Monday, September 05, 2005

FEMA and Katrina

There have been a lot of complaints that FEMA was too slow in reacting to Hurricane Katrina. Instead of discussing the merits or demerits of those claims, I’d like to share with you three quotes that seem highly relevant. After that, I want to briefly mention some things I’ve seen and heard in the past few days that seem particularly interesting in light of those quotes.

Five years ago I bought an amazingly useful book. It’s for laymen who have no background in economics, and it simply explains – in plain English, with no jargon or buzzwords – some very basic economic principles and history.

It’s not an advocacy book; it doesn’t advocate liberalism or conservatism or Marxism or anything else. It just says, “When X happens, here is how people affected by it respond, and here’s why.”

It’s fascinating to me the way it illustrates how people really are pretty much the same anywhere, anytime. Over and over we see that a given policy that had a given result in America 10 years ago had the same result in Africa 100 years ago, in Europe 1,000 years ago, and in Rome 2,000 years ago.

The quotes are in blue, and my observations are in black text. All italics were in the original text. I added other forms of emphasis. (Keep in mind that this was written two or three years before FEMA was absorbed into an even larger bureaucracy, the Dep’t of Homeland Security.)

=== QUOTE 1 ===

Monopoly is the enemy of efficiency, whether under capitalism or socialism. The difference between the two systems is that monopoly is the norm under socialism. Even in a mixed economy, with some economic activities being carried out by government and others being carried out by private industry, the government’s activities are typically monopolies, while those in the private marketplace are typically activities carried out by rival enterprises.

Thus, when a hurricane, flood, or other natural disaster strikes an area, emergency aid usually comes from both the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and from private insurance companies whose customers’ homes and property have been damaged or destroyed. FEMA has been notoriously slower and less efficient than the private insurance companies.

Allstate cannot afford to be slower in getting money into the hands of its policy-holders than State Farm is in getting money to the people who hold its policies. Not only would existing customers in the disaster area be likely to switch insurance companies if one dragged its feet in getting money to them, while their neighbor received substantial advances from a different insurance company to tide them over, word of any such difference would spread like wildfire across the country, causing millions of people elsewhere to switch billions of dollars worth of insurance business from the less efficient company to the more efficient one.

A government agency, however, faces no such pressure. No matter how much FEMA may be criticized or ridiculed for its failure to get aid to disaster victims in a timely fashion, there is no rival government agency that these people can turn to for the same service. Moreover, the people who run these agencies are paid according to fixed salary schedules, not by how quickly or how well they serve people hit by disaster.

=== END QUOTE 1 ===

Quote 2 is from a discussion of insurance, and the various ways in which people reduce economic and other risks.

=== QUOTE 2 ===

…Government programs that deal with risk are often analogized to insurance, or may even be officially called “insurance” without in fact being insurance. Federal disaster relief helps victims of floods, hurricanes and other natural disasters to recover and rebuild but, unlike insurance, it does not reduce over-all risk. Often people rebuild homes and businesses in the well-known paths of hurricanes and floods, often to the applause of the media for their “courage.” But the financial risks created are not paid by those who create them, as with insurance, but are instead paid by the taxpayers.

In short, there is now more risk than if there were no disaster relief available and more risk than if private insurance companies were charging people premiums which cover the full cost of their risky behavior. Sometimes the government subsidizes insurance for earthquakes or other disasters for which private insurance would be “prohibitively expensive.” What that means is that the government makes it less expensive for people to live in risky places – and more costly to the society as a whole, when people distribute themselves in more risky ways than they would do if they had to bear the costs themselves, either in high insurance premiums or in financial losses and anxieties.

There is an almost politically irresistible inclination to help people struck by earthquakes, wildfires, tornadoes and other natural disasters. The tragic pictures on television over-ride any consideration of what the situation was when they decided to live where they did. But government-subsidized insurance is, in effect, disaster relief provided for them beforehand, and is therefore a factor in people’s choices of where to live and what risks to take with other people’s money…

…The lengths to which some (private) insurance companies go to avoid being later than the competition was indicated by a New York Times story: “Prepared for the worst, some insurers had cars equipped with GPS to help navigate neighborhoods with downed street signs and missing landmarks, and many claims adjusters carried computer-produced maps identifying the precise location of every customer.”

