UPDATED: Should the US military take the lead in responding to natural disaster?
Not if we want to keep a federal system.
Unless we’re talking about fighting a war, a “let the military do it” idea is bad for a democracy. What the military can do is provide extraordinarily fine “special asset” coordination. Coordinating air assets (especially helicopters) in an “overwhelmed environment” is a job the military must be good at doing. Likewise coordinating ships and large-scale truck convoys. Coordination doesn’t necessarily mean command– and that’s an important distinction.
The Washington Times published an article today that sketches Bush Administration thinking on use of the military in a “major” natural disaster. The definition of “major” is a key definition.
Here’s the President’s question:
“Is there a circumstance in which the Department of Defense becomes the lead agency?” Mr. Bush asked members of a military task force participating in Hurricane Rita relief efforts in Texas.
“Clearly, in the case of a terrorist attack, that would be the case, but is there a natural disaster of a certain size that would then enable the Defense Department to become the lead agency in coordinating and leading the response effort?” he added. “That’s going to be a very important consideration for Congress to think about.”
Here’s The Washington Post’s story on the same subject.
The Post’s lede:
Military units have been battling the ravages of hurricane winds and flooding for nearly four weeks along the Gulf Coast. Now their leaders must navigate a different turbulent path: Congress.
Political leaders led by President Bush are considering how and when the military should take greater control of relief efforts during national disasters. And one answer may be to ensure that the president has the authority to bring in the armed forces during extraordinary circumstances.
“We’re going to look back at (Hurricane) Katrina as a turning point,” Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., said Sunday. “We need the military, because of its extraordinary capabilities, to be ready to play a much more active role. I don’t think it’s going to be that difficult from a congressional point of view.”
He said Congress must make it clear the president is authorized to use the federal military in a crisis, although that may not require legislation.
The question, according to White House and Pentagon officials, is when.
“If you have a situation like a Hurricane Katrina where the state and local first-responders, to a large extent, are victims themselves and somewhat overwhelmed, then what do you do in a situation like that,” said White House press secretary Scott McClellan.
“Should there be some sort of a trigger that says `OK, the federal government needs to marshal all their resources quickly and get in there and stabilize the situation.’ And it’s the Department of Defense that has the capability to do that.”
Both he and Lieberman said the trigger would be an extraordinary catastrophe.
How long before the KosKidz and democraticunderground start cracking conspiracy theories? Here’s a starter kit for the KosKidz moonbats: Hurricane Adolf approaches Washington and W responds with an airborne division. Yes, the ‘cane is perfect cover for a Seven Days in May putsch in Amerika. The counter-clockwise rotation signals a “counter revolution.” The military front for the Seven Days in May takeover was called ECOMCON, wasn’t it? (Emergency Communications Control…) Stay tuned, moonbats.
UPDATE: From September 26, 2005 briefing by presidential Press Secretary Scott McClellan.
QUESTION: Earlier today you said the President was thinking of suggesting trigger power for the military to take over in the most severe catastrophe. My question is, would he bypass our constitutional civilian rule over the military to get that kind of authority?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, there are some laws that are already in place. You have the Insurrection Act, which was originally passed I think back in 1861. The President had authorities before that to quell rebellions or restore law and order if needed. But that was primarily — the purpose of that act was really aimed at what I just said, quelling rebellions or restoring law and order. What we saw with Hurricane Katrina was a category five hurricane coming up the Gulf Coast. I think it hit as a category four. But this was a major, catastrophic event, and that’s what the President is talking about, a situation like Hurricane Katrina. Is there a trigger needed, an automatic trigger for something like a hurricane five –
Q Wouldn’t that be dangerous? After all, there is a –
MR. McCLELLAN: — for something like a –
Q — precedent, isn’t there?
MR. McCLELLAN: Let me — that’s why I’m trying to go through this to talk to you about his views and his thinking on this because it is one of the important lessons learned of Hurricane Katrina. And the President is talking about what do we do in the event of a major, catastrophic event when we need to quickly deploy large amounts of resources and assets to help stabilize the situation. That’s what he’s talking about.
The military is the one organization that has the capability to quickly deploy large amounts of resources and assets to help stabilize a situation in the event of a major catastrophe.
Q But why bypass civilian control? You have instant communications, you can call the President.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we saw some of the problems from Hurricane Katrina. And this is one of the lessons –
Q Why? What –
MR. McCLELLAN: — this is one of the lessons learned when you have a situation where state and local first responders are doing everything they can to help. But they’re also victims. And to a large extent, they are overwhelmed. And so the question becomes, in a situation like that, how do you immediately or quickly establish some stability to help get people the help they need.
