The dangerous and neglected United States of America: Only about 10 percent of the homes in the City of Moore, Oklahoma have "below-ground storm shelters" - and the City's program to receive federal grants for storm shelters has been stuck for years

By Patrick

It does not take a rocket scientist to see what is going wrong these days in the United States of America.

This was the City of Moore in 1999, after a terrible tornado hit the City, with 44 people dead and about 500 people injured (click on photos to enlarge):

Find more pictures from 1999 at this website.

These are photos of the City of Moore right now:

More shocking pictures can be found at "The Atlantic."

Well, the the fact that so many buildings have been destroyed again was probably unavoidable in this case, as a category F4 or F5 tornado destroys virtually any house in its path.

But how can the citizens survive these monster tornadoes? They need a below-ground storm shelter, like these ones (from a google picture search):

So how many of these below-ground storm shelters are there in the City of Moore?

The website of the City of Moore knows the answer:

"Unfortunately, few homes in Moore have basements, and only about 10% or less have below-ground storm shelters."

Screenshot:

This is especially unfortunate, as the City of Moore also explains on its website:

Unless you are in a mobile home or a portable building, normally the best place to take shelter is "in-place", right where you are. The best place to take shelter is in a basement or a below-ground location. (...) The City of Moore has no community (or "public") tornado shelters. This is due to two factors: Overall, people face less risk by taking shelter in a reasonably-well constructed residence! There is no public building in Moore which has a suitable location for a shelter. Yes, there is less overall risk by sheltering-in-place than by going to a community shelter. The average tornado warning time is generally only 10-15 minutes. That's just not enough time for a person to receive the warning, make a conscious decision to leave their home, gather the few things needed (family, keys, etc.), lock the house, get into the car, drive to a shelter (including possibly experiencing a traffic jam of others trying to get to the same shelter!), get out of the car, and make the way into the community shelter. In this scenario, there's a far greater likelihood of getting caught in your car when the tornado strikes!

Yes, that is understandable. The warning time is too short, and this means that people need their own shelters, if they do not want to put their life in the hands of God!

So then why do only about 10 percent of the homes in Moore have "below-ground storm shelters?" Anyone who looks at the pictures from 1999 knows that their lurks a deadly menace over the City which could return easily - as it did yesterday!

I really would like to go on a longer rant here, but you are all aware of the facts, so I can make it short:

A country which...

...spends for example an insane amount of money on the military each year (currently more than one trillion dollar in total)...

...and which for example spends - in my opinion - also a pretty insane amount of money for (at least!) 16 intelligence services (roughly 80 billion dollars in 2010, sharply rising each year)...

...but forgets that its own citizens need support, a good infrastructure and solid protection by the authorities...

...should change its course immediately!

It is not that the City of Moore has not tried to change the situation.

On the website of the City of Moore, the current status of the "Safe Room Rebate Program" is being explained. The situation looks like this: The problem is that this program apparently has been stuck for years - up until today.

Quote from the website:

Safe Room Rebate Program - Update Feb. 2013

UPDATE - February 2013

The City's safe room rebate program is still "on hold", with not a lot changed from our update of last May.

Our county-wide Hazard Mitigation Plan still has not been approved by the State and FEMA. There were changes to the Federal requirements for this plan that occurred while our contractor was writing the document; he has had to rewrite it. We've found that the FEMA requirements and their interpretations seem to be a constantly moving target, more so with the new wrinkles. We're still working out various wording changes with the State reviewers and hope to submit the final document in March.

However, the Plan is not our main obstacle. The Federal grant program which funds local initiatives such as ours is funded by monies set aside during Presidential major disaster declarations. Oklahoma has had few of these declarations in the past couple of years, so there is not a lot of grant money available.

Once our Plan is approved and grant funds become available, we will certainly proceed with our rebate program application.

Safe Room Rebate Program Status – May 1st, 2012

In October 2011, the City of Moore solicited names and addresses of Moore residents interested in receiving federal grant monies toward the installation of a Safe Room or Storm Shelter. We were required to collect the data prior to submission of the City’s application to FEMA.

For the City of Moore to be eligible for the federal funds, we are required to have a FEMA approved Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) on file. The City collaborated with other communities in Cleveland County on the HMP and it was approved in September 2006 and expired in September 2011. The communities of Cleveland County began the revision process of the new Hazard Mitigation Plan during the summer of 2011.

(...)

