The Daily Pennsylvanian :: Judith Kim | America can't afford to abandon New Orleans

In his Oct. 3, 2008 column, Mordechai Treiger raises a very valid question: "Why save New Orleans?" He claims that New Orleans, because of it precarious geologic location, is in danger of succumbing to the forces of nature and therefore will unavoidably be destroyed. He blames the people of New Orleans for Katrina's disaster, accusing them of "choos[ing] a lousy place to pitch tent," and recommends that they should abandon the city, arguing that any attempts to rebuild New Orleans will only delay the inevitable.

But New Orleans isn't the only city that is vulnerable to nature's future threats. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, New York City, Boston and Bangkok are only a few of the many cities worldwide that face flooding in the future due to rapidly rising sea levels. Even Mr. Treiger's city of Seattle is not immune to the dangers of nature - it sits directly on top of the 30-mile Seattle Fault. According to the May 9, 2008 report in The Seattle Times, if the fault ruptures again, the city could face a possibility of up to 1,600 dead or dying; 24,000 injured; and a "staggering $33 billion" loss to the state's government. Yet, when these threats must be addressed, how will these cities choose to respond? Surely their response will be to find ways in which to protect their citizens because they do not question the importance of their cities to their countries and to the world. Hence, since Mr. Treiger acknowledges that protecting New Orleans is possible, he is essentially arguing that the city is not worth saving.

Yet, Mr. Treiger misses the point. Putting aside the social and moral reasons, the country has no choice but to help rebuild New Orleans due to its economic significance. When Mr. Treiger recommended abandoning the efforts to rebuild New Orleans, he failed to mention that the city produces and brings in a third of the country's oil and a fourth of its natural gas, not to mention over 40 percent of the country's seafood. In addition, moving the city more inland is an unlikely option, for building new ports to dock commercial companies' ships would be highly costly and detrimental to their businesses. Though many might not be willing to admit it, the unfortunate truth is that New Orleans is too valuable to lose.

New Orleans was a man-made disaster, not a natural one. According to the final report released by the Independent Levee Investigation Team, the collapse of the levees during Hurricane Katrina was caused by the failure of the Army Corps of Engineers to build and maintain the levees to the originally promised standard. Had the levees been built up to code, they would have protected against a Category 5 storm; therefore, Katrina's Category 3 forces when it reached the city would have caused minimal damage. Furthermore, the report released by the American Society of Civil Engineers contends that, if the levees had withstood, "two-thirds of the deaths would not have occurred." America's government has a responsibility to rebuild the levees and assist in the recovery efforts - and they have begun to do so, albeit slowly.

The hopeful news is that thanks to the help of volunteers - especially college students - New Orleans has been slowly rebuilding. According to the Brookings Institute's The New Orleans Index, the city has recovered 72 percent of its pre-Katrina population and 86 percent of its jobs.

The problems that plagued the city long before Katrina - education, racial tensions, poverty to name a few - continue to pose issues for the region.

Yet, at the same time, the annihilation of New Orleans has provided an opportunity to create an improved, more modern city of the 21st century.

While New Orleans begins to tackle its problems, the city urgently needs smart, driven individuals of all professions and studies to commit to the long-term recovery efforts. Hundreds of university students all over the country have poured into New Orleans to do whatever they can to help advance the restoration of this metropolis.

Without this help, the city may not succeed in rebuilding.

In light of this, we as university students have the opportunity to serve our country. New Orleans is our generation's call to service - will we heed it or not?

Yes, the saints are marching in - and America is much better for it.

Judith Kim is a College senior and President of Penn Undergraduates in New Orleans. She has worked two summers and made two service trips to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

Comments (2)

Thank you, Ms. Kim, for reminding the country of what New Orleans provides. But one highly important fact of New Orleans' situation continues to be missed. When New Orleans was established nearly 300 years ago, it was at least 30 miles farther inland than it sits now. That is why New Orleans' "founding fathers" chose the site - it was "high ground" and far enough inland to be protected. 20th Century Corps of Engineers projects such as dams and flood prevention efforts upriver disturbed the natural sediment flow that kept rebuilding Louisiana's coastline. This triggered the coastal erosion that has allowed the Gulf of Mexico to encroach on the City, bringing it ever closer to a large metropolitan area. And the result of Congress and the Corps of Engineers ignoring the problem which THEY created was to make New Orleans vulnerable. 30 additional miles of coastline would have provied a natural buffer for the storm surge that tested the flawed levees. Had Congress and the ACOE taken the problem seriously and acted decades ago, New Orleans would have repopulated 48 hours afte the storm. As it stands now, the City may not reach its former population count even 48 MONTHS after the flood. And the cost to the American taxpayer for its recovery will be exponentially higher than would have been the cost of fixing the problem in the first place. But of course, as long as Congress continues to allow the Corps of Engineers to be immune from prosecution (as per the Flood Control Act of 1927), there will be no incentive to "do it right".

The true investigation should be into the ACOE. The ACOE is another case of an underfunded federal program. Not only that but their priorities are set by not the needs and best interests of the nation, but by strong lobbying PAC's who lobby Congress for more ACOE money under the condition ACOE guarantee their half baked projects get done. Having worked with the ACOE extensively in AK I can tell you they are a mislead, poorly managed agency who's undirected staff is unresponsive and fails to learn from their previous mistakes.

Comments are closed for this item.