wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote:


On 14 Sep 2005 01:26:59 -0700, wrote:



Gunner Asch wrote:


On 13 Sep 2005 11:39:45 -0700, wrote:



The Federal government has, and always has had, authority to
intervene without authorization of a governor. Absent the
governor being incapacited, as by the disaster itself, that
should never be necessary for the Federal government to act
independently of or over the objection of the state government.
This time it was.


It was time to invoke the Insurrection Act?



Did Eisenhower invoke "The Insurrection Act" when he
sent Army troops to Little Rock?


Nope..they were requested by the Little Rock Mayor

"U.S. Congressman Brooks Hays and Little Rock Mayor Woodrow Mann asked
the federal government for help, first in the form of U.S. marshals.
Finally, on September 24, Mann sent a telegram to President Eisenhower
requesting troops. They were dispatched that day and the President
also federalized the entire Arkansas National Guard, taking it away
from the Governor."


Hint...the mayor asked for help to quell civil unrest...a legitimate
action. Part of the Insurrection Act.




So was that a no or a yes?

Note that Eisenhower "Federalized the ANG, taking it away from
the governor." It sounds like the Governor did not release the
guard to the Feds, any more than Celeste did when the ONG was
sent to Guatamala (for training).

Besdies, ISTR that the use of Federal Troops in Little Rock was
pro-active, to prevent, rather than quell, civil unrest.

Digressing a bit, IWSTM that the use of regular Army troops
in Little Rock violated the Posse-Comitatus (sp?) act, regardless
of who requested them. What did Ike do with the ANG troops?

But I still can't think of anything that ever prohibitted
the Feds from providing disaster relief independently of the
states. That's different from assuming law-enforcement
authority.

Finally and more to the point regardless of past authority the
National Response Plan:

http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlib...RPbaseplan.pdf

clearly states that the President may (not must) act
independently of the state government. It should never
be necessary when the state government is not itself
incapacitated. Evidently this time it was necessary.



Ya know, It's kinda funny here that people are debating over whether the
president "could have" legally acted sooner and the debate that his
hands were tied. What this implies is that even those supporting the
president have some feeling that *someone* SHOULD HAVE acted sooner.

Interesting that the President's hands never seem to be tied when the
agenda to be met falls within the administration's plans....A simple
swipe of a pen on a presidental finding magically makes things happen
(from suspeding constitutional rights for suspected terrorists to
sending Nat Guard troops to wherever the whim of the day is).
Interesting also that the same people now arguing that the President's
hands were tied have also argued in the past that the President has the
authority to act unilateraly in times of national emergency.

So...Now that it has become clear that *someone* should have acted
sooner, they're already blaming the locals (rightly) as though that
somehow takes the Feds off the hook...argumentative fallacy. John's bad
behavior does not mitigate Jim's bad behaviors.

What this whole mess really shows is that, after billions have been
spent on "homeland security", no one had the brains to actually spend it
on homeland security response. It all appears to be a sham chasing
potential (often mythical) terrorists hiding under every rock. They put
up pretty curtains in a rotting shack and most Americans spent their
time saying "aren't those curtains pretty..gee I sure feel secure now!"

The real crime and shame here is not whether the Prez acted quickly
enough, had the responsiblity to act faster, isn't to blame, etc. but
that the best we could come up with after the fact (billions spent
already on prepardness for just such a disaster) was STILL a hodgepodge
shotgun approach with a bunch of different agencies not under any
central coordination, all with differing agendas and no clear approach
to the hundreds of little details to be solved. This is where blame
needs to fall squarely on a "goofus" administration. It's just one more
example of the overall bad management and misplaced priorities of the
Bush administration.



Koz