It is the desire of the City to assist persons who are in Moore to have a place to seek refuge from severe weather. To this end, the City is gathering interest forms as the first step in applying for a hazard mitigation grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. We intend to apply for 2 million dollars in FEMA funding which will assist approximately 800 Moore homeowners.

This particular rebate program is for residential homes. Rental and/or commercial properties are not eligible. If a homeowner is chosen for the program and the City is successful in securing FEMA funding, the homeowner will be eligible to receive up to $2500 in rebate upon installation and verification of final paperwork.

Come on, Americans! This situation is ridiculous, and there are probably many more "City's of Moore" within the USA! Supporting the citizens is not socialism! Giving the people a good infrastructure and good public services is not Marxism! However, spending billions and billions for overblown prestige institutions is just a waste! The citizens have to come first!

Also, making the rich pay their fair share of taxes is also not socialism. It is part of bearing shared responsibility for the well-being of the society.

If all parts of the society work together for the common good and use common sense, the battered United States of America can get back on track again. But at the moment, the American patient still appears to be suffering badly.

Sandy as Metaphor and Message

by Blueberry T

Superstorm Sandy was a storm of epic proportions that has affected millions of people and caused at least $50 billion in economic damages. While the storm is now over, the aftermath and rebuilding will go on for months, or more likely years.  

As we saw directly here on Politicalgates, especially with sleuth1’s tireless updates of conditions throughout the areas that were affected, our readers' support for sleuth’s husband’s work crew that is restoring power in affected areas, and the ways in which our readers have tried to help and look out for each other, this crisis is a time for all of us to pull together and help one another to recover.

   

(More storm images here, here, here and on many other sites)

This is MrSleuth's crew, courtesy Christian Science Monitor and sleuth1

This week, we also saw Leadership with a capital “L”. We saw President Obama in the midst of this crisis: a strong, steady, capable, organized and effective leader who is also caring, compassionate and supportive. He ignored and bridged political divides and bureaucracy to get things done.  He put together a good team and assigned responsibility to tackle priorities.  First and foremost, he has focused on saving lives and helping those in urgent need. Next, get food and water to those who need it. Help get power restored. Coordinate the relief effort.  Get all the key people, federal, state, local and non-governmental agencies working together as a team. Get information to the people who need it, and keep it updated. Get skilled crews and essential resources to the places they are needed.  Get help from other areas of the country (and beyond). Help people cope with their sorrow, discomfort, frustration and the daunting tasks ahead. Make progress every day. Provide moral, physical, economic and logistical support. Comfort, console, and encourage those who have been hard hit. 

h/t sleuth1

I recognize that we are still in the midst of this crisis, and it’s not yet time to draw too many broad conclusions.  But I will say this anyway: what also strikes me today is that Sandy is an apt metaphor for President Obama’s first term. He came into office as the economy was in free fall, suffering the most extreme job losses, GDP and other economic indices since the Great Depression. It was an economic superstorm. Even before taking office, the President assembled a strong team to do triage, identifying the actions needed immediately to pull us out of the nosedive that the Bush Administration (and predecessors’) policies had engendered (along with corporate mismanagement and recklessness), and then developed a plan to rebuild the economy stronger and better. He has accomplished a great deal – here is a series of graphs showing how much the economy has recovered. He has also prevented the dire economic straits that plague European economies that are finding that austerity is not the answer. He is accomplishing as much as is feasible, given that the Republicans in Congress are not only uncooperative and obstructionist, but are deliberately trying to sabotage his economic recovery initiatives. Here is more on his plan going forward. 

The President also cautioned, even before the storm hit, that this storm would be a major disaster with potentially fatal consequences, that would cripple part of the country for some time, and it won’t be fixed overnight. Some people are lost forever and we are left to honor their memories; and some people lost everything they had. He reminded us that making sure that our neighbors are okay, and helping and supporting those who need our help or who have lost everything, is the top priority; we need to get people the food and shelter and care they need right away, get essential services restored, and we’ll get to the other items on the list of priorities as quickly as possible, but rest assured, we will get to them. We. 

Is it poetic justice that this happened just a week before the election, and offers such a stark comparison to the inept disaster responses of the Bush Administration? The contrast is striking: during Katrina, the Bush Administration seemed more a part of the disaster than the relief. During and after Sandy, most Americans see that the Obama Administration is doing everything in its power to help our people and our states in their time of great need.  But, just in case some people were too shell-shocked to connect the dots (and/or lost power and haven't heard too much news),  Michael Brown, Bush’s unqualified and utterly inept FEMA Director ("Heckuva Job Brownie") reminded us once again of what an idiot he is and how woefully inadequate he and Bush were during Katrina. 

