Lessons from Hurricane Sandy

Nov 03, 2012 Letters

---

 

 

DEAR EDITOR,
The United States suffered a major disaster when Hurricane Sandy descended with unbridled fury leaving in its wake over fifty people dead and billions of dollars in damages. It is undoubtedly the worst natural disaster to hit the country for well over a century, one that will go down in history as the most destructive both in terms of loss of lives and damage to property.
According to media reports, the storm killed at least 98 people, with at least 40 coming from New York City, which is the business centre of the United States, and home to millions of people from all across the globe, including a sizeable number of Guyanese.
The hardest hit was New Jersey, which saw several homes partially submerged with water and sand. And as if that were not enough, a large blaze destroyed more that eighty homes in Queens, a New York City borough where a sizeable number of Guyanese and West Indians reside.
Communities along the East and Hudson Rivers in Manhattan were severely affected by the flood waters as were several other low lying areas in Battery Park near Ground Zero where the World Trade Centre once stood.
Thankfully, there are no reported casualties involving Guyanese, unlike the destruction of the World Trade Centre about a decade ago when a number of Guyanese perished.
The disaster came in the midst of a tightly contested presidential election, which saw both contestants   putting a pause on their hectic campaign schedules in deference to the tragedy inflicted on the nation by Hurricane Sandy.
President Barack Obama for his part issued federal emergency decrees for New York and New Jersey and declared these as major disaster areas. He was very pro-active in his coordination of disaster relief operations, which earned him praise from some unlikely quarters, including New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, a strong supporter of Republican challenger Mitt Romney.
Despite attempts to play down the politics by both sides in order not to appear politically insensitive and to make political capital out of the situation, there are some important lessons that the disaster has brought to the surface, which in a sense could be seen as defining characteristics of the two opposing camps.
The first has to do with the role and responsibility of central government in the political and economic life of the citizenry. Republicans favour a much smaller role for government and a corresponding larger role for the private sector, which it regards as the engine of growth and the creator of jobs.
The public sector, in their view, should only be responsible for creating an enabling environment for the private sector to grow and develop.  The business of government should be limited to those areas which the private sector would not have any real interest in getting into, due to low rates of return on investment such as the construction of highways, harbours and other infrastructural projects.
Democrats, on the other hand, are of the view that the state has an important role to play in terms of providing the right stimulus for business to grow and expand, especially during periods of economic slump and recession, when huge injections of capital are necessary to revitalize the economy and accelerate the pace of growth and development.
Investments by the government in infrastructural projects could have a multiplier effect on the economy and result in greater consumer spending and lead to an overall improvement in the health of the economy.
The recent government bailout of the auto industry, especially in the battleground state of Ohio, has proven to be a correct decision by the Obama administration, and is likely to pay political dividends in the presidential election, if opinion polls in the key battleground state of Ohio are to be believed.
This divergence of thinking is also evident in the contrasting positions taken by President Obama and Challenger Romney over the role of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) – responsible for disaster management nationwide, especially involving mega-disasters, as in the case of Hurricane Sandy. There is no way that the resources available at the state level would have been adequate enough to effectively manage the disaster, which incidentally gave a political advantage to President Obama, as opposed to Mitt Romney, who is on record as saying that his preference was to have resources for disaster management transferred to the state level, better yet, to the private sector rather than at the federal level.
But even more significant from a long-term security perspective, is the potential for future occurrences, a warning that has been largely ignored by policy makers, from experts who for quite some time have been preaching the gospel of climate change and the dangers that are likely to occur as a consequence of high levels of pollution and environmental degradation.
The United States is the largest contributor of carbon emissions in the world, emitting roughly one-quarter of the global level. It refused to sign the Kyoto protocol, which was aimed at limiting carbon emissions to acceptable limits.
Sandy could very well turn out to be an eye-opener for policy makers and reinforce the scientifically established view namely, that procrastination is no longer an option and that the United States must come on board if the likelihood of future calamities is to be minimized.
Meanwhile, Guyana’s President Donald Ramotar in a letter to US President Barack Obama extended heartfelt condolences to those who lost their lives during the storm, as well as those who were injured or suffered losses and destruction of property.
He also expressed confidence that the American people will overcome these testing times and begin the process of recovery and reconstruction at the soonest.
Hydar Ally

---

---