Who is correct in Kansas?

[brien]

White House, Kansas governor argue over storm response - CNN.com


White House, Kansas governor argue over storm response

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House fought back Tuesday against criticism from Kansas' governor that National Guard deployments to Iraq are slowing the response to last week's devastating tornado. White House press secretary Tony Snow said the fault was Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius'. In a spat reminiscent of White House finger-pointing at Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco after the federal government's botched response to Hurricane Katrina, Snow rapped Sebelius for not following procedure to find gaps and then asking the federal government to fill them. "If you don't request it, you're not going to get it," he said. (Watch the war of words escalate ) The enormous twister -- the most powerful to hit the United States in eight years -- ripped through Greensburg, Kansas, on Friday, razing nearly all of the farming town with winds estimated at 205 mph. President Bush will travel to the area on Wednesday. Sebelius plans at that time to raise her contention that disaster preparedness and response are hampered because so many state National Guard units have been sent to the Middle East. "I don't think there is any question if you are missing trucks, Humvees and helicopters that the response is going to be slower," she said Monday. "The real victims here will be the residents of Greensburg, because the recovery will be at a slower pace." Sebelius said about half the state's National Guard trucks are in Iraq, equipment that would be helpful in removing debris, and that the state is also missing a number of well-trained personnel. "The issue for the National Guard is the same wherever you go in the country. Stuff that we would have borrowed is gone," she said. Maj. Gen. Tod Bunting, the state's adjutant general, said the Kansas National Guard was equipped at only about 40 percent of its required levels, down from the 60 percent that it had at the start of the war. Even as Snow insisted he wasn't trying to get into a political tussle with the Democratic governor, he aggressively defended the administration's performance. "As far as we know, the only thing the governor has requested are FM radios," Snow said. "There have been no requests to the National Guard for heavy equipment." He went on to say that the president's disaster declaration for Kansas, issued Sunday, immediately made funding available to get heavy equipment through private contractors. "We are eager to provide what Kansas needs," Snow said. "But again there are also -- you also have to go through the process of making the request first." Snow said "I'm not aware of any prior complaints," and said it would be "standard procedure" when a tornado hits for a state to consult its disaster plan and start making assessments about where the federal government needed to step in. "We are certainly going to try to clean up any misunderstandings about how this works," Snow said. Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback also disputed Sebelius after visiting the destroyed town on Monday. Brownback, a Republican candidate for president, said local officials and the Kansas National Guard commander all told him they have the resources needed to respond. "That's what really got me, is her saying that," Brownback said of Sebelius. But Sebelius said she asked the Pentagon in December to replenish lost resources. She also said she spoke about the issue at great length with Bush over a year ago, in January 2006, when they rode together from Topeka, Kansas, to a lecture in Manhattan. "What the Defense Department said then and continues to say is that states will get about 90 percent of what they had," Sebelius said. "Meanwhile, it doesn't get any better. I'm at a loss." The White House is sensitive to the president's response to disasters after the Katrina debacle. Snow said Bush was waiting until Wednesday to visit the area "to make sure that you do not get in the way, especially of rescue operations." Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Everyone by now is probably familiar with what Kansas Governor Sebelius said about the National Guard last Monday. So let's examine a few questions. One question is, was it the "politics of destruction" aimed at the White House, or was it an accurate statement by the Governor? Or was she simply wrong and if so, for what reason(s)?

What is the truth about the levels of preparedness of the National Guard, not only in Kansas, but nationally? Has the war in Iraq depleted the National Guard to a point where they are unable to respond to a national disaster properly because of their involvement in the war? What is the truth?

[Mozart1220]

Sounds like Katrina pt. 2 to me. FEMA was designed for situations like this. Bush killed it.

Now, as usual, the Bush administration blames others for it's own ineptitude.


Again I say...TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEMS, AND THEN ASSIGN BLAME.

[Osborn F Enready]

A good series of questions to ponder Brien, but I hate to judge yet.

I am following this story as much as possible.

[Slevin57]

I wouldn't compare a farm town to the City of New Orleans..or the entire reigon down there that was devestated.

This is a small town. This is not New York City. There National Guard is more than capable of dealing with this. Governor Kathy just wants to throw darts at Bush too.

[RickSp]

Typical White House bullshit. When it hits the fan, blame the governor. The bastards have no shame.

If the equipment is in Iraq, it isn't available to respond to local disasters. Not hard to understand.

[The Decider]

Governor Sebelius made several requests for new equipment to replace National Guard assets that were sent to Iraq:

Dec. 30, 2005: "Sebelius writes to Rumsfeld requesting new equipment. 'The Guard was critical to responding to recent blizzards and floods in Kansas, yet its ability to respond to similar situations is being diminished by a lack of equipment...'”

Jan. 23, 2006: "Sebelius personally urges Bush to increase National Guard funding. In an one-hour motorcade ride in Kansas with Bush, Sebelius expressed concern about 'a reduction of National Guard troop strength in its next budget.'"

