Imminent Risk
This San Francisco Chronicle article details how Governor Schwarzenegger has declared a state of emergency to speed repairs of levees in California. In this post I’m not so concerned with the accusations that this is a way to sidestep environmental requirements during the repair process. Rather, I’m interested in the following quote emphasis mine:
Previously, the corps of engineers in Sacramento has said that it doesn’t declare an emergency to speed deferred maintenance. Emergencies are called to “prevent or reduce imminent risk of life, health, property or severe economic loss.”
The question is when to declare an emergency over infrastructure, or more broadly, long-term concerns. In the short-term-focused world of politics, it’s quite natural to defer and defer and defer decisions, especially ones which carry political heat. Yet at some point these issues must be dealt with. And the above quote reveals quite clearly how the government would deal with most problems.
Perhaps it would be helpful to more clearly define “emergency”—obviously “severe economic loss” can occur over a period of time, not just from a flood or fire. California is in a unique position because it needs to discover a new cash cow to drive its economy. Silicon Valley has been a reliable economic powerhouse over the years, but at some point national and international competition, and the high costs associated with the Bay Area, will drive business to more profitable locales. But to comprehend this takes long-term vision.
If you see an economically bumpy road far in the future, does it constitute an emergency? Not according to the above criteria, but it’s worth thinking about. Once again, it’s all about time-scales.