The kind of market competition which forces such extraordinary efforts is of course lacking in government emergency programs, which have no competitors. They may be analogized to insurance but do not have the same incentives.

=== END QUOTE 2 ===

=== QUOTE 3 ===

…Perhaps more than anything else, an understanding of basic economics can enable us to consider policy issues in terms of the incentives they create and the consequences that follow, rather then simply the goals they proclaim and how wonderful it would be the achieve such goals. Both within the government and in the private sector, individuals and organizations then to respond to the particular incentives facing them by trying to promote their own wellbeing.

When this adversely affects others, it need not be due to “bureaucratic bungling” within the government or to “greed” in the private sector. Perfectly rational and decent people tend to respond to the incentives confronting them. These incentives may need re-consideration more than the individuals need denouncing. (NOTE FROM BOB: more on this in my comments and observations below.)

While critics of various programs often point out “unintended consequences” that did more harm than good, many of those consequences were predictable from the outset if people had looked at the incentives created, rather than the goals proclaimed.

Very often either history or economics could have told us what to expect, but neither was consulted. It does not matter that a law or policy proclaims its goal to be “affordable housing,” “fair trade,” or “a living wage.” What matters is what incentives are created by the specifics of these laws and how people react to such incentives. These are dry empirical questions which are seldom as exciting as political crusades or moral pronouncements. But they are questions which must be asked, if we are truly interested in the wellbeing of others, rather than in excitement or a sense of moral superiority for ourselves.

As historian Paul Johnson has said:

“The study of history is a powerful antidote to contemporary arrogance. It is humbling to discover how many of our glib assumptions, which seem to us novel and plausible, have been tested before, not once but many times and in innumerable guises; and discovered to be, at great human cost, wholly false.”

We have seen some of those great human costs – people going hungry in Russia, despite some of the richest farmland on the continent of Europe, people sleeping on cold sidewalks on winter nights in Manhattan, despite far more boarded-up (due to rent control) housing units than it would take to shelter them all. A desperate government in 18th-century France decreed the death penalty for anyone who refused to accept the money that the revolutionary leaders had issued, in ignorance or disregard of economics. After the astronomical inflation in Germany in the 1920s had destroyed millions of families’ life savings, many who were bitterly disappointed with their traditional leaders and institutions eventually turned toward someone who had just been a fringe fanatic before: Adolf Hitler.

No complex or esoteric economic principles would have been required to avoid these and other human tragedies around the world. But it would have required people to stop and think, instead of being swept along by emotions, rhetoric or the political pressures of the moment. For those who are willing to stop and think, basic economics provides the tools for evaluating policies and proposals in terms of logical implications and empirical evidence.

===END QUOTE 3 ===

In light of the above, here are three things I’ve noticed…

1) On Saturday September 3rd, President Bush said, “We will not let bureaucracy get in the way of saving lives.” I may be wrong, but as soon as he said that it struck me very strongly that this was a tacit admission that that had already happened and/or was currently happening.

2) On the same day, Homeland Security Director Chertoff said, “This…perfect storm…exceeded the imagination of the planners…” When the levees broke, Chertoff indicated, it was a “second disaster” that was outside the box in which the planners had operated. Fair enough – let’s give the benefit of the doubt and recognize that it is simply not possible to plan for every possible contingency. That’s why they call it an “emergency.”

But a few hours later, he said that “…the Federal Government will break the mold on rescue operations.” In other words, they hadn’t “broken the mold” yet but they were going to – even though they knew that the levee breaks had “broken the mold” of their planning more than four days earlier.

3) It took the Department of Health and Human Services eight days to set up medical stations in the area, and it also took them eight days to set up a website for medical professionals who wished to volunteer their services.