June 28, 2006: "Sebelius sends Army Secretary list of equipment lost in war. In a meeting with Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey, Sebelius told Harvey that the state had lost about $140 million in National Guard equipment to the Iraq war."

Sept. 2006: "Sebelius lobbies for replacement of National Guard equipment sent to Iraq. 'Kansas’ congressional delegation, Sebelius and governors from around the country have been lobbying the Pentagon for increased funding to replace National Guard equipment that has been left in Iraq or damaged beyond repair after repeated use in war.'"

Feb. 27, 2007: "Sebelius pushes White House and Congress for more funding. 'Now the Guard needs Washington’s help,' Sebelius said in press conference on Capitol Hill."

The Mahablog » America the Unready
Think Progress » White House Blames Gov. Sebelius For National Guard Shortages

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: RickSp Typical White House bullshit. When it hits the fan, blame the governor. The bastards have no shame. If the equipment is in Iraq, it isn't available to respond to local disasters. Not hard to understand.

I pretty much agree with Rick on this one.


It's all because of the Feds, and their overreaching policies that the equipment is absent in the first place.


Our National Guard is not for waging wars of culture.

[Slevin57]

Quote by: The Decider Governor Sebelius made several requests for new equipment to replace National Guard assets that were sent to Iraq: Dec. 30, 2005: "Sebelius writes to Rumsfeld requesting new equipment. 'The Guard was critical to responding to recent blizzards and floods in Kansas, yet its ability to respond to similar situations is being diminished by a lack of equipment...'” Jan. 23, 2006: "Sebelius personally urges Bush to increase National Guard funding. In an one-hour motorcade ride in Kansas with Bush, Sebelius expressed concern about 'a reduction of National Guard troop strength in its next budget.'" June 28, 2006: "Sebelius sends Army Secretary list of equipment lost in war. In a meeting with Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey, Sebelius told Harvey that the state had lost about $140 million in National Guard equipment to the Iraq war." Sept. 2006: "Sebelius lobbies for replacement of National Guard equipment sent to Iraq. 'Kansas’ congressional delegation, Sebelius and governors from around the country have been lobbying the Pentagon for increased funding to replace National Guard equipment that has been left in Iraq or damaged beyond repair after repeated use in war.'" Feb. 27, 2007: "Sebelius pushes White House and Congress for more funding. 'Now the Guard needs Washington’s help,' Sebelius said in press conference on Capitol Hill." The Mahablog » America the Unready Think Progress » White House Blames Gov. Sebelius For National Guard Shortages

Wouldn't that information be private? I mean the National Guard probbaly does not disclose equipment lists and requests by the state..

[RickSp]

Quote by: Slevin57 Wouldn't that information be private? I mean the National Guard probbaly does not disclose equipment lists and requests by the state..

Obviously it isn't.

[brien]

It was helpful for the Governor to bring the equipment shortages question to the forefront of national politics but I think she could have done it in a less partisian manner, thereby sidestepping the issue of her intentions. Every American deserves to know the equipment availability in their state should it be needed for a local disaster. It is essential for planning.

[Osborn F Enready]

I agree Brien.

I am against the Iraq war, but even I questioned the partisan manner in which it was brought up. Seems like more political grandstanding on both sides, to me.

I think all states should be upset over the use of their National Guard auxilliary units in Iraq.

[The American]

Maybe if Congress would quit dragging their feet with funding, things would be better in order. A clean bill would be nice. The American public was warned several times of the consequences in the delay of funding. Lack of personel, and equipment was included. However, if the American people would return to traditional values, ........ help yur neighbor. ......... oh yeah, and help yourself, quit looking for government handouts.

As far as security is concerned, lack of law enforcement was not an issue.

[The American]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I agree Brien. I am against the Iraq war, but even I questioned the partisan manner in which it was brought up. Seems like more political grandstanding on both sides, to me. I think all states should be upset over the use of their National Guard auxilliary units in Iraq.

Why should they be upset? The war in Iraq is not the first war they have contributed to.

I don't care for natural disasters to be politicised either, yet it seems to be done quite frequently. However, this makes me strong in my belief in smaller government, and every man for himself. It draws people together in communities in times of peril. Government can't do that. Why expand it's powers, to the point of depending on them for handouts?

Government is methodical. Leave out one step, and your goal does not get accomplished. You disadvantage yourself in the long run depending on government for basic needs.

Trig.

[RickSp]

Quote by: The American Maybe if Congress would quit dragging their feet with funding, things would be better in order. A clean bill would be nice. The American public was warned several times of the consequences in the delay of funding. Lack of personel, and equipment was included. However, if the American people would return to traditional values, ........ help yur neighbor. ......... oh yeah, and help yourself, quit looking for government handouts. As far as security is concerned, lack of law enforcement was not an issue.

