The phrase “everything is political” is not an exaggeration; something as non-political sounding as a natural disaster can take a political twist.
Natural disasters, such as hurricanes, earthquakes and so on, can play a role in affecting the reputation of a politician. A key function that the government should be responsible for is protecting its citizens. After all, what is a government without any citizens to govern?
A quick, effective response to a natural disaster will make an individual politician or political party look better to the rest of the world. On the other hand, slow and ineffective measures employed by the government to help citizens will serve the opposite effect. People want to see their elected politician roll up the sleeves, get muddy and play a physical role in disaster relief efforts.
How involved should the government be? That’s a question for a different day, as this article will be focusing on the amount of good or damage a natural disaster can bring upon a politician or party.
A natural disaster is only a disaster when human beings are involved. A category three hurricane decimating communities on the coast of a given country will be more disastrous than a category five hurricane sweeping over an unpopulated area. More political attention will be given to large population centers. However, leaving small communities out to dry isn’t the best way to get reelected. Hard decisions have to be made in these scenarios.
For an example of how devastating a natural disaster can be to a politician, look no further than former president George W. Bush. Hurricane Katrina raged through New Orleans and other communities throughout Louisiana. Katrina was one of the deadliest and most expensive storms to ever hit the U.S. To be fair to Bush, there was no way the government could prevent Katrina from slamming Louisiana and causing a ton of damage, but government response to the aftermath was a major concern.
According to The Washington Post, “Katrinagate” was a runner-up candidate for linguists’ 2005 word of the year due to slow response time and mismanagement at the local, state and federal levels of government. Katrina is now used as a figure of speech by politicians when describing the biggest crisis of their time in office. Michigan Governor Rick Snyder used Katrina in reference to Flint’s water crisis in 2016. Bush’s tenure in office will be forever blemished by the government’s inability to effectively help. However, since Katrina occurred in Bush’s second term, he didn’t have to worry about getting re-elected. Would Bush have been re-elected if he could’ve run again? With the response to Katrina, among other factors, I would say its doubtful.
There are other examples of damage done to political careers due to government incompetence in dealing with natural disasters. Former New York Mayor John Lindsay rode in a limo through New York City streets that were covered in 20 inches of snow; a downpour of snow that the city was ill-equipped to deal with. Lindsay did not win the Republican Primary for re-election, per The Washington Post. His detachment from the people of New York City likely wasn’t the only cause in his defeat, but it surely helped.
Even the aforementioned Flint water crisis has done damage to some politicians. Government response to Flint was so bad that private individuals like Elon Musk had to step in and donate money to help the town.
Natural disasters are no joke and they can’t be prevented. All we can do as humans is prepare the best we can. Politicians don’t normally campaign off of this, and judging them based solely off of the damage done by something like a hurricane is unfair. But it is how the politicians handle such cases that make or break their careers.