Why did these things happen?

I believe that employees at FEMA and HHS, with occasional exceptions such as exist in any large organization, are absolutely dedicated to doing their jobs to the best of their ability. I want to re-iterate something quoted above: “Perfectly rational and decent people tend to respond to the incentives confronting them. These incentives may need re-consideration more than the individuals need denouncing. “

The question is, what exactly does “doing their jobs” mean?

Let’s start by recognizing that every large organization has bureaucrats, people who deal with paperwork and accounting and correspondence and compliance and personnel and all those sorts of things. There’s nothing wrong with any of that; those are necessary functions if the organization isn’t to descend into utter chaos.

Private companies also have producers. I’ll use a manufacturer of widgets as an example, but the same thing applies to a company selling services rather than physical goods.

Producers design the widget. Other producers build it. Others transport it. Others sell it – whether the customer is another manufacturer, a wholesaler, a retailer, or the general public. The ultimate result of all these producers’ activities is that at the end of the line, the customers trade their money for the company’s widgets. If that doesn’t happen, the company ceases to exist.

Therefore, within that company, even the non-producers understand that “doing their job” ultimately means supporting the producers in their efforts to satisfy the customer. And that shapes (to return to that quote) how they tend to respond to the incentives confronting them.Their incentive is to keep their job, and the way they do it is by contributing to the production and sale of widgets.

They understand that a failure to serve the customer well can very easily mean that the company shrinks or goes bankrupt, because there are other widget companies working every day to take those customers away.

But what of an organization to whom that last sentence does not apply? What does “doing their job” mean to FEMA employees? What is the job description?

FEMA’s revenue does not come from the people they serve, it comes from taxpayers via Congressional authorizations. So when we think about how they might “tend to respond to the incentives confronting them,” a very different picture emerges. The one overriding incentive is to do whatever is required to keep that Congressional funding coming. That’s the one task – rather than providing satisfactory service to the people they serve – that keeps the doors open and the paychecks coming.

If the only way I could maintain my paycheck was by satisfying Congress, believe me, I’d work HARD to satisfy Congress – which means doing my job exactly as they have specified that they want it done. Other considerations, if any, would be secondary to that.

So what does that mean? It means documenting everything in triplicate. Keeping the files up-to-date. Scheduling meetings, being on time for them, and writing memos about them. Complying with all existing rules and plans – which certainly doesn’t include “breaking the mold,” as Secretary Chertoff described it. It means following procedures in the exact way Congress wants them followed. Generating an endless stream of memos to document that you’ve done all these things. Submitting proposals. Keeping the files up-do-date, especially your CYA file.

It means accepting that nothing else can be done because “we don’t have a form for that.”

I want to re-emphasize that it is entirely rational for FEMA employees to behave this way, because that’s the job description. That’s precisely what they are paid to do. They want to keep their jobs just as much as you and I do, and they are in a situation and a system where providing good service to, for instance, hurricane victims, has absolutely nothing to do with keeping their jobs or with keeping the revenue flowing in. The way they keep jobs and revenue is by never, ever, ever going “outside the box.” And once again, if I were in that situation (assuming I wanted to keep my job) I’d do exactly the same thing.

I might wish that I could do more. But I would also realize that if I get fired for not following procedure, I won’t be able to do anything for anyone – not for hurricane victims, and not even for my own kids.

Think back to our widget company, where supporting the producers is Job One, because they serve the customers who provide the funds that keep the doors open and the paychecks flowing. Compare that with FEMA (or the Dep’t of Motor Vehicles, or any other government agency), where the people who serve the “customers” are NOT the producers of revenue. From an institutional perspective, the incentives and the constraints are completely different – so why should anyone be surprised that the activities and priorities of the employees are likewise completely different?

At FEMA, the “producers” are the people who create the reports and charts and graphs and all the other paperwork that gets presented to Congress, in order to keep the funding going. Clearly, those kinds of activities are unrelated to getting food and water and medicine to people in New Orleans who may well die without it.

