[StBernard] how much are we worth saving

[Westley Annis]

  From the media articles regarding the $5.23 BILLION in additional levee
construction costs (some are citing it as $6 BILLION) --

Improvements in East New Orleans would cost $.710 billion  or 13% of the
additional money

St.Bernard-Lower 9th Ward = $1.0 billion.  or  19% of the additional money

East Jefferson-St. Charles = $.386 billion   or   7% of the additional 
money

West Jefferson = $.657 billion      or              13% of the 
additional money

Algiers- Belle Chase = $.290 billion  or          6% of the addtional 
money
********************************The above protects 99 percent of the
population for 45% of the  additional costs.

Plaquemines=$2.9 billion or   56% of the additional money

"One would clearly understand by looking at the chart that for roughly
$2.5
to $3 billion, you would encompass about 99 percent of the population," 
is what Powell
said during a conference call.

So here's what I'm thinking. The feds are doing calculations for
costs/benefits. Using population, Plaquemines would be a sacrificial lamb. I
don't know the population of N.O East, St. Bernard,nor St. Bernard combined
with the Lower 9th ward. I don't know if they use pre or post Katrina, but
based on either population, St. Bernard by itself with a pre Katrina
population of 67,000 would be another sacrificial lamb, EXCEPT-----and it's
a big one----IF THE FEDS SEE A NATIONAL INTEREST TO PROTECT CHALMETTE
REFINING AND MURPHY OIL PLANTS.

So our fate when it comes to whether or not St. Bernard is expendable has to
ride on the nation's dependency on the production of these two refineries. I
doubt they care about sugar refinining, damage to the national parks, or the
Port of St. Bernard, etc.

  Now if they determine that any parish or portion thereof is expendable,
i.e. not worth protecting, then does the federal govt. have to give
restitution, and if so, what is that cost?
Just based on the two refineries, what does it cost if the feds had to pay
their relocation costs?  I haven't built a refinery so I don't know, but if
we can send BILLIONS of "free"
money to countries all over the world for humanitarian purposes (and
sometimes it's people who hate American) and who knows what other causes,
why can't we find the money for U.S. citizens on U.S. soil? I doubt the GAO
does a cost benefit analysis on giving money to foreign countries based on
anything, let alone population. We save snails, birds, and fish based on the
responsible thing to do, but for flood protection, it's going to be
cost/benefits?

ddk