NOTE TO READERS: This was originally posted yesterday but due to the timeliness of this post and the long roundup we’re reposting it to today’s blog.
The other shoe –or rather, the FEMA director — has dropped in the controversy over the federal government’s performance in the Hurricane Katrina Disaster: Michael Brown is out as FEMA chief…at least when it comes to hurricane relief, that is.
The AP reports:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Michael Brown is being relieved of his command of the Bush administration’s Hurricane Katrina onsite relief efforts, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced Friday.
He will be replaced by Coast Guard Vice Adm. Thad W. Allen, who was overseeing New Orleans relief and rescue efforts, Chertoff said.
Earlier, Brown confirmed the switch. Asked if he was being made a scapegoat for a federal relief effort that has drawn widespread and sharp criticism, Brown told The Associated Press after a long pause: “By the press, yes. By the president, No.”
Brown apparently did not read the non-partisan (except for the administration’s most staunch defenders) demands for his ouster.
These calls came from Democrats, Independents, some Republicans and a host of weblogs from all over the political spectrum including this weblog (post is here).
So what does this mean? It means:
- There was a lot of heat that increased the last 24 hours (see below) and the administration has tried to relieve if.
- But they clearly did not want to yield to demands for his FIRING — so they’ve left him in place to serve the nation with his past experience and experience in handing the Hurricane Katrina crisis. (If there is an ironclad case for prayer in public school THIS IS MAY BE IT…)
- It may ease some of the controversy but won’t totally end it if he remains in the FEMA job too long.
Brown was given a face sending send off:
“Michael Brown has done everything he possibly could to coordinate the federal response to this unprecedented challenge,” Chertoff told reporters in Baton Rouge, La. Chertoff sidestepped a question on whether the move was the first step toward Brown’s leaving FEMA.
But a source close to Brown, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the FEMA director had been considering leaving after the hurricane season ended in November and that Friday’s action virtually assures his departure.
Brown has been under fire because of the administration’s slow response to the magnitude of the hurricane. On Thursday, questions were raised about whether he padded his resume to exaggerate his previous emergency management background.
Less than an hour before Brown’s removal came to light, White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Brown had not resigned and the president had not asked for his resignation.
And it now turns out that this was the TRUTH: Brown will still be there to supervise any future disasters. MORE:
Chertoff suggested the shift came as the Gulf Coast efforts were entering “a new phase of the recovery operation.” He said Brown would return to Washington to oversee the government’s response to other potential disasters.
“I appreciate his work, as does everybody here,” Chertoff said.
BOTTOM LINE: The White House, despite transferring him, is in effect saying he performed SO WELL here that he can be in charge of protecting the nation in the future.
“I’m anxious to get back to D.C. to correct all the inaccuracies and lies that are being said,” Brown said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.
Asked if the move was a demotion, Brown said: “No. No. I’m still the director of FEMA.”
He said Chertoff made the decision to move him out of Louisiana. It was not his own decision, Brown said.
“I’m going to go home and walk my dog and hug my wife and, maybe get a good Mexican meal and a stiff margarita and a full night’s sleep. And then I’m going to go right back to FEMA and continue to do all I can to help these victims,” Brown said. “This story’s not about me. This story’s about the worst disaster of the history of our country that stretched every government to its limit and now we have to help these victims.”
But…no…the story has been partly about Brown: about his lack of experience, tentative response to the hurricane disaster, values within the administration that led to him being named to the post in the first place. Add to that the most recent scandal that popped within the psat 24 hours about him allegedly padding his resume — a scandal that clearly will be seen (correctly or not) as a last straw, making him a political liability simply too hot to handle amid the controversies swirling around him. Even blaming state and local officials couldn’t take the press focus off the alleged resume padding (which was still excused by some folks on talk shows as representing the American way and nothing for the public to be at all concerned about.)
In short, that was a story that would have had “legs,” as they say in Hollywood. Just note this quote on this report on CBS News’ website:
That bio and a White House news release says Brown worked for the city of Edmund, Okla., overseeing its Emergency Services Division.
But Carolina Miranda, a reporter for Time, tells The Early Show co-anchor Rene Syler that doesn’t appear to have been the case.
