Friday, September 09, 2005
A visit to a FEMA camp and wondering about the "exit strategy"
We then started lugging in our food products. The foods I had purchased were mainly snacks, but my mother - God bless her soul - had gone all out with fresh vegetables, fruits, canned goods, breakfast cereals, rice, and pancake fixings. That's when we got the next message: They will not be able to use the kitchen.
Excuse me? I asked incredulously.
FEMA will not allow any of the kitchen facilities in any of the cabins to be used by the occupants due to fire hazards. FEMA will deliver meals to the cabins. The refugees will be given two meals per day by FEMA. They will not be able to cook. In fact, the "host" goes on to explain, some churches had already enquired about whether they could come in on weekends and fix meals for the people staying in their cabin. FEMA won't allow it because there could be a situation where one cabin gets steaks and another gets hot dogs - and...
it could cause a riot.
It gets worse.
He then precedes to tell us that some churches had already enquired into whether they could send a van or bus on Sundays to pick up any occupants of their cabins who might be interested in attending church. FEMA will not allow this. The occupants of the camp cannot leave the camp for any reason. If they leave the camp they may never return. They will be issued FEMA identification cards and "a sum of money" and they will remain within the camp for the next 5 months....
We then lug all food products requiring cooking back to the car. We start unloading our snacks. Mom appeared to have cornered the market in five counties on pop-tarts and apparently that was an acceptable snack so the guy started shoving them under the counter. He said these would be good to tied people over in between their two meals a day. But he tells my mother she must take all the breakfast cereal back. My mother protests that cereal requires no cooking. "There will be no milk, ma'am." My mother points to the huge industrial double-wide refrigerator the church had just purchased in the past year. "Ma'am, you don't understand...
It could cause a riot."
He then points to the vegetables and fruit. "You'll have to take that back as well. It looks like you've got about 10 apples there. I'm about to bring in 40 men. What would we do then?"
My mother, in her sweet, soft voice says, "Quarter them?"
"No ma'am. FEMA said no...
It could cause a riot. You don't understand the type of people that are about to come here...."
The post is long and troubling and complete with pictures. The tone is consistent with the excerpt -- appalled, more than anything else. Assuming that the facts of the story are substantially true, the question is whether FEMA is being sensible in its tremendous concern for control and bureaucratic consistency, or callously controlling and bureaucratic. Is FEMA actually worried about "a riot" over randomly unequal food contributions? Or maybe it is worried about moral hazards: if the camps are too comfortable, will it be hard to get some of the people out of them?
In addition to describing the regimentation, the author touches on an interesting question concerning the camp's location, Falls Creek, in southern Oklahoma:
Falls Creek is like a small town that is closed down about 9 months out of the year. It is made up of cabins that range from small and humble to large and grandiose, according to how much money the church who owns the cabin has. Each cabin has full kitchen facilities, bathrooms and usually have two large bunkrooms - one for women and one for men. The occupancy of the cabins varies according to the church. This past week the Southern Baptist association of Oklahoma offered the facility as a place to house refugees from the Katrina disaster. Each church owning a cabin was then called to find out if they would make their cabin available. Churches across the state agreed....
From the moment I heard about Falls Creek being scheduled to receive refugees I had two thoughts run through my mind:
1. What a beautiful place to be able to stay while trying to get your life back in order.
2. What a terrible location to be when you're trying to get your life back in order.
The first thought is because Falls Creek is nestled in the Arbuckle Mountains of south central Oklahoma. One of the more beautiful regions of the state. It would be a peaceful and beautiful place to try to start mending emotionally, and begin to figure what you're going to do next.
The second thought comes because Falls Creek is very secluded and absolutely no where near a population center. The closest route from Falls Creek to a connecting road is three miles on a winding narrow road called "High Road" (It gets that name for two reasons - it's goes over the mountain instead of around it like "Low Road" does, and it's where the teenagers of the area go to party). The road has not a single home on it for over 3 miles. After battling that 3 miles over mountains, you'll find yourself about 5 miles from the nearest town, Davis, Oklahoma, population ca. 2000. This is no place to start a new life.
The working assumption of the post is that these camps are meant to launch people into a "new life." Is that the purpose for the camp, or is it just a place to stay while insurance and government money rebuilds the housing stock in the New Orleans area? Will FEMA and other camp administrators encourage or discourage permanent relocation to parts of the country away from New Orleans? Almost anything that these agencies do will influence whether the inhabitants of the camps look toward southern Louisiana or elsewhere. Will they discourage relocation to the communities near these camps? Perhaps the communities are worried about the security risk if Katrina refugees (I'm not sure I understand the politically-correct opposition to this word, by the way) travel into nearby towns. Is this racism, or sensible caution given the reports of all the crime in New Orleans during the flood? Is that the reason why people will not be allowed to leave and return?
FEMA may well have internally logical reasons for the rules it seems to have imposed, but there is definitely a lot that I, at least, do not understand about the plans for the people whose lives Katrina has blown apart. It seems to me that the design of these camps, from location to organization to services, will have a huge impact on the length of time that people remain there, who will get out the quickest and who will stay the longest, and where they will go once they leave.
4 Comments:
By 
TigerHawk, at
Fri Sep 09, 06:21:00 AM:
Heh. I didn't say she wasn't an asshat... :)
By 
, at
Fri Sep 09, 10:10:00 AM:
First of all, I am concerned over the use and context of the word riot.
Assumptions being made that the people who are arriving are the gang rapists, then who is going to provide security for the sleepy little town?
You know what this means. Let us assume that all she has stated is true. If something does happen, can the townspeople then say they weren't warned?
Next, in finding out what is needed versus what you feel is needed is the best course of action. I am going to make an assumption here that someone knew who to contact to make the arrangements for the housing of the refugees. So, it would follow that they should have asked what was needed.
My own church is sending people to help tarp roofs in Alabama. But even before THAT was known it was announced during our Sunday services that our church HQ
was needing able bodied men, but that they didn't want anyone going on their own until they had made a complete
inquiry as to where they were going, what facilites would be available for the volunteers (tents and porta potties), what the volunteers had to bring and so forth.
It took three days for the information to be sent out, but just about all the questions were answered.
I emphasize again: Three days. Isn't that about the same time it took government agencies to assess the situation? And my church has a world wide rep for being 'johnny on the spot.'
I am not bragging, but pointing out that even though we have storehouses all over the world, own ranches and orchards and process that food and so forth and so on, we still needed to get the information so that we could be of the best serivce possible.
Why is that so hard for the liberal moonbats to figure out? But then again, knee jerking is their forte.
By Papa Ray, at
Fri Sep 09, 12:01:00 PM:
Well, I'm old enough to know that I only believe about half of what I hear and almost none of what I read in the newspaper [blog].
Take that to heart, Sonnie.
Papa Ray
West Texas
USA
By Chris, at
Fri Sep 09, 02:48:00 PM:
I would have thought that this type of operation would be right up the lefties' alley. If true, it smacks of a UN refugee camp, complete with the expectation of permanent residents.
I would think that those disposed to settling in on the government teat would do so, and those inclined to treat this as a rest stop on the highway of life will do that.
