CFR Presents

Renewing America

Ideas and initiatives for rebuilding American economic strength.

Print Print Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close


Hurricane Sandy: A Lesson in Why Governments Really Matter

by Edward Alden
October 30, 2012

Emergency personnel help a resident onto a boat after rescuing her from flood waters brought on by Hurricane Sandy in Little Ferry, New Jersey on October 30, 2012 (Adam Hunger/Courtesy Reuters). Emergency personnel help a resident onto a boat after rescuing her from flood waters brought on by Hurricane Sandy in Little Ferry, New Jersey on October 30, 2012 (Adam Hunger/Courtesy Reuters).


Grover Norquist, the anti-tax crusader, has famously said that he has no wish to eliminate government, but only to “shrink it to the size where we can drown it in a bathtub.” Americans up and down the east coast can be grateful in the wake of Hurricane Sandy that he has not yet succeeded, or they might well have drowned in their own homes.

For those who wonder just what it is our tax dollars pay for, consider just a small list of government actions before and during the storm that made it far less catastrophic than it might have been:

  • The Commerce Department’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which is responsible for tracking the path of hurricanes and other storms, predicted days in advance – and with astonishing accuracy – both the path and strength of Hurricane Sandy. That gave governments throughout the region time to plan a response.
  • New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg ordered the evacuation of nearly 400,000 people from low-lying areas of the city, and set up emergency shelters. That order probably saved countless lives given the heavy flooding in Lower Manhattan that came at the peak of the storm.
  • New York Governor Andrew Cuomo shut the city’s subway, rail, and commuter buses. The record storm surge led to severe flooding in seven subway stations, the worst in the system’s 100-year history. But no one was hurt in the empty stations.
  • New Jersey Governor Chris Christie ordered the evacuation of Atlantic City and shut the region’s casinos to keep people away from the dangerous coastline.
  • In neighborhoods everywhere, like my own in Maryland, county and city governments provided constant updates on road conditions, dangerous wires, downed trees, and other hazards, and advertised available shelters for those who lost power or had storm damage to their homes.

This list could be much longer, but each represents a success born of planning and coordinated action to improve outcomes for large numbers of people – exactly what governments can and should be doing.

The contrast with the failed preparation and response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 is striking.  In the years prior to Hurricane Katrina, the Louisiana Army Corps of Engineers had identified some $18 billion in projects necessary to shore up the levees in New Orleans against hurricanes and flooding. Instead, Army Corps funding in the state was cut in half in the four years before the 2005 hurricane, with predictable consequences. Both federal and state governments failed to preposition supplies as the storm barreled in, there was little pressure on local residents to evacuate, and emergency responders took days to get to the scene after the storm to rescue the tens of thousands stranded in the city.

The vastly improved response this time around shows that governments – like private businesses – can learn from past mistakes. Governor Christie of New Jersey praised the federal government’s response to Hurricane Sandy, calling it “outstanding.”

There are some basic lessons in all this. First, we should invest in government services because we want them to be there when we are in a time of need.  Whether it’s a natural disaster that affects millions or a company closure that leaves hundreds out of work, government has the resources to help people get back on their feet and start over. Secondly, governments – like businesses or individuals – can learn to do things better. The preparations for Hurricane Sandy would likely have been much poorer if not for the lessons from Katrina, from Irene, and from this past summer’s “derecho” storms in Washington. Third, the effort to pit state and local governments against the federal government is mistaken; when a genuine crisis hits, we need all three working effectively and in concert.

As with all such disasters, human memory is short. Most of us will quickly forget Hurricane Sandy, move on with our lives, and grumble about high taxes. But if we keep letting them do their jobs – rather than continuing to cut them down — our governments will be busy preparing for the next time we really need them.

Post a Comment 3 Comments

  • Posted by Peter Duveen

    Mr. Alden is right in saying that a society should invest in government functions that prove useful. However, it must be done in such a way that the balance of powers is not disturbed. Our form of government was established to preserve the power of local government, to which the people are closer, vis-a-vis Federal Government. When this balance is disturbed by concentrating too much power in the Federal Government, it invites abuse. In a world in which human character was perfected, such an imbalance would not be as much of a problem. But human frailty being demonstrated again and again in history, the founding fathers were wise to secure local governance as a counterweight to federalism.

    The Federal Government has invested in foreign wars to the extent that resources have become ever scarcer with which to invest for other purposes. There is also a great deal of pernicious fiscal mismanagement and a redistribution of wealth, and the power that comes with wealth, that has been effected by government. Furthermore, funds raised by Federal taxation have been devoted to destroying, in other lands, the lives of people and the infrastructure needed to keep them comfortable. These sins may indeed haunt America for centuries to come. Waving the flag of national security does not eliminate responsibility for crimes against humanity in the court of world public opinion, either now or in the future. So people are wary these days of giving even one additional cent to the Federal Government. Although people recognize that governments provide many vital services, they are also becoming increasingly aware that governments can act to oppress the people they were intended to serve. I would hope that Mr. Alden would address these issues when he praises government and decries attempts to limit its reach.

  • Posted by Bob Finch

    While I agree with much of Mr. Duveen’s second paragraph, I take issue with his assertion that “concentrating too much power in the Federal Government … invites abuse.” US history does not bear this out, at least domestically. As the Federal Government has grown, so has oversight over it. Few could argue that many state and local governments are (still) famously corrupt, with rampant abuses by local pols and woefully inadequate transparency. Furthermore, state and local governments have not generally had their citizens’ best interests in mind (despite being “closer”); else the states would have abandoned slavery and would never have instituted Jim Crow. The US Federal Government has been the greater champion and defender of liberty and freedom for its citizens, not the individual states.

  • Posted by Russ Peterson

    That is what Government is for to protect and serve. Not to take over every aspect of our lives and businesses as is presently being attempted.

Post a Comment

CFR seeks to foster civil and informed discussion of foreign policy issues. Opinions expressed on CFR blogs are solely those of the author or commenter, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. All comments must abide by CFR's guidelines and will be moderated prior to posting.

* Required