GovernmentExecutive.com

While saying he was not interested in "second guessing" or playing the "blame game," President Bush Monday promised an ongoing assessment of the federal role in the response to Hurricane Katrina, and urged Congress to look at whether laws and regulations governing the federal government's relationship with states and localities should be changed.

Asked whether existing policies hampered federal officials from acting more quickly to take control of the situation on the ground in New Orleans, Bush said, "That's one of the interesting issues that Congress needs to take a look at. It's really important that we take a step back and learn lessons. We need to learn everything we possibly can."

"I think there'll be plenty of time to examine particularly the structure between various government levels," Bush said at a news conference in New Orleans.

The president said he would defer to local officials in crafting a long-term plan to rebuild New Orleans. "I think the best policy is one where the federal government doesn't come in and say, 'This is what your city will look like,' " he said.

Bush said initial response efforts were hindered by a "sense of relaxation" on Aug. 29, when the storm hit, due to the belief that New Orleans had "dodged a bullet" because the storm had changed course just before making landfall. Bush said that at the time, he believed the city had been spared major damage "because I was listening to people, probably over the airwaves."

Bush defended the scope of the military response to storm-ravaged region, saying "it is preposterous to claim that the engagement in Iraq meant there wasn't enough troops here."

The president denied there was any racial element to the response, saying, "The storm didn't discriminate and neither will the recovery effort."

COMMENTS

• I'll try this again r-e-a-l s-l-o-w in short words so you can get what I'm saying. I have no problem with you saying what you want. I served a career in the armed forces so you could. I want all elected people to account for their decisions. It just makes me laugh when I see Bush blamed for being too slow after Katrina and too fast after Rita. For being blamed because he backs an investigation on FEMA response and then because he doesn't let his publicly-professed enemies name the members of that panel. It's comical. I found the same faults with those that couldn't find a thing good to say about Clinton, Bush 1 and Reagan. That is politics, and you totally partisan people make me laugh. Thank you. Skeptical Posted September 29, 2005 1:41 PM
• The Bush Backing Brain-Dead never change. They cry over poor Bushie being "attacked" for his failures. The same people who probably never shut up when it came to criticizing Clinton. It's called ACCOUNTABILITY, being held RESPONSIBLE. Go ahead, I'll wait until you grab a dictionary...... GovExec.com reader Posted September 28, 2005 1:10 PM
• Alfredo (love your nick), I far prefer the current President over either of the individuals that ran against him (were they really the best the DNC had?), but I don't find him faultless. For example, I think he's shown himself to be a better Democrat than many with his uncontrolled spending initiatives. But my question remains - I have not seen a single point of view that he took that has not generated biting vitriol by his detractors. An example would be the recent "Peace Demonstration" headed by Cindy Sheehan, Jesse Jackson, Joan Baez, et al. The only thing I heard that was common amongst the speakers was a hatred of all things Bush. I find it somewhat comical that the response is so predictable. But then I'm ... Skeptical Posted September 28, 2005 8:35 AM