this tragedy, not just the that paint the President in the worst possible light.

So the people who aren't in charge might just be responsible?

For all this talk, did any environmental lawsuit even due anything to stip work on the levees. Especially since the Republican Congress defunded them, and then, among other things, decided to build bridges to nowhere in Alaska.

[Wicked Pilot]

There are plenty of Democrats who can be legitimately blamed for parts of what happened. If Bush and co had some balls they'd call out Blanco and Nagin, but as they say it's unwise to go around throwing bricks in a glass house.

[The Yosemite Bear]

that will never happen as glass house dwellers and bricks don't mix. There is enough stuff that went down over the years and we're talking a state that reveled in their status as the most currupt government in the United States, their pirate history and taking money from the emergency prevention funds and education funds to spend on big business projects and casinos. This was going on for over a century, with NO being known for flooding for quite a long time, it has continued reguardless of the "party" in charge. This was not just a "republican" or "democrat" created tragedy, this was the result of a political culture of curruption, which despite minor setbacks at the turn of the 20th century, has grown consistantly for over 200 years in the United States.