“His bio, the White House press release, and a number of sources list him as assistant city manager in Edmund, Okla.,” Miranda says. ” When we called the folks in Edmund, they told us that, no, his position in fact had been assistant to the city manager, which is a purely administrative job, a very different job. He was an administrative assistant. It’s sort of an entry-level, intern-type job for somebody who’s interested in learning about government. …When he began that job in 1977, he was still a college student. He didn’t graduate with his B.A. until 1978.”
Miranda says she isn’t sure who is responsible for that type of error.
“That, we’ll have to wait to see and find out,” Miranda says. “But the fact is, it’s an error that’s been repeated a number of times, on his FEMA bio, the White House press release. It’s the kind of thing you’d think somebody would have caught it by now but, clearly, nobody has.”
Questions will likely still be asked.
Questions will be asked such as: why didn’t anyone catch the errors on the resume? How could it be repeated so many times? Add to that questions about his qualifications (his background with a horse organization made him seem most qualified to rescue stranded horses…) and whether political cronyism got him a plumb federal job (the emerging answer seems yes)…plus continued questions and news reports about his job performance…
Will this be enough to defuse the crisis? Or will the White House face a prospect: stick with this guy, or cut its losses by extracting that part of the negative press coverage and bipartisan (from all but those delivering the talking points for the White House) criticism? Will a transfer be enough to short-circuit this growing controversy?
From a report on CTV’s website:
In recent days, several Democratic members of Congress have called for Brown to be fired immediately.
“I would never have appointed such a person,” said New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar said the FEMA chief had 36 hours advance notice of the destruction that Katrina threatened to wreak on the Gulf Coast; but Brown waited five hours until after the storm made landfall before he asked his boss to send rescue support workers.
Meanwhile, questions are continuing to emerge about Brown’s qualifications to lead the country’s main disaster-response agency.
A 2001 press release on the White House website says that Brown worked for the city of Edmond, Okla., from 1975 to 1978 “overseeing emergency services divisions.”
Brown’s official biography on the FEMA website says that his background in state and local government also includes serving as “an assistant city manager with emergency services oversight” and as a city councilman.
But Randel Shadid, former mayor of Edmond, told AP on Friday that Brown had been an assistant to the city manager, not assistant city manager.
Claudia Deakins, head of public relations for the city of Edmond, bolstered Shadid’s claim.
Deakins also said that Brown was “an assistant to the city manager” from 1977 to 1980, not a manager himself, and had no authority over other employees.
However, FEMA’s office of public affairs deputy strategic director, Nicol Andrews, dismissed the claims, saying Brown became an “assistant city manager” after beginning as an intern.
So you have several issues here (1)Brown’s performance during the storm, (2)his qualifications to head FEMA, (3)the role of politics in appointing someone to a life-or-death post in a time of increased perils to U.S. security and increased funding to emergency prevention and emergency response, (4)how much of its vanishing political capital the White House was going to have to expend to keep him in in charge of the hurricane even amid a clear campaign via talk show and friendly cable personalities to hammer home local and state failings (which existed) to downplay federal failings (which existed) (5)the danger that press focus on Brown would make HIM a symbol of the adminsitration’s hurricane response — versus the symbol the White House would like the public to visualize (President Bush visiting the storm areas and hugging victims and detailing federal efforts to help them out).
Does taking him out of the hurricane job but leaving him in charge of FEMA defuse the controversy, keep it going, or INCREASE it because he’s being kept on?
How big did the Time resume story play in the timing of his departure? If you fell off a turnip truck you will likely fully agree with the official line that he planned to leave soon anyway (you’d have to ignore the Brown quote about this departure not being his idea).
But if blog reaction to the news about Brown’s “inaccurate” resume is any indication, it was clear something had to be done or the White House’s political crisis would grow.
Here’s some of the blog reaction to the resume story:
—Gary Farber:”BOUNCING BOY. That should be Brownie’s nickname after we’ve learned how deeply he padded his resume.”
—James Joyner:
Still, aside from a stint as the FEMA Deputy immediately before taking on the head role, Brown clearly had little experience with emergency management. Indeed, he had little experience with management, period. Readers can draw their own conclusions as to whether he’s a fast learner.
At any rate, this is yet another case where the appointment of people on the basis of service to their political party rather than their experience makes no sense. One doesn’t want the head of NASA or the head of FEMA to be a Joe Schmoe with no expertise in the highly technical functions of their agencies.