At the same time, Governor Christie and Mayor Bloomberg put partisanship aside, and reminded us how much better we are as a country when we work together.  While downplaying the political, numerous reports made note of Mitt Romney’s comment that disaster relief is "immoral" and that he would transfer disaster relief to the states or, better yet, to private enterprise, where people like him and Jeb Bush could make fortunes off other people’s misfortunes. Let's not forget that he thinks we should get rid of firefighters and other first responders, and the Romney/Ryan budget would drastically cut not only disaster relief funding, but also funding for scientific programs that help accurately predict storms. (What are voters in "hurricane and tornado alleys" in the South thinking by voting for R/R?) Then there was Mitt's idea of non-political disaster relief, which would be comical if it were not so cravenly opportunistic.  (Where else has Mitt been cravenly opportunistic in the midst of a tragedy? Oh, yeah.)  

Sandy has another message: global warming is real, and it is a real, major threat to our well-being. No one is immune from the impacts (not even Wall Street).  Here is Nicholas Kristof from NYT on this subject. Mayor Bloomberg himself made this connection in crossing party lines to endorse President Obama for a second term. Al Gore also made the connection.  Here is the White House report on steps that Obama has taken to address global warming and a transcript of his recent comments on MTV. The National Memo wrote this piece on all that President Obama has done to address global warming.  Romney, on the other hand, has treated the issue with scorn. I wonder if Romney thinks his mocking remark about global warming is so clever now? Here is President Clinton, calling Romney's comments on global warming out.

(h/t Leadfoot)

With the election just days away, maybe Sandy is a message from the cosmos.  Please take heed. Please vote for President Obama, who has proven himself through the economic crisis, tornadoes, hurricanes, wars and challenges of every sort: he is the right leader for our times.

Hurricane Sandy is on her way

By Patrick

Unless a little miracle happens, Hurricane Sandy will hit the East coast with full force. The very detailed and interactive "Google Crisis Map" currently shows this picture:

NASA provided stunning images of the storm.

From October 26, 2012 - already a few days old, but it provides a fascinating high-resolution view:

See this excellent post at Gizmodo with lots of other satellite images, more pictures and constant updates.

Also see the main article with live updates on Huffington Post.


When we looked for videos from today, we found the following:

We saw other clips on youtube in which New Jersey residents said that the situation at the coast already appears to be much worse then in 2011 with hurricane "Irene."

President Obama addressed the nation today:

In related news, Mitt Romney said during the campaign that he wants to get rid of FEMA and transfer its responsibilites to the states. Mitt Romney believes that Federal relief spending is "immoral":

But it is even worse: Mitt Romney also says in this clip that it would be "even better" to transfer these responsibilities to the "private sector." Mitt the twit just has the best ideas, hasn't he?

From HuffPost today:

UPDATE

Sunday, 10:04 p.m.-- A Romney official reaffirmed the former governor's position Sunday evening in an email. "Gov. Romney wants to ensure states, who are the first responders and are in the best position to aid impacted individuals and communities, have the resources and assistance they need to cope with natural disasters," the Romney official said.

 UPDATE II

Monday, 9:10 a.m.-- The Washington Post's Greg Sargent adds: "There’s another nugget here worth highlighting, though. In that appearance, Romney also suggested it would be 'even better' to send any and all responsibilities of the federal government 'to the private sector,' disaster response included. So: Romney essentially favored privatizing disaster response."

If only all these Obama-haters would actually listen carefully to what Mitt Romney has to say! Oh well...

But let's forget about politics right now. We do hope that all our readers will get through the "Frankenstorm" unharmed. Take all precautions and be careful. Please tell us in the comments about the situation. Good luck and stay safe!

UPDATE:

Sandy and planet earth (click for full picture):

The comparison of "Sandy" to "Irene" is quite a shocker:

GIZMODO provides the links to five webcams to watch "Sandy" live.

Link from USTREAM to several webcams.

The CBS News live stream is very good - watch:

Free live streaming by Ustream

The Rise of the American Police State

by Nomad

From Fiction to Fact

Here is a clip from that brilliant, strange but frightening film "Brazil." The film was a surreal tragic comedy involving a Dystopian authoritarian world where the last refuge of the common man is in his heroic dreams. Because of the threat of terrorism, the state relies on an aggressive policy of No-Questions-asked policy which soon becomes mere intimidation. 

