1. I suspect the reason that local government was unable to take control of the fate of the levees is that the fed has jurisdiction over waterways in the US. Even if they wanted to (which is certainly in question), I’m not sure that N.O. could affect the state of the levees.

2. The problem with reliance on the nanny state goes far beyond your summary. Federal or local makes no real difference in this case. Some people didn’t evacuate before the storm because they were waiting for the government to provide them with a means of evacuation. People didn’t stockpile food, water, and basic survival goods because they expected the government to take care of them after the hurricane. There is a segment of our population that has come to believe that their individual lives are worth more to the government than to themselves.

The trouble Mayor Negin is having with the National Guard is a good example of this. He keeps asking them to forcibly evacuate the city, and they keep saying they don’t take orders from the mayor (yes, I know they take orders from the Governor, so that’s not quite a “national organization”).

The model that seems to work OK in most disasters (although it may be distasteful) is for the feds to provide money and clean-up. The locals usually handle the rest (vis. New York). In this particular disaster the local/state machinery was apparently destroyed in the flooding (and many police quit), so they didn’t take care of what they normally do. The feds operate on a timeline where it’s fine to be late, because they’re usually just rebuilding houses, not stopping armed looters.

I like your solution to the problem. When we need money, the government usually finds a way to get it there (again, whether this is distasteful is another issue), but if we need people, perhaps we should make it easier for people to select themselves and volunteer. In a country of 300 million people I’m sure we have enough potential volunteers near any potential disaster site. Why not mobilize and use them?