A drought out West. Flooding down South. Tornadoes raging through the Midwest, and sinkholes. Everywhere.
ITS. A. DISASTER. or more accurately a series of disasters.
As storms and other natural disasters ravage their way across the United States, many families are left in the wake of destruction. Many of us can turn a blind eye, considering we are not the ones being affected here in central Pennsylvania. However, what if it was you? What if it was your family, left with nothing, rebuilding your life from the debris of a town you once knew?
Hearing news of destruction, many questions may arise: Was my family affected? How bad was it? What can we do to help? Initially, many of these communities may face an abundance of assistance. We can expect the American Red Cross to rush in and take care of business. The American Red Cross claims that they respond to an emergency every eight minutes.
However, who is there to help long after initial relief efforts? Who is supporting these families when volunteers and funding run out? Should the government be stepping in to get these families back on their feet?
Many of us remember the drought in California that began six years ago. The Public Policy Institute of California reported that Fall 2011 to Fall 2015 was the driest in the state since 1895. Katherine Mieszkowski, reporter for Reveal News, described the effects the drought: farmers lost millions of dollars and the state lost thousands of agricultural jobs. Fruit and vegetable prices rose significantly across the United States, fish evacuated the area, and wildfires began to rage. Twenty million residents had been suffering for more than four years.
But what kind of assistance did California face? Were they left to rely on volunteer organizations until their funds dried up? or did the government step in to help?
In March of 2014, two years after the drought began but only months after it was officially declared, California governor Jerry Brown signed drought legislation relief for $687 million. Just a month earlier, in February of 2014, President Barack Obama promised $183 million to California for drought relief.
This may sound like a large sum of money, but divided evenly among 200 million residents, allocates less than five dollars per person.
Are we doing enough to help those in need? Some may question whether or not we can do more considering the large number of disasters that have hit the United State in recent months. We can't just throw money around to every disaster zone, yet there has to be a way to help.
Rather than monetary relief, some have turned to the environment for answers. Some Californians had suggested turning to water that was already available, in the ground. Yet, Park Williams, climate scientist and as assistant professor at Columbia University, labeled this solution as a major issue. He claimed that by taking the "very valuable resource" of water out of the ground, essentially, "we're stealing from the future." In California, groundwater was originally treated as a local issue. Yet, as conditions decline, things have changed.
Michael Dettinger, U.S. Geological Survey hydrologist and researcher at the University of California, added that state lawmakers are now making laws on the management and monitoring of ground water. Additionally, Governor Brown introduced a series of executive orders to help the state deal with this drought.
However, it is important for us, as Americans, to consider when it is appropriate to step in. Is it the government's responsibility to control the water that belongs the those who own the land? In normal conditions maybe not, but what about in the midst of a disaster?
If the government can step in to regulate the water, though, what else can they do to help? Should they being doing more? That is a question for Californians and Americans alike to consider.
Thankfully, California has recovered, for now. Periods of drought are inevitable in the state of California due to their climate, but we can appreciate the return to prosperity, until next time.
As the global climate continues to become more polarized, Americans may have to reconsider the role of the government in the midst of a disaster. We may have to redefine what we consider a disaster to be. The government's role in disaster aid is not clearly defined, but as we race down the rabbit hole of climate change, this is a discussion Americans must face, and soon.
ITS. A. DISASTER. or more accurately a series of disasters.
As storms and other natural disasters ravage their way across the United States, many families are left in the wake of destruction. Many of us can turn a blind eye, considering we are not the ones being affected here in central Pennsylvania. However, what if it was you? What if it was your family, left with nothing, rebuilding your life from the debris of a town you once knew?
Hearing news of destruction, many questions may arise: Was my family affected? How bad was it? What can we do to help? Initially, many of these communities may face an abundance of assistance. We can expect the American Red Cross to rush in and take care of business. The American Red Cross claims that they respond to an emergency every eight minutes.
 |
| American Red Cross Disaster Relief |
Many of us remember the drought in California that began six years ago. The Public Policy Institute of California reported that Fall 2011 to Fall 2015 was the driest in the state since 1895. Katherine Mieszkowski, reporter for Reveal News, described the effects the drought: farmers lost millions of dollars and the state lost thousands of agricultural jobs. Fruit and vegetable prices rose significantly across the United States, fish evacuated the area, and wildfires began to rage. Twenty million residents had been suffering for more than four years.
But what kind of assistance did California face? Were they left to rely on volunteer organizations until their funds dried up? or did the government step in to help?
In March of 2014, two years after the drought began but only months after it was officially declared, California governor Jerry Brown signed drought legislation relief for $687 million. Just a month earlier, in February of 2014, President Barack Obama promised $183 million to California for drought relief.
This may sound like a large sum of money, but divided evenly among 200 million residents, allocates less than five dollars per person.