Even then, sometimes things go wrong. 
But this was all fiction, you say. Just a harmless bit of entertainment. I mean, it couldn't happen in the free nations of the West. We have protections for our civil rights built into the system, after all. These have to be respected by authorities. Perhaps not in some third world banana republic, but in the US or in Europe, it's simply not possible. That is a proud notion based on a small degree of truth and a great deal of wishful thinking.
In fact, beginning with the war on drugs and dramatically increasing with the war on terror, the local police have become more and more aggressive in their assault on the rights of citizens. 

Because videotaped evidence can often be quite misleading, the details in this case are, therefore, important. 

Without the videotape, this is how the official story would read in your local gazette. 

Acting on a tip, SWAT police in Columbia Missouri arrested 25 year old Jonathan E. Whitworth on February 11, 2010 for drug possession. 

As a newspaper article states:

A police SWAT team entered Whitworth’s residence around 8:30 p.m. suspecting a large amount of marijuana at the location, police spokeswoman Officer Jessie Haden said. SWAT members encountered a pit bull upon entry, held back and then fatally shot the dog, which officers said was acting in an uncontrollably aggressive manner.

Quite predictably, most dogs tend to act in an aggressive manner when confronted with an uninvited squad of intruders bearing arms, breaking down doors and behaving in a threatening manner. It is what we train them to do. From the video, it doesn't appear that the dog actually attacked anybody and was reportedly caged during the intrusion.

Whitworth was arrested, and his wife and 7-year-old son were present during the SWAT raid, Haden said. A second dog, which Whitworth’s attorney Jeff Hilbrenner described as a corgi, also was shot but was not killed.

“The family is concerned with what happened,” Hilbrenner said. “We don’t feel like what happened in the home was appropriate. The priority right now for us is the misdemeanor charges.”

Based on information from two confidential sources (informants) law enforcement believed the man to be in possession of large amounts of the illegal substance. In fact, what the police found was a pipe with a small amount of pot- enough only for misdemeanor charges (under 35 grams).  

In order to justify their obvious failure in the matter, the police decided to charge Whitworth with second degree child endangerment, presumably in regard to the marijuana. Ironic, given the actions of the SWAT team.

Whatever one's own opinions on illegal drugs such as marijuana, one has to ask whether the police response matches the severity of the crime. Was this degree of aggression necessary to serve a warrant? Even if the police had found large qualities of marijuana on the premises, was this actually the best way to handle the situation?

After all, in the United States, in theory, suspects are presumed innocent until a judge or jury determines otherwise. This type of home invasion, destroying property and traumatizing children is not acceptable treatment of an innocent citizen and his family.
With a warrant in hand, the police could have easily entered the home without all the drama. Better yet, the suspect could have been picked up outside the home and the house could have been searched separately. The man and his family could have been an opportunity to peacefully evacuate the home with their pets restrained while police conducted a search of the home.  As you can clearly see, the family was given little time to answer the door and no time whatsoever to restrain their dogs. There were many alternatives but this heavy handed approach was the only one the local police considered.

According to The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and Warrants shall not be issued, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Apparently a search warrant was obtained. Police authorities were able to persuade a judge that there was probable cause- incorrectly, as it turned out. How they could ever have persuaded a judge that possibly endangering a seven year old child was a necessary risk is hard to imagine.  And indeed they were well aware that a child was at the residence when they decided to send the SWAT team- as the statements of police demonstrate in the article.

Because the SWAT team acts on the most updated information available, the team wanted to enter the house before marijuana believed to be at the location could be distributed, she said.

Drug distributors traditionally have a history with firearms, which is why the SWAT team is used when executing such warrants, Haden said. If the SWAT team believed they could have executed the warrant successfully during the daytime when the wife and child were not present, they would have, she said.
“If you let too much time go by, then the drugs are not there,” she said.

The excuse is, therefore, expediency and yet nothing is given to corroborate the claim that it was a matter of urgency. According to the spokesperson, it simply was not possible to conduct this action during the day. End of story. We are expected to take her word for the fact. However, given the sheer number of police involved in this drama, it would have taken only one or two police officers to maintain a continual police surveillance of the home until a more appropriate time could be found. 

