The NYT is, of course, leading the Bush-bashing pack, blaming hurricane Katrina on Bush and the Republicans. Their main argument is that Bush cut funding for hurricane control. (Even if he would have fully funded hurricane control, it wouldn’t have helped, as I pointed out the other day.)
Well, they seem quite adamant (now) that Bush should have funded it, but they weren’t quite so enthusiastic (to put it mildly) earlier this year. Here’s their editorial:
Anyone who cares about responsible budgeting and the health of America’s rivers and wetlands should pay attention to a bill now before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. The bill would shovel $17 billion at the Army Corps of Engineers for flood control and other water-related projects — this at a time when President Bush is asking for major cuts in Medicaid and other important domestic programs. Among these projects is a $2.7 billion boondoggle on the Mississippi River that has twice flunked inspection by the National Academy of Sciences.
The Government Accountability Office and other watchdogs accuse the corps of routinely inflating the economic benefits of its projects. And environmentalists blame it for turning free-flowing rivers into lifeless canals and destroying millions of acres of wetlands — usually in the name of flood control and navigation but mostly to satisfy Congress’s appetite for pork.
First they bashed Bush for spending so much on it because it was “pork” and now they bash Bush for not spending enough on vital hurricane control. Amazing how quickly their partisan little opinions can change… (Does this remind you of a certain Democratic presidential candidate? Perhaps a certain Virginia Gubernatorial candidate?)
(Hat tip: Powerline)
Leave a Comment