Q But can’t you assume, then, that the President would know immediately if there was a severe catastrophe in the country?
MR. McCLELLAN: I’m sorry, what?
Q I said, wouldn’t we assume that the President would know immediately that there was something terribly catastrophic?
MR. McCLELLAN: And that’s why we need to look at this issue, because right now, the way things are set up, you have the Department of Homeland Security, which is from the federal government standpoint where you have a number of agencies under its umbrella that help assist the first responders. But it’s primarily a state and local responsibility — the initial response efforts, with the full support of the federal government.
And we saw with Hurricane Rita that there was very good coordination going on at all levels of government. And the response — or the reports that the President was receiving that the response efforts were going well to get people the help that they needed and to save lives.
With Hurricane Katrina, you had a unprecedented natural disaster, one of a size and magnitude like we haven’t seen before. It covered a very large area. And the President wants to make sure that we learn the lessons from Hurricane Katrina, and that means at all levels of government. And one of the lessons is, in a situation like this, do you need an organization like the military to come in and quickly stabilize the situation. They’re the one organization that can do that, and that’s what he wants Congress to consider.
Q They couldn’t even reach the President during Katrina.
MR. McCLELLAN: That’s false. That is absolutely false.
Q Well, then, isn’t that the lesson –
MR. McCLELLAN: In fact, if you go back and look, the President was very engaged during that time period, including on the day — the morning before the storm hit, when he was participating in a videoconference with federal and state and local officials, and the different — in the region…
UPDATE 2: Comments 3 and 5 — see my column which will be out Wednesday morning. Marines need to be Marines first. I spoke with a PAO at NORTHCOM this afternoon. There are assets DOD possesses that sane people know must be used by the American people when major natural disasters occur. But there are constitutional considerations that are extremely significant and have long-term significance. LTG Honore has made a clever argument: Katrina struck like a very well-planned enemy attack. The storm knocked out communications, cut transportation routes, then surged in with a “rear attack” (breaking the levees after everyone thought the storm had by-passed New Orleans). This is an analogy that has some element of truth, and one that to a degree exculpates some of the decisions (or non-decisions) made at the local, state, and federal levels. Despite General Honore’s sound points about the storm’s surprise effects, I believe Governor Blanco proved to be an incompetent leader in the crisis. Why fiddle with the federal system because of a single state’s incompetence? Simplifying or stream-lining bureaucratic procedures in order to access useful DOD assets should interest all of us– we’ve already paid for the assets. Putting DOD in charge is another issue.
There is already a trigger for federal support in a disaster, even (or especially) if the local and state resources are overwhelmed. That is a request from the state governor for federal support. It was that trigger which was not “pulled” during the early stages of Katrina. A more worthwhile consideration would be “How can the federal government force state and local jurisdictions to act responsibly in planning for and responding to disasters?” Clearly (to all but the MSM) that is what did not happen during Katrina. Perhaps a provision that federal funds could not be disbursed to state and local constituencies unless a minimum standard of DETAILED planning had been completed AND TESTED.
Comment by John F Harvell — 9/26/2005 @ 3:19 pm
The President can’t seem to win for losing. First it’s that “he wasn’t doing enough” now it’s “is he trying to grab too much power.” This is so amazingly transparent, how can someone sit there, ask these kinds of questions, and still be called a professional?
Comment by Shawn — 9/26/2005 @ 4:03 pm
This reminds me when they put the Marines on the Mexican border in the nineties and then were surprised when some poor farmboy (with a rifle) got shot and killed by a Marine named Banuelos (doing exactly what he was trained to do). The situation started to become really farcical when the local DA tried to prosecute Banuelos for murder(or manslaughter, I can’t remember). The military is not a police force and should not be used as such. In domestic situations we benefit from our military for its organization and its assets, such as helicopters and ships. However, if we try to fit the military into a civilian role, it will perform it in a military manner; something we don’t want. Also, it is not counter-intuitive to questions FEMA’s effectiveness (though I thought LA was worse) and to also oppose greater military involvement in domestic situations.
Comment by ElamBend — 9/26/2005 @ 4:52 pm
The liberal media asked for this, when they let the local officials off the hook. So its the feds fault? Well the feds will fix things in the future. They asked for government accountability, they got it brother!