Was this type of "shock and awe" police action actually warranted? And purely from an economic standpoint, is it worth the expense to the taxpayers? All that equipment, all that training of so many SWAT members? 

But you know what? This event is merely one example.

From the War on Drugs to the War on Terror..and Beyond 

According to  Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America, by Radley Balko a policy analyst specializing in civil liberties issues:

Over the last 25 years, America has seen a disturbing militarization of its civilian law enforcement, along with a dramatic and unsettling rise in the use of paramilitary police units (most commonly called Special Weapons and Tactics, or SWAT) for routine police work. The most common use of SWAT teams today is to serve narcotics warrants, usually with forced, unannounced entry into the home.

These increasingly frequent raids, 40,000 per year by one estimate, are needlessly subjecting nonviolent drug offenders, bystanders, and wrongly targeted civilians to the terror of having their homes invaded while they're sleeping, usually by teams of heavily armed paramilitary units dressed not as police officers but as soldiers. These raids bring unnecessary violence and provocation to nonviolent drug offenders, many of whom were guilty of only misdemeanors. The raids terrorize innocents when police mistakenly target the wrong residence. And they have resulted in dozens of needless deaths and injuries, not only of drug offenders, but also of police officers, children, bystanders, and innocent suspects.

The real push to arm your local police to the level of military force standards began immediately after September 11 2001. According to Andrew Becker and G.W. Schulz of the Center for Investigative Reporting, much of the funding of local police agencies for buying military equipment comes in federal government grants of more than $34 billion in the last ten years.

The federal grant spending, awarded with little oversight from Washington, has fueled a rapid, broad transformation of police operations ... in departments across the country. More than ever before, police rely on quasi-military tactics and equipment, the Center for Investigative Reporting has found.

No one can say exactly what has been purchased in total across the country or how it’s being used, because the federal government doesn’t keep close track. State and local governments don’t maintain uniform records. But a review of records from 41 states obtained through open-government requests, and interviews with more than two-dozen current and former police officials and terrorism experts, shows police departments around the U.S. have transformed into small army-like forces.

While it may be impossible to determine exactly how this money was spent, this interactive map can give one a general idea how much funding state police forces received. In 2011 California, for example, received $141,599,909 for something called Urban Areas Security Initiative.  As  Andrew Becker and   G.W. Schulz explain:

Administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the UASI program allocates grant funding to help high-risk, high-density urban areas develop the capacity “to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism.”

With an annual budget of  $662,622,100, little oversight on spending and no clear definition of what is and what is not terrorism, the program is ripe for misapplication.

And keep in mind this is only one program of many under the auspices of Homeland Security which provides funding. among other anti-terrorism funding programs, there is State Homeland Security, which received $526,874,098 this year, and Emergency Management Performance Grant, $329,040,400 and Emergency Operations Center Grant,  $14,601,740. Again, these are only a few examples of the kind of funding. Justin Elliot for Salon.com interviewed Becker and Schultz who explained:

What we learned over time is that it’s not just one grant program, it’s grant programs. There is a dizzying array of grants that local communities are eligible for from the Department of Homeland Security and sometimes the Justice Department. A few grants existed prior to 9/11. After DHS was created, Congress kept creating new programs to meet perceived needs around security. For example, “We need a bulletproof vehicle to send in our SWAT unit if a Mumbai-style attack occurs.” That led to a spree of spending on bulletproof vehicles. Each round of purchases is fueled by a what-if scenario.

You could be thinking that this is the price that we all have to pay in order to prevent acts of terrorism in the modern age. But even the General Accounting Office questions whether there is any proof that all the funding  has done anything to decrease the risks. FEMA reports claim that the program is effective but provides little in the way of evidence. David Muhlhausen for The Foundry reports:

Too frequently, the report asserts that the UASI program is effective without providing any quantifiable outcome measures. For example, the report asserts that the “UASI program is enhancing regional collaboration and coordination” without providing any quantitative evidence to support the conclusion. How much has collaboration and coordination increased in areas receiving funding? Other than stating that there has been an increase, the report does not provide any outcome measures. In a 2009 report that contradicts this finding, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) concluded that FEMA “does not have measures to assess how UASI regions’ collaborative efforts have built preparedness capabilities”—the primary goal of the program.