Sure it is the Congress's fault. And now you blame the American people for lacking "traditional values." I guess your ignore that what was lacking in Kansas was not "values" but heavy equipment, which was off being used in King George's war. Don't you war mongers get tired of blaming others for your own failings?

Perhaps if Bush had put war funding into the budget rather than always as off budget supplementals. Perhaps if the Bush administration hadn't started a needless war in the first place, or if they hadn't sent into too few troops with inadequate equipment, or if they hadn't screwed up absolutely every aspect of the occupation.

Maybe it is time for the Bushies to stop pointing fingers and start bringing our soldiers home. t would be nice if the National Guard was available to actually guard the nation for a change.

[RickSp]

General Says National Guard Is Weakened by Deployments in Iraq

The National Guard is overstretched by deployments in Iraq and can't properly respond to local emergencies in the U.S., said retired Major General Melvyn S. Montano, a former adjutant general of the New Mexico guard. ``The National Guard, our nation's first responder to hurricanes, forest fires, tornadoes and other natural disasters, is not as prepared as they should be,'' Montano said in the Democratic Party's weekly radio address. ``It is not only a matter of equipment, but of personnel as well.'' A tornado that nearly leveled Greensburg, Kansas, last week and killed about 10 people underscored that both guard members and equipment are depleted by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Guard forces in Kansas had about half their usual equipment available when the tornado hit, slowing the recovery process, Montano said. The strains of keeping high troop levels in Iraq, where more than 145,000 soldiers are deployed, has forced the government to rely heavily on guard units. About 80 percent of guard and military reservists have served in either Afghanistan or Iraq since 2001, with some deployed more than once, Montano said.

[The Decider]

Quote by: brien It was helpful for the Governor to bring the equipment shortages question to the forefront of national politics but I think she could have done it in a less partisian manner, thereby sidestepping the issue of her intentions. Every American deserves to know the equipment availability in their state should it be needed for a local disaster. It is essential for planning.

How should the governor have handled the issue? Prior to the disaster, she had private discussions with bureaucrats, sent letters, attended congressional hearings, and did everything but beg for the return of her state's NG equipment. After the disaster, she tells the press that she warned Washington about the problem. What did she do wrong?

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: The American You disadvantage yourself in the long run depending on government for basic needs.

I think you will find the outrage here predominently focused on the contract, and the cost, not the desire to have Uncle Sammy involved.


Just like 9/11 exposed the fraudulent nature of The Emergency Broadcast System, Imigration, and Naturalizaion, and countless other agencies.


We thought that since we paid for these goods, and services that they would be available to us at the critical moment.

[Osborn F Enready]

The American said: Why should they be upset? The war in Iraq is not the first war they have contributed to.

So because it has happened in the past, you assume I think its "acceptable" or "necessary"? I don't.

I have a lot of problems with the government military interaction, but this should come as no suprise to you, right?

The American said: I don't care for natural disasters to be politicised either, yet it seems to be done quite frequently. However, this makes me strong in my belief in smaller government, and every man for himself. It draws people together in communities in times of peril. Government can't do that. Why expand it's powers, to the point of depending on them for handouts?

Who is promoting the expansion of powers here? Not me! National Guardsmen are the states defense force, and they have a hell of lot more obligation to the state in Kansas, than the nation, in Iraq.

The power expansion that bothers me is the abuse of the National Guard by the Executive Branch, Defense Department and Joint Chiefs of Staff to fight national wars based on subjective BS (Iraq) as opposed to objective facts and hard evidence. Our border suffers, our emergency response (which is bought and paid for as a service with our taxes) suffers when the national guard is abused for national wars as opposed to state protection and service, or actually necessary, national war.

The American said: Government is methodical. Leave out one step, and your goal does not get accomplished. You disadvantage yourself in the long run depending on government for basic needs.

No mystery to me. I don't depend on government for basic needs, nor should anyone, but that is a moot point when the services are bought and paid for already with taxpayers dollars, they have a right to expect what was purchased, and have a right to public oversight over the outlay of those tax dollars. A large part of the U.S. population is not being represented politically right now, and it is becasue we have allowed the two-party, bi-partisan monopoly to create and enforce the rules that keep the money in their hands, the media in their hands, and the corporate and special intrest groups eating out of their hands.

Less than 50% of the nation votes in national elections, and 15% of the voters who DO vote, are non-partisan swing voters.

It could be said that UP TO 65% of Voting Citizens of this nation are not being represented enough to feel compelled to vote, because they either believe they can't effect change, or don't know how.

This is unacceptable, and by no means fits the bill of "conscent of the governed".

[RickSp]

Governors from various states are also speaking up about the National Guard. Looks like the Bush strategy of blaming everyone except themselves is n't working this time.

Governors say war has gutted Guard

[brien]

What did she do wrong?

This is what I was asking in the OP