Yet those producers – as in any other organization – are the most important people at FEMA. If they fail, the organization dies. So it is entirely rational for everyone to do their job in such a way as to maximize their chances of success, by following procedure to the letter and by never, ever going outside the box.

So let me get back to my original questions. Why did President Bush seem to tacitly admit that bureaucracy had gotten in the way of saving lives? Why did Director Chertoff admit that FEMA had not “broken the mold” (i.e., gone “outside the box”) more than four days after Katrina broke it? Why did HHS take eight days to set up medical stations? Why did they take eight days to set up a website for medical pros wishing to volunteer? Why did so many other things that I haven’t even mentioned take so long?

I have no solution to offer, because I believe that the problem is built in to very nature of FEMA or HHS. That's why the first six words I quoted in Quote One were, "Monopoly is the enemy of efficiency." That's equally true whether the monopoly is owned by private investors or by the Federal Government.

In regard to this problem, I don’t think that it makes any difference at all who the director of FEMA is, who the mayor of New Orleans is, who the President of the United States is, or who the governor of Louisiana is. This problem with institutional incentives and constraints existed long before any of them were elected and will continue to exist long after they’re gone.

That’s why, earlier, I didn’t ask “What is the solution?” Instead I asked “Why did these things happen?” I’m sure that I haven’t provided the full answer, but I think that the things discussed here are an important part of it.


At 2:08 PM, Blogger Johnny Canuck said...

I definitely don't have all the answers, but I know that as long as people keep sharing ideas like this, the truth will eventually reveal itself and maybe it can make a difference somewhere.

I think this blog rocks! Keep up the good work, I've bookmarked it and will definitely swing by again soon.

Feel free to pay a visit to my Canada immigration site. It might not be your "cup of tea", but it covers Canada immigration related topics.

At 5:54 PM, Blogger ModTodd said...

I agree Bob. The entire system failed here. Local Government, the Corps of Enigineers, State and National Governments, Fema, etc. All knew that NOLA and the entire Gulf Coast was in peril. NOLA flooding brought about by a hurricane has been aknowledged and acted upon (vis a vis the levees project) since the Spanish built the place. Your 'monopoly' assertion is right on the money. Another problem is that long-term projects make for bad short-term politics, even though they are often the best long-term government policy. The political nature of government was a major reason the levee budget was consistent;y slashed at every level over the past several years and administrations. This kind of long-term project isn't something that will produce much political 'bang' over a term. In line with your thinking, I would advocate the Red Cross, which is essentially an apolitcal organization, whose seven priciples are Humanity, Impartiality, Unity, Universality, Neutrality, Voluntary Service, and Independence, promote preparation, response, and recovery for all people (including you). Economically the Red Cross is a clearing house for local governments and economies, regional and state government and business, and national government organizations, and even international organizations and governments. As such, I'm not sure how it fits into the economic engine, but I would assert that they are an excellent 'levelor' and above average in the efficiency department. I believe that the key now is not to assess blame, but to recover from this disaster, and reassess the risks. Ultimately the people who are going through this disaster will have to make some important decisions. Due to the apocalytic degree of this tragedy, the entire nation will be affected, and it will be an American decision, not just that of the dispossesed, as to the value of rebuilding a high-risk scenario. I hope that politics doesn't win-out over good goverment this time. Whatever the future brings, I'm sure there will be many eyes on the ball.

At 7:43 AM, Blogger Drums said...

I agree Bob. Well done indeed. Incentive IS the key. Corporate competiveness is the driving force. I feel... just kidding. I maintain that people will continue to be led and misled by media for decades to come. Thanks for digging deeper and placing it on this forum.

I have 3 business associates to relocate and provide housing, clothing etc. for the next 6 months (or until they can recover.

I am thankful for all American citizens who have taken the adopt a family approach to the solution. If we simply throw $$$ to the big organizations recovery will take a long time. The $$$ are certainly needed but WE (citizens) are the missing manpower.

