Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
Got to disagree with you here. I have kept saying, and no one has ever been able to show me that I am wrong, that the Feds were responsible for the levees. The levees broke so the Feds are responsible for the damage. If someone's house is under water the Feds have to cough up for it.
Am I missing something? Why am I wrong?
|
1) Soveriegn immunity/Fed. Tort Claims limit
2) Practical limits . . .
If your proposition is correct, any time any person suffered a loss of property that could have been prevented through more/greater/better government action, they would have a taking claim.
Your proposition is doubly dubious given that the levees were not designed to withstand a storm of this strength. So you don't have what in the tort world might be a product liability claim that the levees didn't do as promised. They did, but they never promised to stop everything.
So, I don't know if it counts as showing you that you are wrong, but many articles, including some I'm sure in the Economist, will explain that (construction defects aside) the levees were not designed to stop Katrina. And they didn't.