—Think Progress:”More evidence the White House may not have put a lot of thought into making former Internation Arabian Horse Association commissioner Mike Brown the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency… Makes you wonder…don’t they check references in the White House?”
—Jesse Taylor:”Bush hired an obvious incompetent who lied about his past repeatedly. However, Democrats pointing this out are triggering Bush’s natural response, which is to clam up and not admit errors when they’re being pointed out. Obviously, Democrats should change their tactics to accomodate Bush rather than Bush simply learning how to admit a screwup. The best way for Democrats to get rid of incompetent people is just to hold off all public pressure or attention on them, because then, logically, Bush will fire them at the drop of a hat.”
—Jonah Goldberg:”Amid all the bashing of FEMA director Michael Brown as an incompetent, unqualified, resume-padding political hack, one small factor has been overlooked: His job required Senate confirmation, didn’t it? Indeed it did. And not only was Brown confirmed, but he was apparently confirmed by a unanimous voice vote — when the Senate was controlled by Democrats.”
—Dave Pell:”Things are getting even worse for Michael Brown who has turned into a one man federal disaster.”
—TBogg:”So what’s it gonna be? Fire him for being both incompetent and padding his resume, or look the other way and say he’s doing a fine job? Either way someone is going to be asked who vetted this guy. Scottie McClelland just started drinking heavily…”
—Democratic Veteran:”Up next: an revelation that the Harvard that John Roberts went to was actually the now-defunct Harvard A&T in West Pimple, Connecticut. So, does the actual lying ever end with these people, or is it just sport now to see how much they can get away with day to day?”
—Betsy Newmark:”We can’t tolerate that and especially when he has not distinguished himself since then. The only thing that seems to be protecting him now is that to fire him would be to give in to Bush’s critics, something he is usually loath to do. So, ironically, criticism from people like Pelosi is helping Brown.”
—Josh Marshall:”You can’t make this stuff up. Or, I guess, maybe that’s not the best line in this case.”
—Daily Kos’ soonergrunt:”Read the whole article, and then will some lawyer-type please tell me if this man can be prosecuted.”
AND HERE’S A CROSS SECTION OF BLOG REACTION TO BROWN’S TRANSFER BUT NON-FIRING:
—Kevin Drum:”FEMA chief Mike Brown has been sent back to Washington, but we’re assured this has nothing to do with the quality of his work. On the contrary: “The department said Brown was returning to Washington to manage FEMA’s national operations because it is still hurricane season.” Indeed. We need Brown’s steady hand on the tiller in case Tropical Storm Ophelia decides to meander back in the direction of Florida.”
—No More Mr. Niceblog:”I’m expecting not Rudy Giuliani, Jimmy Carter, or Colin Powell, but a well-regarded milquetoast, quite possibly with no related experience, but someone who won’t show The Big Guy up.”
—Steve Soto:
It’s even worse. Unable to admit error, Bush doesn’t have the guts to fire Brown, so he is relieving him of command over the Katrina effort and is sending him back to Washington, where his ability to lead the agency is forever compromised.
….The guy is a lying political hack who can’t run the agency well enough to perform its essential functions, yet he is replaced on the ground and sent back to the Beltway to still run the agency? Yeah, that should work. How soon will it be before those in Bush’s own party start asking about what sense this move made
—Americablog:”Not to mention, what do you mean he’s still on the job but moving back to Washington? Either the guy is competent or not. If he’s not competent to run the hurricane relief then he’s not competent to run FEMA nor work there. So what is going on? Why is the Bush administration trying to cut the baby in half? Is Brown still on the federal payroll? Is he still the head of FEMA? Is he still having a roll in FEMA at all?”
—James Joyner:”In other words, Brown has been fired….Such are the hazards of public life. One presumes Brown has put in incredibly hard hours and done his best here. Clearly, he wasn’t particularly well trained for the position; it’s not knowable whether someone with better credentials could have done any better, though.”
—TalkLeft’s Katrina:”CNN itself says he’s history: “He wasn’t the right guy for the job.” Bob Franken reports he’s not out; just moved back to Washington. Congress wants his head. The White House wants him to prepare for other disasters. (Typical!) Coast Guard Vice Admiral Thad Allen takes over…”Brownie, you’re doin’ a heck of a job.” And so it goes.”