At 3:23 AM, Blogger johngibson7612 said...

i thought your blog was cool and i think you may like this cool Website. now just Click Here

At 4:52 AM, Blogger edwarner55780557 said...

I really enjoyed your blog. This is a cool Website Check it out now by Clicking Here . I know that you will find this WebSite Very Interesting Every one wants a Free LapTop Computer!

At 11:39 AM, Blogger Gordon said...

Just visited your blog, it's great. I have a jobs seeking website which is informative and you can find info of different job natures, hope that it will be useful in your job seeking

At 12:35 PM, Blogger brian said...

Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!

I have a government accounting site/blog. It pretty much covers ##KEYWORD## related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time :-)

At 8:21 AM, Blogger TheDevilIsInTheDetails said...

Be prepared for the next 2005 hurricane name or find another one that's similar. As the Boy Scouts say: "Be Prepared"!

At 3:22 PM, Blogger TheDevilIsInTheDetails said...

Another against death fact penalty Resource... . A discussion forum for all that deals with such hot-button issues as against death fact penalty .

At 2:51 PM, Blogger Joe Berenguer said...

Hi Bob Blount! You have a great blog over here!
Please accept my compliments and wishes for your happiness and success!

If you have a moment, please take a look at my site:
Sample Job Resume Job Resume
It covers Sample Job Resume Job Resume related stuff.
Have a great day!

At 6:30 AM, Blogger Joe Berenguer said...

Hello Bob Blount! I just came across your blog and wanted to
drop you a note telling you how impressed I was with
the information you have posted here.

I also have a web site & blog about stockbroker job so I know I'm talking
about when I say yours is top-notch! Keep up the
great work, you are providing a great resource on the Internet here!

If you have a moment, please visit my site stockbroker job

Best success!

At 11:30 PM, Blogger Paul Adams said...

I was looking around and I just found your very nice blog, Bob Blount!
Please accept my sincere appreciation for your good work!
If you have a moment, please visit my site:
job search south africa
It pretty much covers job search south africa related stuff.
Best regards!

At 10:18 AM, Blogger James Baker said...

I just came across your blog and wanted to
drop you,Bob Blount, a note telling you how impressed I was with
the information you have posted here.I have a
at home job site. It offers at home job related stuff.
Come and check it out if you get time :-)
Best success!

At 12:43 PM, Blogger eddlane8526 said...

Make no mistake: Our mission at Tip Top Equities is to sift through the thousands of underperforming companies out there to find the golden needle in the haystack. A stock worthy of your investment. A stock with the potential for big returns. More often than not, the stocks we profile show a significant increase in stock price, sometimes in days, not months or years. We have come across what we feel is one of those rare deals that the public has not heard about yet. Read on to find out more.

Nano Superlattice Technology Inc. (OTCBB Symbol: NSLT) is a nanotechnology company engaged in the coating of tools and components with nano structured PVD coatings for high-tech industries.

Nano utilizes Arc Bond Sputtering and Superlattice technology to apply multi-layers of super-hard elemental coatings on an array of precision products to achieve a variety of physical properties. The application of the coating on industrial products is designed to change their physical properties, improving a product's durability, resistance, chemical and physical characteristics as well as performance. Nano's super-hard alloy coating materials were especially developed for printed circuit board drills in response to special market requirements

The cutting of circuit boards causes severe wear on the cutting edge of drills and routers. With the increased miniaturization of personal electronics devices the dimensions of holes and cut aways are currently less than 0.2 mm. Nano coats tools with an ultra thin coating (only a few nanometers in thickness) of nitrides which can have a hardness of up to half that of diamond. This has proven to increase tool life by almost ten times. Nano plans to continue research and development into these techniques due to the vast application range for this type of nanotechnology

We believe that Nano is a company on the move. With today�s steady move towards miniaturization we feel that Nano is a company with the right product at the right time. It is our opinion that an investment in Nano will produce great returns for our readers.