Are we doing enough to help those in need? Some may question whether or not we can do more considering the large number of disasters that have hit the United State in recent months. We can't just throw money around to every disaster zone, yet there has to be a way to help.
Rather than monetary relief, some have turned to the environment for answers. Some Californians had suggested turning to water that was already available, in the ground. Yet, Park Williams, climate scientist and as assistant professor at Columbia University, labeled this solution as a major issue. He claimed that by taking the "very valuable resource" of water out of the ground, essentially, "we're stealing from the future." In California, groundwater was originally treated as a local issue. Yet, as conditions decline, things have changed.
Michael Dettinger, U.S. Geological Survey hydrologist and researcher at the University of California, added that state lawmakers are now making laws on the management and monitoring of ground water. Additionally, Governor Brown introduced a series of executive orders to help the state deal with this drought.
However, it is important for us, as Americans, to consider when it is appropriate to step in. Is it the government's responsibility to control the water that belongs the those who own the land? In normal conditions maybe not, but what about in the midst of a disaster?
If the government can step in to regulate the water, though, what else can they do to help? Should they being doing more? That is a question for Californians and Americans alike to consider.
Thankfully, California has recovered, for now. Periods of drought are inevitable in the state of California due to their climate, but we can appreciate the return to prosperity, until next time.
 |
| During Drought - ABC News |
 |
| Today - ABC News |
I like your format and colors, very aesthetically appealing. A family friend living in California shared all the struggles and consequences that came from the drought which were devastating. The main part of the problem seems to be that people have sympathy but not so much empathy which is disappointing and concerning. A lot of people feel bad but since it didn't happen to them they kind of brush it off.
ReplyDeleteI think this is such a great topic. There definitely is an influx of aid during the week after a major natural disaster, but after that, it seems to be forgotten. The news stops talking about it and most of America just moves on with their lives. The California drought is an interesting example to bring up because there was no influx of aid. This comes from how it was seen. As someone from who was born and raised on the east coast, I have no concept of a drought. I obviously know what one is, but cannot grasp the severity of the one in California. I have relatives in California, however, and they filled me in on just how bad it was. I think that in the case of the drought, the government should have stepped in.
ReplyDeleteI really like the approach you take in this blog. First of all I really like how you recognize the fact that after the initial flood of relief organizations and volunteers clears out, the victims are left to deal with the consequences all on their own. I think this is very relatable to other circumstances as well. For example when someone passes away there is a flood of support and help offered to the grieving, but after the funeral or service is over everyone goes home and the family is left all alone to deal with the harsh realities. I also really like how you talk about government in this piece. Many Americans don't like it when the government gets too involved in their lives, however, it is often necessary, in times like these, for the government to regulate the water supply for our future as a nation.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed the tone of your blog. It was very conversational, yet really informing. I also really like the layout of your blog. Everything really ties in nicely together. Your rhetorical questions are also really intriguing and got me thinking while reading the post. You're so right, though. Whenever I hear of a natural disaster occurring in the United States, I thought that the state or national government would be there to help those who are affected no matter what, even if it took a lot of time and effort. However, when you said "This may sound like a large sum of money, but divided evenly among 200 million residents, allocates less than five dollars per person.", I was extremely surprised at how little each individual gets when trying to recover from a natural disaster. I feel like these individuals deserve more aid and help because like you asked in your blog, what if it was you and your family who has been affected by a natural disaster - something no one can even control? I really liked how your post got me thinking.
ReplyDeleteI love how you included the reality of climate change and the dire need to take action in order to save our planet and our people from its grave effects. I find it frightening to think that if the natural disasters we are experiencing in our world now are this bad, how on earth will future generations deal with the increasing disasters to come? With the constant climate change due to humanity polluting the natural environment, how will those who come after us manage with all of the struggles that will result if we do not take action to save our planet today?
ReplyDeleteI really enjoy the way you use questions to prompt readers to consider possible solutions and weigh each option. It actually reminds me a bit of what we’re talking about in class with deliberation! Either way, you definitely had me engaged and thinking. I can also relate to your choice to use the drought in California as an example. Although not nearly as grave as wildfires and agriculture losses, when my family and I visited Yosemite NP during this period, the park's waterfalls were nothing more than a trickle! It just goes to show how these disasters have such extensive ripple effects and are so relevant to every one of us.
ReplyDeleteHi Lucy! I think you bring up some really good points about the government's role in providing funding in terms of people affected by natural disasters. I found your fact about Obama's $183 million legislation to California for drought relief was extremely interesting. I assumed that that was a large sum of money, but when you broke it down to being less than five dollars a day per person out of 200 million resident, I was shocked. These people need support and the methods in doing so are so difficult to find. Do you think areas of government funding do you think could be subsided in order to use more money towards disaster relief? Great blog post!
ReplyDelete