Lolis Eric Elie asks a good question:
The Baker bill has all but achieved that status of a sacred text. It has become the rock on which our state is planning its rebuilding. But is our faith in it well-placed?In a previous post, I urged people to support the Baker Bill. Being that it is the only plan to make homeowner financially whole, I am willing to accept a few warts. When the White House announced its opposition, South Louisianans faces turned red. I even sent an email to the White House stating my displeasure. And I'm a Bush supporter.
Here Mr. Elie makes an excellent point. Accepting the Baker Bill would be like taking a $1,500 settlement from the insurance company of the person who just totaled you Mercedes and sent you to the hospital to two-weeks. In other words, we deserve more. After all, it was negligence on the part of the federal government that resulted in the flooding of the city.
If homeowners who were flooded, even some who weren't, are able to sue the federal government - and that's a big if - the should be able to get a settlement worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. That's a lot better that 60 - 80% of the value of your home (assuming you still have a home).
When President Bush said that he needed a plan from the state, maybe that's what he had in mind? If it is, Louisiana need to bring a mindreader with them next time they visit Washington. What they'll probably do is continue to hold out their hand saying "Oh woe is us."