Of course, nobody would argue that the United States should not be prepared to deal with terrorist acts. The threats are not imaginary. However, , as we have seen recently in a number of cases, when this money is spent against citizens engaged in peaceful protest then it is only right and only fair to begin asking the hard questions. As the article on Center for Investigative Reporting points out:

No one can say exactly what has been purchased in total across the country or how it’s being used, because the federal government doesn’t keep close track. State and local governments don’t maintain uniform records. But a review of records from 41 states obtained through open-government requests, and interviews with more than two-dozen current and former police officials and terrorism experts, shows police departments around the U.S. have transformed into small army-like forces.

Since Occupy Wall Street and similar protests broke out this fall, confusion about how to respond has landed some police departments in national headlines for electing to use intimidating riot gear, pepper spray and rubber bullets to disperse demonstrators. Observers have decried these aggressive tactics as more evidence that police are overly militarized....

Many police, including beat cops, now routinely carry assault rifles. Combined with body armor and other apparel, many officers look more and more like combat troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. The list of equipment bought with the federal grants reads like a defense contractor catalog. High-tech gear fills the garages, locker rooms and patrol cars in departments across the country.

Although local officials say they have become more cautious about spending in recent years, police departments around the country are continually expanding the equipment and tactics of their jobs, despite, in many cases, the lack of an apparent need.

Not quite true. The apparent need has been found: the elimination of  freedom of speech and the right to peaceful dissent. Our local police, equipped with funds by large Homeland Security grants, are now being used, along with the Patriot Act, to quash all protests and intimidate non-violent protesters around the nation. All under the guise of fighting terrorism. As Conspiracy Watch notes:

The FBI has filed 164,000 suspicious activity reports written up on activists who did not follow government policies. For example, in California, 27 individuals are set to go on trial for protest actions. In Pennsylvania, activists even faced terrorism charges for writing slogans in chalk on sidewalks. But this is just the beginning of a frightening nationwide trend. 

Be sweet, please retweet.
http://twitter.com/#!/ANomadicView/status/152787813618810882
http://twitter.com/#!/ANomadicView/status/152789142957330434
Digg
http://digg.com/news/politics/the_rise_of_the_american_police_state_politicalgates

Update:

I found this informative video (courtesy of InfoWars) that shows examples of brutality and excess by police departments. I admit that context is important but when a police officer arrests a teenage girl for blowing bubbles at him, or for selling lemonade then it is worth a second look. 

Tornadoes and Koch Industries: An Elegant Solution

by Nomad
(originally posted in April 2011 at Nomadic View blog)

A Declaration of Emergency

On April 28th, 2011, tornadoes swept through the south of the United States, killing 128 people in Alabama and 32 others in Mississippi and leaving long trails of destruction. Homes and businesses were left as piles of rubble. Towns were plowed down the middle and many residents, having lost all they owned, felt
lucky just to be alive. My sympathies went out to the survivors and my condolences to the families that have lost loved ones.

This all came after a week in which storms torn through a half a dozen states in what meteorologists have called the deadliest season in nearly four decades. Republican Governor Robert Bentley of Alabama declared a state of emergency and said he was deploying 2,000 National Guardsman.

Similarly, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour declared a state of emergency for 39 counties. “Our thoughts and prayers are with the families who lost loved ones or property in these devastating spring storms,” Gov. Barbour said. “A large section of our state has been impacted, and our emergency responders are doing an excellent job in helping communities. This State of Emergency declaration will allow the state to offer aid to begin recovery efforts.”

The Mississippi Emergency Management Agency coordinates with the Federal emergency Management Agency, better known as FEMA in administering disaster recovery. Federal sources contributes at least 75% of damage repair costs while while state and local entities share the remaining 25 percent or less of repair costs.

Nobody can blame the governor for requesting money when it is urgently needed. However, there's a ugly, hypocritical side to Barbour's requests. Like numerous Republican politicians of late, Gov. Haley Barbour last March chastised Obama for "limitless government" and out of control spending. His stand against Big Government has made him something of a "politician of note" in the Republican party.

Mind you this is the same governor who easily took $15 billion in aid following Hurricane Katrina, which critics of Barbour have charged, was mishandled. Timothy J. Burger, writing for Bloomberg notes, the use of those funds has raised many questions.

No evidence has surfaced that Barbour violated the law; at the same time, the pattern that emerges from public records and interviews raises ``many red flags,'' said Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, a watchdog group in Falls Church, Virginia, that investigates the investments of government officials. ``At the minimum, the public is entitled to a full explanation of the facts,'' he said.

