There may be some interesting things that will happen that will benefit no one. Mickey Kaus suggests that states are obsolete and the US should be split into larger regional zones. His assertion is that those zones would be more responsive than the federal. Kinda true, if those zones responsibilities replace the federal they will be more responsive. This is because they will be smaller. Since his main argument is that federalism and local government are dead I can safely say he is one confused guy.

The state of Lousiana had enough resources to deal with it's disaster all by itself. It is great and good that folks and countries - far and wide, public and private - are helping out. Many of them have proved far more efficient and proficient with applying aid than the local leaders. More power to them. I point this out just to say that nationalising disaster relief is the worst way to go. Locals know the locality. National organizations like the Red Cross and the Salvos are driven by their local chapters. Federalization of government disaster relief will just move the blame higher up the ladder. Governors won't be allowed to screw up because they won't be involved but a bad head of the federal agency will mean screw ups accross the country until he is replaced.

Nationalising disaster loses local knowledge and limits accountability ("I handled 2 out of 3 disasters!"). FEMA has been much maligned but they aren't responders, they are just consulttants. Even if you think they did a good job the absolute wrong thing to do is to give them an army which will cause all the others, good and bad, to disband.