—Dave Pell:”Michael Brown, who was doing a great job according to W’s comments, has been sent back to Washington where he hopefully will do less harm to the Katrina efforts. So much for Brownie points.”
—Begging To Differ:”He’s leaving for Washington, but the official word is that he’s going where the need is greater: “The department said Brown was returning to Washington to manage FEMA’s national operations because it is still hurricane season.” Even if Chertoff can’t admit Brown’s incompetence, I’m glad to see that Brown’s been taken out of the mix.”
—Jeff Goldstein:”Revelations over “discrepencies” in Brown’s resume likely gave Bush an excuse to remove the beleagured head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency from national firestorm.”
—Wizbang’s Paul:”I’ve been so annoyed with this guy I didn’t even bother learn his name… For the last few days I’ve simply called him “The FEMA Idiot.” I said a few days ago that if Bush did not replace him I’d lose 25% of my respect for Bush instantly. Apparently Bush didn’t want that to happen…”
—Demagogue:”Seriously, though, why do they call it “relieved ” when the man was clearly fired? Then again, he probably is feeling pretty relieved right now.”
—Right Thinking:
This is excellent news. Of course, the fact that it took a week is pretty disheartening, but still. I’d rather have a president who gets it right eventually than one who doesn’t get it right at all. Now, it remains to be seen whether the president will repudiate his statement about Brownie doing a heck of a job. I’m not going to hold my breath on that one.
Oh, and for you staunch Bush-loving holdouts who still think that Brown is such a fantastic candidate for the job, it looks like Brown’s resume, which was pretty pathetic to begin with, was only at the level it was because he lied his ass off on it. This is the reason Brown is being fired, make no mistake.
—John Cole:”I don’t know what practical effect, if any, this will have on the relief efforts, but it will ease some of the political tensions.”
—Bull Moose:
The Moose urges all Americans to buy bottled water this weekend. There was good news and bad news from the Chertoff press conference about FEMA Director Brown. The good news for residents of the Gulf Coast is that Brown will no longer handle Katrina recovery. The bad news is that Brown is coming back to Washington to take charge of overall national disaster planning….What were Rove and Co. thinking? Why was Brown not fired outright? What does Brown know?
Which, um, is like being fired, but not firing him because that would mean Bush was wrong for praising Brown and would be akin to admitting a mistake (which our infallible president never does).
Or something like that. Of course, the cynic would argue that Brown never did his job to begin with. And it would be quite a convincing argument. And a reminder — Bush appointed this guy without vetting him (he lied on his resume) because he was friends with his 2000 campaign manager. And Joe Lieberman, who controlled the committee first vetting Brown, gave the nominee high praise and pushed him through after less than an hour of questioning.
—Charging Rhino:”ABC News says “informed sources” tell them Brown will also step down as FEMA head, which makes sense considering this newest turn of events. Possibly the smartest Administration move since the hurricane, except that it should have come much sooner.”
—Jeff Jarvis:”Oddly, it doesn’t seem he’s being relieved of his job. That’s as decisive as the White House is these days: half-acts…. I was waiting for Andrew Sullivan to dance a victory jig. I’m dancing, too. But Brown is still in charge of keeping the rest of us safe. And that doesn’t make me feel safe at all.”
—Andrew Sullivan (who launched a major campaign to get bloggers to go on the record to demand Brown be fired):
Brown has gone. But he wasn’t quite “fired.” He was “reassigned.” ….Still: great news. Thanks to everyone in the blogosphere who helped raise the cry for someone competent to run the federal response to a catastrophe. You helped keep the pressure up. And it worked.
—Michelle Malkin (who early on demanded Brown be fired):
Question #1: Does this make President Bush a member of the “bed-wetting right,” too? Answer: No. It makes him someone who has put accountability over cronyism in a time of crisis. Good for him.
Question #2: While the president is getting rid of dead wood, can he do something about Norman Mineta now?
—Q&O:”I wonder what effect this will have on the baying of the wolves. Increase or diminish it?…Maybe sharks is a better analogy. With blood in the political water, will this turn into more of a feeding frenzy than it already is?”
UPDATE: To futher underline the fact that criticism of the White House is NOT just a “blame game” coming from Democrats and pesky independents, watch THIS VIDEO CLIP HERE of Ret. Lt. Col. Ralph Peters blasting GWB.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.