Exactly what Boehm is referring to is illustrated in an article from the website, The National Corruption Index :

The wife of Barbour’s nephew, Rosemary Barbour, was one of the biggest Mississippi-based winners of Katrina contracts. Her company, Alacatec LLC, picked up nearly $300 million in contracts from the Federal Emergency Management Agency or the General Services Administration, the bulk of it for trailer maintenance. The FBI began an investigation in 2007.

Of course, there's' nothing particularly remarkable about a politician being hypocritical. Of course, in Babour's case, in terms of hypocrisy, it is a little above the usual standard.

Should We Talk About The Weather?

But first of all, let's take a small step back and examine what on earth is going on with the weather. Most meteorologists have already declared this year to be something special in terms of storm activity and indeed, records seem to show an overall increase in the number of tornadoes from decade to decade. A 2011 preliminary count from all National Weather Service reports for the month of April is an eye-opening 654 tornadoes, compared to 2010 count of 139 and 2009 count of 226.

So what is the cause? NOAA 's answer is somewhat guarded.

Does "global warming" cause tornadoes? No. Thunderstorms do. The harder question may be, "Will climate change influence tornado occurrence?" The best answer is: We don't know. According to the National Science and Technology Council's Scientific Assessment on Climate Change, "Trends in other extreme weather events that occur at small spatial scales--such as tornadoes, hail, lightning, and dust storms--cannot be determined at the present time due to insufficient evidence."

Many researchers feel the evidence suggests a more direct influence.

Research Meteorologists found that the temperature changes brought on by global warming are significant enough to cause an increase in the occurrence of severe storms.

"What we found is that increases in human-induced greenhouse gases will lead to more frequent severe storms in the United States," Jeff Trapp, Ph.D., a meteorologist at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Ind., said.

Based on the models, the researchers believe the number of days that favor the formation of severe storms could more than double in places like Atlanta and New York. These added storms will likely hit areas during already heavy storm seasons and extend wet weather seasons.

"This obviously impacts people in terms of potential hazards to their life and property," Dr. Trapp said.

Purdue University scientists are not alone in that assessment. NASA scientists have developed a new climate model that indicates that the most violent severe storms and tornadoes may become more common as Earth's climate warms.

"..[T]he model suggests that the most violent severe storms and tornadoes may become more common with warming.'

Clouding the Issue

This kind of research isn't universally accepted, especially by climate change deniers. According to a Greenpeace report, one of the largest private corporations in the country has spent a veritable fortune in undermining climate change research by funding organizations that spread inaccurate and misleading information about climate science and clean energy policies.

This report documents roughly 40 climate denial and opposition organizations receiving Koch foundation grants in recent years, including:

• More than $5 million to Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFP) for its nationwide “Hot Air Tour” campaign to spread misinformation about climate science and opposing clean energy and climate legislation

• More than $1 million to the Heritage Foundation, a mainstay of misinformation on climate and environmental policy issues.

• Over $1 million to the Cato Institute, which disputes the scientific evidence behind global warming, questions the rationale for taking climate action, and has been heavily involved in spinning the recent ClimateGate story.

• $800,000 to the Manhattan Institute, which has hosted Bjorn Lomborg twice in the last two years. Lomborg is a prominent media spokesperson who challenges and attacks policy measures to address climate change.

• $365,000 to Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment (FREE) which advocates against taking action on cliimate change because warming is “inevitable” and expensive to address.

Additionally the report cites the tremendous political power that the Koch brothers have used to defeat carbon-limiting regulatory legislation, through direct federal lobbying and campaign contributions.

• Spent $37.9 million from 2006 to 2009 for direct lobbying on oil and energy issues, outspent only by ExxonMobil ($87.8 million) and Chevron Corporation ($50 million).

• Spent $5.74 million in PAC money for candidates, committees, and campaign expenditures since the 2006 election cycle.

• Contributed at least $270,800 to federal political party committees since the 2006 election cycle.

Flexing Muscles

It shouldn't surprise anybody that Koch Industries should be willing to invest a fortune to derail any legislation that might negatively affect its ability to do business, much of which involves the petro-chemical sector.

Koch Industries would certainly have a lot to lose if carbon emission industries were more carefully regulated.