Comment by Mike Burleson — 9/26/2005 @ 5:18 pm
The fact is that nobody does logistics and air transport like the military so it makes sense to streamline the legal environment to ensure that these capabilities can be efficiently utilized in a disaster. I’m really impressed by the Coast Guard and I don’t think they get enough credit for what they do. Given that the CG is both a military and a law enforcement force with vast experience at disaster response they are the best positioned federal entity to take lead a combined military/civilian federal response. The Navy’s hospital ship Comfort should be reassigned to the Coast Guard so they can use it for natural disasters. The Navy will still have access to it the same way they have access to the Coast Guard as a whole in times of war. We should assign an older, decommisioned Navy assault ship or a smaller aircraft carrier that has been mothballed to the Coast Guard for use in emergencies.It could be set up as a command center, it can have deployable medical and engineering units and be capable of operating rescue helicopters. The Posse Commitatus Act should amended to allow military law enforcement troops (military police, security police, shore police etc) to perform law enforcement roles in natural disasters. Military bases just outside the range of hurricanes should have runways that can handle the AF’s big cargo jets and should be stocked with relevant supplies and facilities. The National Health Service, which is one of the 7 uniformed services, should have deployable medical units that can respond to disasters. State and federal laws should be shaped to allow for volunteers to come in and perform services. There is a tremendous amount of distributed knowledge among the American population and we should ensure the doctors, nurses, and others can volunteer without having to go through a bunch of bureaucratic bs.
Comment by phil — 9/26/2005 @ 5:25 pm
[…] s be ancilliary for domestic matters unless there is an enemy attack. More analysis from Austin Bay. posted by: The Editors @ 11:27 am September 26, 2005 […]
Pingback by The Unalienable Right » DoD is for fighting wars, FEMA is for emergency management… — 9/26/2005 @ 7:48 pm
A major component of the disaster associated with Hurricane Katrina was the incompetence demonstrated by Louisiana’s Governor and New Orlean’s Mayor, and we are all going to pay for their mistakes. I suspect President Bush may not really want the military to assume as much control over future disasters as is being floated in public, but that he wants broad and open debate to let everyone conclude for themselves why the federal government should not be first responders or operational controllers. This debate approach will probably be a lot more effective than trying to tell the public what is best for us. The governors of Mississippi, Alabama and Texas have been excellent examples of why it will be best to leave disaster responsiblity in the hands of local and state officials. Perhaps the debate will formally define what level of local/state incompetence will be tolerated before the federal government is required to accept the on-scene command by default.
Comment by E. T. — 9/26/2005 @ 9:26 pm
Unless the Active Component responsibility in a disaster such as Rita is very carefully designed, the idea, much less the actual act, of handing over responsibility has all the potential of being an unmitigated disaster. The active component is not “local” and the very act of lifting a brigade with enough equipment to actually be of some help would delay the process. The AC can’t train for every possibility in every state, maintain the relationships with the local police and emergency workers and train for a war-time mission. The Guard can and does because its focus is limited to one state, that the know very well. The guard also develops and “institutional memory” because senior personnel are in the State guard, they are not spending time with the 82d, then the 101st, then some other unit. The AC has some lift and response capabilities that makes them absolutely necessary in situations like this, but only as late-comers to the party. It might be better for FEMA to run CPX’s more like the military and maybe develop some of the military style and methods in its operations. Couple that those types of drills with State and locals and we would improve the response. It seems that, listening to folks from Texas, that something like this had happened in the past 4 years. I hope Mr. Bush was making a suggestion that he knew wouldn’t fly but would light a spark under a few Governors to get with the program. I really can’t see any of them giving up their army or standing aside to let someone else do their jobs.
Comment by Bob — 9/26/2005 @ 10:53 pm
I don’t believe that we need to look to the active military to run such an effort at all. After all, the military is not the only large organization with extensive logistics and air capabilities. Both FedEx and UPS have experience at dealing with short-term, rush requirements which force long hours and some fancy footwork to make things happen as needed. Just look at their workloads and responses every Christmas. Perhaps some kind of arrangement could be made under which they could be tapped to take charge of the logistical support effort, under the umbrella of FEMA. Put together a management team from either organization, give them the backing of the federal government by making them a temporary part of FEMA, and give them the authority to request personnel and vehicular assistance from either active or Guard/Reserve forces, and let them get the job done. Keep the civilians in charge, give them the resources they need, and expect the best from them. I realize that a whole lot more would be needed to flesh this out, responsibilities, authorities, duties, etc., but it would have the advantage of keeping the active military out of the direct chain of command during such an emergency.
