The Loss of Sense and Cents

I read some of the greatest words of sense that I have heard in a long time while reading the editorials today. Orrin Pilkey talks in his article about the stupidity of rebuilding along the Gulf Coast with the recent experience of the destruction of last year's hurricane season and the knowledge that more big hurricanes are coming in the near future.

"Today, the new hurricane season begins, in a time of rising sea levels and increasing intensity of storms. It makes no sense to simply rebuild and even increase building density after Katrina. It might be difficult to accept, but reconstruction near the beach should be prohibited. Strong consideration should also be given to halting future federal storm bailouts, including taxpayer-supported flood insurance and the handout of post-storm cleanup and reconstruction funds - all of which only encourages rebuilding in the most dangerous locations. Government purchase of vulnerable beach properties, as costly as it might be, would pay off in the long term."

I have been considering almost the same thing ever since the advent of Hurricane Katrina's destruction of New Orleans last year when the question of whether or not to rebuild came up. People have been building along the beautiful shore in a place that is widely known to be venerable and dangerous, and yet they are shocked when their property is destroyed and demand for the government to bail them out year after year. How much longer will it last?

Not long after the Hurricane Katrina vs. New Orleans fiasco last year I was reading Bob Sheets and Jack Williams' book Hurricane Watch. It was a very interesting and insightful read, especially with all of the Hurricane talk in the news and everywhere else at the time. The part of the book that stuck with me the most, though, was where they wrote, pre-Katrina, about what would happen if New Orleans was indeed hit by a large storm. It was scary how well they had predicted the things that would happen, including the impossibility of complete evacuation with the amount of warning that would be available at best, the overflowing of Lake Pontchartrain, the inability of the pumps to handle the direct hit of a hurricane, the flooding of certain parts of the city, and the awful conditions that would be faced by those unable to evacuate the city. The things that happened with Hurricane Katrina should not have been a surprise but were merely the fulfillment of previous predictions.

Yesterday I came across an article in the news that helped move me even further towards the opinion that the city of New Orleans should not be rebuilt, at least not how and where it was. It seems that New Orleans is not only below sea level, but has been and continues to sink even further. The levees that were built were not able to withstand the surge of the storm since they had sunk to lower than they were supposed to be, making the city that much more venerable.

I realize that there are many people who call New Orleans home and do not want to move from there. They want things to go back to the way they were. Perhaps if I were to actually live down there I would have a different opinion. As it is, I have never even visited New Orleans. However, does sentimentality really make for a good reason to rebuild a city with billions of taxpayer dollars when there is a very good chance that it will be facing the same kind of destruction again in the near future? Why do people insist on building multi-million dollar homes, not just in New Orleans, but all over the Gulf Coast in the face of such odds? And why does the government insist on subsidizing it year after year?

The meteorological community is predicting another active hurricane season this year. The news is full of headlines such as "US weather experts forecast above-normal hurricane threat", "Forecaster expects active hurricane season", and "Forecaster sees nine Atlantic hurricanes in 2006". However, people seem to still feel invincible as they rebuild buildings and homes that may have to rebuilt again by the end of the summer. More money will be poured out as people insist on living in places that are almost assured of destruction and then demanding financial aid when that destruction arrives. No, I do not have the answers and solutions to the problem, but I still continue to wonder why people continue to put themselves and their property in the path of such danger and then expect not to pay for that decision. It is as if they have lost their sense and so are willing to lose both their own and the tax payer's cents.