Online Stock trading, in the New York Stock Exchange, and Toronto Stock Exchange, or any other stock market requires many hours of stock research. Always consult a stock broker for stock prices of penny stocks, and always seek proper free stock advice, as well as read a stock chart. This is not encouragement to buy stock, but merely a possible hot stock pick. Get a live stock market quote, before making a stock investment or participating in the stock market game or buying or selling a stock option.

At 2:32 PM, Blogger Car Insurance Center said...

Hi Thanks for your interesting blog. I also have a blog/site, covering auto insurance quote related stuff. Feel free to visit my auto insurance quote site.

At 6:11 PM, Blogger Paul Adams said...

Hi Fellow!I was just searching blogs,and I found your site! I like it!
If you have a moment, please visit my site:
How to give a blow job
It covers How to give a blow job related contents.
All the best!

At 9:29 PM, Blogger Paul Adams said...

Hi Fellow! I was just searching blogs,and I found your site! I like it!
If you have a moment, please visit my site:
job interview preparation
It covers job interview preparation related contents.
All the best!

At 5:02 AM, Blogger lennyalexander46768146 said...

I read over your blog, and i found it inquisitive, you may find My Blog interesting. My blog is just about my day to day life, as a park ranger. So please Click Here To Read My Blog

At 2:19 PM, Blogger Paul Adams said...

Hi Blogger!I like your blog! Keep up the
good work, you are providing a great resource on the Internet here!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my site:
work at home mom job
It pretty much covers work at home mom job related issues.
Best regards!

At 6:04 PM, Blogger James Baker said...

Congratulations Friend for your excellent blog on how to write a job description!Keep up the good work!
If you have a moment, please visit my site:
how to write a job description
I send you my warm regards and wish you continued success.
Have a nice day! :-)

At 9:55 AM, Blogger Diamonds Center said...

Hi thanks for your blog, I liked it! I also have a blog/site about canadian diamonds
that covers canadian diamonds
related stuff. Please feel free to visit.

At 11:55 PM, Blogger Accounting Center said...

Hi, Thanks for your interesting blog. Keep up the great work! I also have a site & blog about accounting software
, please feel free to visit.

At 8:21 PM, Blogger megandenton38921805 said...

While you read this, YOU start to BECOME aware of your surroundings, CERTIAN things that you were not aware of such as the temperature of the room, and sounds may make YOU realize you WANT a real college degree.

Call this number now, (413) 208-3069

Get an unexplained feeling of joy, Make it last longer by getting your COLLEGE DEGREE. Just as sure as the sun is coming up tomorrow, these College Degree's come complete with transcripts, and are VERIFIABLE.

You know THAT Corporate America takes advantage of loopholes in the system. ITS now YOUR turn to take advantage of this specific opportunity, Take a second, Get a BETTER FEELING of joy and a better future BY CALLING this number 24 hours a day.
(413) 208-3069

At 4:56 PM, Blogger Eugene said...

Hi. My name is Eugene Gershin. I'd like to welcome you to Obadiah Shoher's blog, Samson Blinded: A Machiavellian Perspective on the Middle East Conflict.

Obadiah is a pen name of a politician. He writes extremely controversial articles about Israel, the Middle East politics, and terrorism.

Obadiah advocates political rationalism instead of moralizing. He is economic liberal and political conservative.

Google refused advertising our site and Amazon deleted reviews of Obadiah's book. Nevertheless, Obadiah’s is the largest Jewish personal blog, read by more than 100,000 people monthly. 210,000 people from 81 countries downloaded Obadiah’s book. The blog was voted the best overall in People’s Choice: Jewish and Israeli blogs Awards, received Webby Honoree and other awards.

Please help us spread Obadiah's message, and mention the blog in one of your posts, or link to us. We would greatly appreciate your comments at

Best wishes,

Eugene Gershin – Israeli Uncensored News


Post a Comment

<< Home