Share

Five Bailout Lessons From Katrina

by: Bill Quigley, t r u t h o u t | Perspective

photo
Hurricane Katrina victim, Lewis Reddick, stands in the FEMA Diamond travel trailer park in May of 2008. (Photo: Getty Images)

    The US has committed nearly three trillion dollars to the financial bailout so far. The Federal Reserve has made more than $2 trillion in emergency loans and another $700 billion has been pledged through Congressional action. Much more money is coming.

    Things better for your community? I didn't think so.

    Welcome to Katrina world. Despite pledges of a hundred billion dollars, we are still in deep pain along the Gulf Coast. What happened?

    Unless citizens are vigilant and demanding, the entire US will be subjected to the same forces that swept through the Gulf Coast after Katrina - spending huge amounts of money and leaving a second disaster behind.

    Despite promises of buckets of bucks, New Orleans still has 60,000 abandoned homes. Media reports say that 75 percent of the abandoned buildings have homeless people sleeping in them. Public health care, public education and public housing are all less available and being thoroughly privatized. Crime is sky high, though we still have 100 National Guard members patrolling our streets.

    So, what lessons can be learned from Katrina world that apply to the financial bailout?

    First, demand transparency. Insist on knowing how much money is being spent, by whom it is being spent, who is receiving it and for what reasons. Bloomberg News sued the Federal Reserve in November to find out who received money from the more than $2 trillion dollars in emergency loans they have given out. The government refuses to release that basic information. Such an outrage cannot be permitted.

    Second, keep a constant watch out for predators. Many interests feast on the suffering of others. When disaster hits, some see opportunity for their own private interests. What Naomi Klein calls disaster capitalism kicks in and the big bucks start flowing out and away from real needs. Those who are not already picking the bones are circling. It is up to us to force them away.

    Third, people have to participate in the decisions. During and after a disaster, there is a vacuum of leadership, and those with the most resources usually rush in, declare an emergency and then go on to make decisions about what has to be done. Not surprisingly, these folks are focused on taking care of their own interests first, and often second and third. We cannot let emergencies be the excuse to avoid democratic decision-making.

    Fourth, the human rights of the least powerful must be made a conscious priority. This is the exact opposite of what happens. The human right to housing, land, livelihood and freedom from discrimination must guide the response to the emergency. Liberation theology calls this the preferential option for the poor. Year-end bonuses continue while foreclosures increase? The needs of the poor must take priority over the wants of the rich.

    Fifth, insist on gender equity. Experiences show a systematic violation of the rights of women in every phase of disasters. The presence, participation and value of the role of women have been seriously inadequate. Women bear a disproportionate burden of the effects of poverty. The human rights of women must be immediately respected, as their suffering and disrespect continues today.

    If our citizens and organizations demand these five principles be respected and followed, there is a chance that the post-bailout environment will not end up like the post-Katrina landscape of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. Because there is one iron rule in responding to disaster - once that money is gone, it is not coming back.

  

»


Bill Quigley is a human rights lawyer and law professor at Loyola University New Orleans. He can be reached at quigley77@gmail.com.

Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

This is utopic trifle and a

This is utopic trifle and a twist of facts. A human right to housing? Who gave the right? And how much right? 80 sqf or 800 sqf? Human needs are unlimited as Maslov observed. Who will be the arbitrator? It is inconceivable for me that Katherina victims are still living in emergency FEMA containers instead of taking matters in their own hands by moving, working, renting, or building. Or that 60000 abandoned buildings are not given away for free and are renovated by those in need for housing. Money spent on emergency aid will not come back but money spent on an absolutely necessary financial bailout will most likely come back. After all it is in the form of loans that need to be repaid with interest. A collapse of the banking system would gravely affect everybody, even those who talk so unqualified against a bailout. The 2 trillion in Federal Reserve loans are replacing collapsed interbank lending and Commercial Paper lending on an emergency basis, as a lender of last resort. That's the mandate of the Federal Reserve and there is good reason for its partial secrecy. If critics don't understand it and say Thank You then at least they should shut up altogether!

Wouldn’t it be luverly?

Wouldn’t it be luverly? Your principles are both sensible and unexceptionable. But, as Ms Klein and others have shown, precisely for those reasons they will not be followed in any disaster, natural or human made, because power sees disasters, like everything else, either as an opportunity for profit or irrelevant or dangerous. Your principles are positively dangerous, since, if followed, they would deprive the already rich of what they take to be their due. Perhaps more important, if people in disasters were treated as the principles demand, they might get an inkling of the idea that these principles specify not just proper disaster recovery but a decent, humane and very attractive society. Almost 40 yr ago, Rawls argued for two principles that should guide any society whatever: I) each person a right to the most extensive scheme of basic liberties compatible with all others having equal liberties; and II) Inequalities in those things that all humans want no matter what else they may have, like food, shelter, clean water and air, tools needed for work, etc, benefit the least well off persons in the society the most and are attached to offices open to all under fair equality of opportunity including training and education. Taken together, Rawls’ principles define what used to be called social democracy. I think your principles specify his for disasters but can easily extend beyond disasters. His principles were pretty much buried under a flurry of “professional” nit picking and a 30 yr barrage of right wing propaganda. Your principles are likely to draw the right’s precision munitions. So sad and so unsurprising. But I do hope your principles will open a few minds and imaginations to the possibility of a better way of living before the bombs do their work.

The comments above seems

The comments above seems unreasonably harsh. First, I don't think they've been to NO during any stage of recovery or they wouldn't be so superficially critical. Second, I don't think they are remembering the source of "bailout" or "loan" money as they write, plus the effect of huge deficits on younger generations. I'm not wise enough to critique your ideas, but I'm smart enough to wonder why the secrecy...why the abandonment of regulations and decreased number of fraud investagators; i.e. cases brought to trial. I congratulate you for living and continuing your work in NO. Having been there (re undergrade parent) pre and post Katrina, I understand the abandoned housing and some the mass of homeless and jobless. I have no idea whether or not it was good to rebuild--but all those majestic commercial buildings and all of the various HOMES repaired--demonstrate how hope had to stay alive for all who loved NO. Merry Xmas New Orleans.

"A human right to housing?

"A human right to housing? Who gave the right [sic]?" God.