Interesting discussion on federalism in our country

[dude1394]

An interesting article about federal powers that pertain to Katrina. It seems that to deploy soldiers to LA dubya would have had to invoke the Insurrection Act to wrest control of law-enforcement from the Governor and Mayor. Interesting article all through.

nytimes

WASHINGTON, Sept. 8 - As New Orleans descended into chaos last week and Louisiana's governor asked for 40,000 soldiers, President Bush's senior advisers debated whether the president should speed the arrival of active-duty troops by seizing control of the hurricane relief mission from the governor.

For reasons of practicality and politics, officials at the Justice Department and the Pentagon, and then at the White House, decided not to urge Mr. Bush to take command of the effort. Instead, the Washington officials decided to rely on the growing number of National Guard personnel flowing into Louisiana, who were under Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco's control.

The debate began after officials realized that Hurricane Katrina had exposed a critical flaw in the national disaster response plans created after the Sept. 11 attacks. According to the administration's senior domestic security officials, the plan failed to recognize that local police, fire and medical personnel might be incapacitated.

As criticism of the response to Hurricane Katrina has mounted, one of the most pointed questions has been why more troops were not available more quickly to restore order and offer aid. Interviews with officials in Washington and Louisiana show that as the situation grew worse, they were wrangling with questions of federal/state authority, weighing the realities of military logistics and perhaps talking past each other in the crisis.

To seize control of the mission, Mr. Bush would have had to invoke the Insurrection Act, which allows the president in times of unrest to command active-duty forces into the states to perform law enforcement duties. But decision makers in Washington felt certain that Ms. Blanco would have resisted surrendering control, as Bush administration officials believe would have been required to deploy active-duty combat forces before law and order had been re-established.

.....

[dude1394]

Mickey Kaus is saying that it's our basic federalism that is the problem here and that if bush had taken control of LA that everyone would have cheered. Maybe so, but I'm sure there are some pretty thorny constitutional issues here as well. If the president can declare unilaterally that there is an emergency and then use the military to shoot civilians...I just don't know....I'm sure he would not be looked on favorably at the next election, assuming there was one.

kaus

[LRB]

If Bush had sent in troops and taken control over Blanco's objects, then that would be a serious expansion of the executive branch of government. It would also be a serious inroads into states rights. I too believe that it would have been unconstitutional, and above all, and that means even saving lives, Bush has sworn to uphold the Constitution. Millions have died to bring to pass and uphold the constitution. However the simple fact is that those lives could have been saved if Blanco had worried more about saving them and less about party politics and salvaging her damaged ego.