New Orleans: A case study for federalism?
The blame on politicians has started.
I have a question: why is the federal government the proper agency to protect a city?
One city is a huge voting section of Baton Rouge's thinking. It is a tiny part of Washington's.
Why should the federal government have much say on how a city protects itself? This is reverse political bribery. The politicians bribe the voter to vote for the politician.
If New Orleans was protected by Louisiana's projects, then they could invest what they wished in protecting their city.
If St. Louis and Missouri chose a different protection mechanism and protocol than New Orleans -- great. We would learn which mechanisms work the best. Insurance premiums would even help score the success. Higher premiums for similar starting points would indicate bad methodologies. Theory would score until reality serves as the final referee.
Washington has no business determining how New Orleans is protected or built so it had no business building levees.
Now Washington has made bad decisions starting with LBJ's era in relying on levees by and large. Washington now has to foot some of the bill because of its bad choice.
Washington should get out of this business and make the states carry their own loads.
No comments:
Post a Comment