According to SourceWatch, for example, Koch Carbon trades and transports petroleum coke, coal, cement, pulp and paper, sulfur and other commodities, the Koch Exploration Company acquires, develops and trades petroleum and natural gas properties in the United States, Canada and Brazil. Flint Hills Resources operate crude oil refineries in Alaska, Minnesota, and Texas and petrochemical plants in Illinois, Michigan and Texas. The Koch Pipeline Company owns and operates approximately 4,000 miles of pipelines used to transport crude oil, refined petroleum products, natural gas liquids and chemicals while the Koch Alaska Pipeline Company owns an approximate 3 percent interest in the Trans Alaska Pipeline System. Koch Industries also owns a 28% interest in the Colonial Pipeline Company which it describes as the "owner and operator of the world’s largest-volume refined products pipeline.

That's capitalism in action and with an estimated of $100 billion (2008 figures) Koch Industries can afford to flex its muscles.

And another way that the Koch brothers have flex their political muscle is through the funding of political organizations like Americans for Prosperity (mentioned above) which has been, among other duties, useful in campaigns against any legislation involving cap and trade or carbon emissions.

Purporting to be a grassroots group, AFP, founded and chaired by David Koch, is the "third largest recipient of funding from the Koch Family Foundations, behind the Cato Institute and the George Mason University Foundation,according to DeSmogBlog.

AFP is a non-profit organization who does not to disclose its donors. However, the Media Transparency project shows from 2003-2006, Americans for Prosperity received $1,181,000 from conservative foundations. $1 million of that funding was given by the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation--one of the Koch Family Foundations.

In the past years, the AFP has organized various Tea Party events throughout the nation. Koch was reported to have said at a Americans for Prosperity Conference in 2009 that in creating AFP:

"'we envisioned a mass movement, a state-based one, but national in scope, of hundreds of thousands of American citizens from all walks of life standing up and fighting for the economic freedoms that made our nation the most prosperous society in history.'"

In other words, the birth of the Tea Party.

A Fair Solution

Last year there was a string of weather related disasters, such as flooding in Nashville, tornadoes in the Midwest, extensive blizzards throughout the nation and powerful hurricanes in the southern states. The problem is simple: If Tea Party members wish to limit the role of big government and also wish to reduce taxes, who then is going to pay for clean-up and rebuilding? Not to mention preparedness training and search and rescue. Who is going to build the levies and the dikes that keep the waters back? Who is going to keep the snow off the streets if nobody is paying taxes?

Fear not, I come with what I consider a brilliant and fair solution to this problem. Why shouldn't Koch Industries pay for the clean up and rebuilding? The Koch Brothers do not seem at all hesitant about spending their fortunes on lobbying against climate change and cap and trade; they don't seem to worry about the vast sums of money for setting up fake grass roots organizations, or sponsoring phony science. After all, they are the ones that are making enormous sums of money by dumping more and more carbon into the environment which seems to be causing more and more dangerous weather.

Let's just drop the middle men. The government officials, the regulatory busy-bodies, and the corrupt politicians asking for their piece of the action.

With that problem solved, let's take a moment and return to Mississippi Governor Barbour. By decrying the sins of Big Government while happily taking federal emergency funds again and again, Barbour seems to want his cake and eat it too. but that's not all of it.

During the Deepwater Horizon Oil spill Barbour said he was not sure it was a good idea for the federal government to make BP put $20 billion into escrow to compensate victims of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Barbour said that BP needed to use its money to drill oil wells and produce revenue.

So, making the government pay for cleaning up tornadoes and hurricanes is okay, even while you are condemning Big Government spending.. but making oil companies clean up after their own spill is a question?

It's not all that remarkable really, I suppose. ThinkProgress points out:

Barbour raised significant amounts in campaign contributions from the industry, and from 1999 to 2003, was a lobbyist for various energy interests. Even as oil was touching Mississippi shores in the summer of 2010, Barbour downplayed the effects of the catastrophic spill. A ThinkProgress review of IRS documents revealed that with Barbour at the helm, the RGA received over $5 million in contributions from the oil and gas industry – including four of the Big Five oil companies – in just one year:

• $1,000,000 from David Koch, $25,000 from Koch Industries
• $625,000 from Exxon Mobil
• Over $150,000 from Chevron
• $50,000 from Shell
• $25,000 from ConocoPhillips

So, Koch Brothers, let's get those angry Tea Party members out there, let them burn off some of that anti-government fury. I imagine many of the people who have lost everything already belong to the Tea Party.

Just like Michele Bachmann, that popular Americans for Prosperity event speaker, said, “Do you see what we can do when we all work together?”

---