The Puerto Rico Thread

Unfortunately we do know. I can't blame FEMA. The curent FEMA director, Craig Fugate, has had experience with a number of hurricanes and is supported by both parties. He started as a firefighter and paramedic and has 30 years experience in emergency management. He seems to know what he is doing.

The blame lies squarely with Trump.

Craig Fugate was an Obama appointee who left with the rest of that administration. FEMA has had two administrators since then. The current guy is Brock Long.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brock_Long
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Emergency_Management_Agency
 
Last edited:
The DOE issues daily reports on the electricity situation. As of yesterday, 95% of customers were without power. That's actually good news, because as of the day before yesterday, 100% were without power. Having a base of operations with regular power will make further operations more efficient.

https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files...d Harvey Event Summary September 29, 2017.pdf

Interestingly, from the Energy.gov website:

Beginning Monday, October 23, DOE is planning to issue situation reports on the response and recovery efforts in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands only on Mondays and Thursdays. DOE will continue to provide daily updates through FEMA.

From the latest report on the DOE site, dated 20 October:

Puerto Rico: Approximately 18.5% of normal peak load has been restored and 23 of 78 municipalities are partially energized or have energized facilities

More than 80% of people are without power. That doesn't sound like an A+ or 10/10 performance to me. :mad:

I cannot seem to be able to find anything out from the FEMA site.

https://www.fema.gov/hurricane-maria

Is that quite normal or is FEMA trying to avoid information which conflicts with the Adminstration narrative being easy to access ?
 
General question for the thread: President Trump has been heavily criticized for the poor US response to the hurricane. First, what could he, as the President, have done prior to the event to ensure a better response. And following on from that, what actions could he have take immediately after to ensure a decent response?

To make it clear, I'm talking about what any President of the United States could do to ensure a timely and comprehensive response to the Puerio Rico disaster, given the fact the island is not attached to the mainland. That means there's no road or rail shipping, and because the infrastructure was heavily damaged, getting supplies and people to where they're needed is difficult.
 
In Trump's case, it's not so much about what he could have done or should have done. It's more about what he shouldn't have done: Claiming it was the best response ever and blaming the victims.

It would have been a difficult task for anyone. Trump's incompetence has made it worse.
 
General question for the thread: President Trump has been heavily criticized for the poor US response to the hurricane. First, what could he, as the President, have done prior to the event to ensure a better response. And following on from that, what actions could he have take immediately after to ensure a decent response?

To make it clear, I'm talking about what any President of the United States could do to ensure a timely and comprehensive response to the Puerio Rico disaster, given the fact the island is not attached to the mainland. That means there's no road or rail shipping, and because the infrastructure was heavily damaged, getting supplies and people to where they're needed is difficult.

Prior to the hurricane, I don't see any issues.

As of the morning after the hurricane, it should have been clear that this was not an ordinary disaster. FEMA is not equipped to do what needed (and still needs) to be done. That isn't their job. The military should have put in charge of the task on Thursday morning. Instead, General Buchanan was not appointed until the following Thursday. When asked why it took so long to make that appointment, a White House spokesman replied that they didn't need him eight days ago. The spokesman was wrong, and obviously so.

The last part of your question emphasizes the difficulty of getting supplies to where they are needed due to being on an island. That is exactly correct, which is why the emphasis from the beginning should have been on rebuilding rather than resupplying. They should have been shipping bulldozers instead of bottled water. You can't feed three and a half million people by helicopter shipments. You need a functioning infrastructure.

It was clear from day one that people in remote villages simply could not be maintained. For those people, you save their lives, and come up with a plan to get them into urban shelters with running water, and if you can do it, some sort of security to keep their homes from being looted until they can return.

Obviously, I don't know exact details of what ought to be done, and no one does. Somebody ought to, though. The guy in charge should have been given goals to get power into a certain number of cities, and get one or more of those pharmaceutical factories on line. Instead, roads and ports are clogged with small scale diesel deliveries to keep hundreds of thousands of small scale generators going. That is no way to run a modern civilization.
 
Prior to the hurricane, I don't see any issues.

As of the morning after the hurricane, it should have been clear that this was not an ordinary disaster. FEMA is not equipped to do what needed (and still needs) to be done. That isn't their job. The military should have put in charge of the task on Thursday morning. Instead, General Buchanan was not appointed until the following Thursday. When asked why it took so long to make that appointment, a White House spokesman replied that they didn't need him eight days ago. The spokesman was wrong, and obviously so.

The last part of your question emphasizes the difficulty of getting supplies to where they are needed due to being on an island. That is exactly correct, which is why the emphasis from the beginning should have been on rebuilding rather than resupplying. They should have been shipping bulldozers instead of bottled water. You can't feed three and a half million people by helicopter shipments. You need a functioning infrastructure.

