I heard on the news that because of the cost of involved, Bush decided against giving funding for improving the levee system in New Orleans. I don’t remember which channel I heard it on; MSNBC or CNN. My question is, did this actually happen? At $14.5B, it looks like it would have been a bargain.
Are there any Dopers out there that can speak to this issue? Opinions on the decision (if it actually happened). I am trying to understand the technical/engineering aspects of this whole nightmare, and I am the first one to admit I know little about this issue in particular, or levee / environmental engineering in general.
I haven’t heard anyone talking about a figure as high as 14.5 billion. Most of what I’ve heard say the cost for upgrading the levees would have been in the tens of millions. One person, who was apparently attempted to defend the decision not to upgrade by saying how big the job would have been, said it would have cost a billion dollars to prevent all damage.
The actual funding received for the levee project was 23 million (1998), 16 million (1999), 10 million (2001), and 5.7 million (2004). The drainage project received 75 million (1999), 69 million (2001), and 36.5 million (2004). While this doesn’t show the figures for every year, the amounts were reduced over the years.
As for whose decision this was, it’s almost impossible to say. Under any circumstance, it’s difficult to say who was responsible for something that didn’t happen. It’s not like there was an Undersecretary in Charge of Making Sure There Was Enough Money Spent in New Orleans. In circumstances like this, where the consequences have been so severe, nobody is going to step forward now and admit they were part of the decision making process.
I should clarify that this figure was for an entire revamping of the area, including the barrier islands and the runoff of silt…an eco-engineering thing. I’m catching bits and pieces of these news stories as I’m working. I’m hoping someone has more reliable info than my memory.