Comment by JayTex — 9/27/2005 @ 10:16 am
The notion of having the military take over disaster relief is stupid. Their primary mission is to kill bad guys and break their stuff. Katrina’s damage was magnified by the fact that it hit a city that had long-running problems with corruption, and was under grossly incompetent leadership at the state and local level. Ray Nagin was asleep at the switch, and Kathleen Blanco managed to make George C. McClellan and Frank Jack Fletcher look like decisive and competent individuals. What ought to be done instead is that states, as a condition of receiving federal funds for transportation and other funds, should be required to run exercises for the major disasters most likely to hit on an annual basis. This can be expanded to include military units in the area, but they need to drill. One military aphorism is very applicable to this: “You fight as you train.” It will also help identify which areas may have incompetent boobs in charge - and thus, FEMA and DHS can plan accordingly. But having the active military take the lead? Unless the active-duty military is being expanded from its present-day structure, I think that is a stupid idea. They’re being stretched thin as it is.
Comment by HaroldHutchison — 9/27/2005 @ 11:10 am
Who defines whether a disaster is “major” enough for immediate federal intervention? And how does an administration deal with the inevitable storm of recriminations if an emergency is NOT deemed “major” enough? This is an incredibly stupid lack of judgement on everyone’s part. The whole Katrina case has been a classic example of mass hysteria, fed primarily by the Big Media (why are they called “Mainstream” when they are not?) and Bush opponents. On Bush’s side we get overreaction and more stupidity. What happened were two major hurricanes at the top of a multi-decade cycle (the previous high was during the Great Depression). A natural disaster, but NOT a major national cataclysm. We have lost our bearings and our cool.
Comment by Roderick Reilly — 9/27/2005 @ 2:25 pm
I am in total agreement in recognizing the massive failure of leadership at the local/state levels in Louisiana and that tinkering at the federal level won’t protect us from that kind of incompetence. It is unlikely that Louisiana is the only state with that problem. I also agree that the DOD already has enough responsibilities as it is, so I don’t think it should take the lead in disaster response. Perhaps we can borrow the concept of joint operations from the military and find a way to apply it in disaster response thus establishing procedures of coordination among federal, state, and local entities while respecting federalism. But ultimately we are going to have to get tough with our local and state officials to make sure they are doing their jobs.
Comment by phil — 9/27/2005 @ 2:49 pm
DOWN WITH TIMES SELECT: Read David Brooks and John Tierney while they last at brooksandtierney.blogspot.com. Apologies for being off topic, but I’m sure the readers of this site might appreciate the service.
Comment by DWTS — 9/27/2005 @ 3:32 pm
Trying to fix “the problem” means having to define the problem in the first place. Unfortunately, the problem appears to be less at the federal level and more at the local and state level in Luisiana, so fixing things at the federal level will not provide us with the lessons learned and the “fixes” that are so vital. Nagin’s plan to send people back into N.O. a few days before Rita, tell them to leave, and then tell them to go back (contradicting the CG numerous times) when there are no services is merely confirmation that he has no concept of the disaster in his own city and was, and continues to be, making all the wrong decisions. The reason he talked so early and loud about the “failures” of the Feds and others is that he was probably trying to distract from the real problem — his own failures (perhaps you have seen this tactic used in office politics as well?). After Bush and Blanco took responsibility for mistakes related to Katrina, Nagin said his only mistatke was that he didn’t yell louder. Yelling and blaming others is not an emergency plan. Incidentally, N.O. has an EOP on their website. The problem is that they failed to implement it. Nagin’s only talent is making the wrong moves and then blaming others. He had his Giuliani moment and blew it because he is no Giuliani. It was this same “talent” that led to many of the issues that lie at the heart of what went wrong during and after Katrina hit. Every emergency manager in America knows that disaster mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery are the primary responsibility of the locals. Locals know their roads, resources, population, vulnerabilities, capabilities, etc. IMHO, if the locals screw up the pre-disaster planning, or fail to implement their EOPs when a disaster strikes, as appears to be the case in Luisiana and N.O., then the federal government will require lots of time to undo the damage, from the failures as well as the disaster. Local governments need to watch, listen, and learn very carefully from this one. They must — absolutly MUST — get their DMA 2000 Mitigation Plans completed and implemented, update their EOPs, make sure the have a robust continuity of government plan (for providing critical services as well as protecting civic leaders), dust off or create a post-disaster recovery plan, encourage their business community to have disaster response and business recovery plans, and make sure that their citizens have personal/family disaster plans, 7 to 10 days of supplies, and so on. In addition, citizen can participate in Citizen Emergency Response Trainging (CERT), given that the true first responders are often you or your neighbors. These are old lessons we “learn” in every disaster, but bear repeating in light of what is happening now and the incredible unpreparedness that we have witnessed in Luisiana and N.O. My only concern is whether or not we will learn the right lessons, or entrench the failures even more…
Comment by Michael Cadrecha — 9/28/2005 @ 12:38 pm