It was clear from day one that people in remote villages simply could not be maintained. For those people, you save their lives, and come up with a plan to get them into urban shelters with running water, and if you can do it, some sort of security to keep their homes from being looted until they can return.

Obviously, I don't know exact details of what ought to be done, and no one does. Somebody ought to, though. The guy in charge should have been given goals to get power into a certain number of cities, and get one or more of those pharmaceutical factories on line. Instead, roads and ports are clogged with small scale diesel deliveries to keep hundreds of thousands of small scale generators going. That is no way to run a modern civilization.


Latest update from Puerto Rico, three miles north of San Juan. (Son of Mrs. qg's physical therapist.)

Still no power. They are being told "maybe February".

Oddly enough, they can get stuff shipped to them from friends in the States. They are expecting a new generator.
 
General question for the thread: President Trump has been heavily criticized for the poor US response to the hurricane. First, what could he, as the President, have done prior to the event to ensure a better response. And following on from that, what actions could he have take immediately after to ensure a decent response?

To make it clear, I'm talking about what any President of the United States could do to ensure a timely and comprehensive response to the Puerio Rico disaster, given the fact the island is not attached to the mainland. That means there's no road or rail shipping, and because the infrastructure was heavily damaged, getting supplies and people to where they're needed is difficult.

In Trump's case, it's not so much about what he could have done or should have done. It's more about what he shouldn't have done: Claiming it was the best response ever and blaming the victims.

It would have been a difficult task for anyone. Trump's incompetence has made it worse.

IMO Trebuchet has pretty much nailed it. I'm not close enough to the situation in Puerto Rico and I have no relevant experience in recovering from a hurricane but for me the biggest issues regarding the Trump Administration's response are:

  • The initial complacency that a week and a half elapse before the army were fully engaged
  • The President's need to give himself an A+ or 10/10 grade in the face of the facts
  • The President's lack of empathy with those American citizens who are suffering without electricity and/or water. Blaming the victims and a quick visit to the lease affected area before declaring everything is fine is not the way to go IMO
  • Seemingly to be doing sweet FA a month later while American citizens are still suffering - at least mention it once in a while (and not just that you've done an A+ job)

I'm sure that there are many, many things that could be done differently. Meadmaker's point about addressing infrastructure issues rather than attempting to slap a Band-Aid on sounds reasonable, the fact that the hospital ship that was dispatched to the island was largely empty 2 weeks after its arrival because local doctors didn't know how to get patients assigned to it is another.

For me the biggest failing is the government's seemingly intentional efforts to keep anything to do with Puerto Rico out of the media. The Bush Administration IMO did a poor job on Katrina but at least people were aware of what a poor job was being done. A couple of million American citizens will be without power and/or water for six months or even a year. That should be headline news but instead everyone is too enthralled by the latest nonsense from President Trump and his coterie, whether it's kneeling NFL footballers, Hillary or picking fights with grieving war widows. :mad:
 
This is exactly the kind of thing that comes from poor organisation and management, the kinds of things entirely within the control of Senior administration officials.

I guess this is modern A+ performance Art:rolleyes:

FIFY

suddenly it makes sense
 
FIFY

suddenly it makes sense

:D

And I would find it funny if it wasn't quite so serious.

The US President tells whopping great lies - not being economical with the truth or cherry-picking favourable parts of a wider story or spinning a story - and whilst the "reputable" press attempt to report on it, the sheer volume of lies seems to have stunned his opposition into silence and his supporters believe whatever rubbish they're told. :mad:

I'd suspect that if you asked a cross section of the US electorate, a large section, possibly even the majority, would say that Puerto Rico is all sorted out and that the President and his Administration have done a great job. This is because the story seems to have disappeared from the news and because the President and all around him have said what a great job he has done.

Lying is nothing new, everyone (IMO especially politicians) do it, but President Trump seems to do it on an industrial scale, the lies are often so easily proven and yet he continues to enjoy the trust and support of almost half the electorate. I simply do not understand how this is possible and how a majority of white people not only says that President Trump is doing a great job but also that the GOP should become more like him :confused:
 
"A hurricane hit 3 million of our citizens almost a month ago and they are still without basic necessities."

What more information do you need exactly?

"Buuut it's hard!"

Bull. This is America. We put a man on the moon. During WWII single factories making planes and boats had the output of medium sized countries. We don't get the play the "Not sure if we can pull this off or not card."

Getting food, water, emergency supplies, medical care, and basic utilities to 3 million of our citizens isn't something we should accept a loss on.

This.

I don't personally know what resources are required, but I do know the United States government has experts on the payroll who do know. This isn't anything the Army Corps of Engineers can't handle, it only takes the political will to get them funded and turn them loose.
 
This.

I don't personally know what resources are required, but I do know the United States government has experts on the payroll who do know. This isn't anything the Army Corps of Engineers can't handle, it only takes the political will to get them funded and turn them loose.

Maybe they should outsource it to China, like everything else.
 

Back
Top Bottom