tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN August 27, 2015 3:00pm-5:01pm EDT
the supply channel start immediately after this panel so we don't have movement back and forth between rooms while the supply chain people see the partnership otherwise known as c-fat will happen after the drone panel. we are doing that because we want there to be adequate time for this panel which we are delighted with. i want to thank the colonel for being the injury behind putting this panel together because we thought about the panel. thanks to your persistance we have a topic that is interesting. people look out to see the geese and i am fine with them. but like this can be a different issue. we are delighted to start this
panel. i want to make one more reminder to you which is our cocktail reception will follow after the panel and if you have not had a chance to mix and mingle hopefully some of the faculty will stay. we have in access of 80 faculty so hopefully some of them will stay and cards can be exchanged if you are in private practice or government. to that end, we are always learni learning. we are a professor from duke university, the dreblther of center on law ethics -- director -- and charlie dunlap is a professor of the practice of law at duke university school of law as well. before his retirement from the
airforce he had authority supervising 2500 military lawyers worldwide and held numerous duties around the world. he is a grnaduate of the nationl war college. >> he is a legend in this field. >> and let me end by saying charlie as a speaker in many places and written. >> joe, thank you and the rest of the team for putting together one of the premier conferences not only that you put on but anywhere. i think the great thing about conferences like this is, of course, the information that is conveyed but the ability to see old friends and make new ones. and so just to be a good guest i will be at the cocktail
reception and try to sample all of the free cocktail which very good. in all seriousness that is an important part of the event. don has put together a panel together here with myself excluded. it is an honor. i am not going to go through their bios in a lot of detail. i will give you their title so you can orient yourself toward what is in the material. we have a general here who is president and ceo of resilient solutions limited. we have jay stanley from senior policy analyst from the aclu speech privacy and technology project. and of course we have don, but scott click, who is senior counselor and acting director of the prepared response in the
national security division in the department of justice. let me focus on something hard here. we have government officials on our panel. they are not speaking for the government. they are speaking for themselves. fred is not speaking for any government entity or neither am i. jay is speaking for the government. there is a lot of unmanned systems, drones if you want to call them. drone is a bad word for industry as well as the military, i think, because it implies things that are not true about the
technology. and there is lots in the military, lots of different classes of unmanned airnautical systems and in the civilian world as well. we will focus on the little uas's and we will have a show and tell here before meaning it will not be quite in here. if it was it was unbriefed. we will not talk about armed drones overseas. we will talk about the challenge we have here -- had so much focus on privacy. it is a complex problem and since diving in i am surprised at things that are not regulated and i think it is the question of the technology, or the administration meaning the
administration of the regulation has not caught up with the technology. there is lots of unanswered questions and so what we are going to do is we are going to have a conversation here. let me ask a few questions. it will go back and forth and then open it up for your questions. i think this is one subject where i think it is important and it will help us if you ask questions because as we are all developing our thinking on this subject we really need to know what practitioners, scholars and so forth are thinking about awht they are concerned about. i found what i as a scholar -- don't laugh, don, that is my title now -- that i think are important but may not be shared by others. let's start out by talking about the general question. it seemed to me every time i
looked into the newspaper i hear a press report there is something about these little drones. sometimes they are good things. but sometimes not so good. i would like to ask what you see is the potential threat these small systems present to our safety and security, if anything. >> i will take that one. on this being a pilot with 4,000 flying hours over 22 different types and last job in the air force was chief and responsible for safety i would say the threat now and i will quote major briggs who said this is not an emerging threat. this threat is here and it is here today. it is here for a couple reasons. the threat, i think, you talk about that your question is
about is sort of divided into two parts. we have the threat if you are a passenger on an airline, these little guys can occupy the same airspace easily. if you look an youtube, you will see video of this one up at about 4,000 feet over the freeways of california. well-won -- well within the boundaries. you say it looks like it is made of plastic. what will that do? this has a battery inside it and it has warnings and things that lawyers just love to have on these explosive, capable types of batteries. if that were to strike an
airplane or go down an engine they are a threat. they are not being flown by people with a desire to do ill harm. they are on the ground while those in the airplane are at risk. they are done by people who have been made empowered, if you will, to operate this because they are so easy and simple to operate. i can take any of you out and you can fly it like an expert in less than five minutes to be frank. easy to operate, inexpensive, anybody can get it, and you don't have to pass a test or be licensed to fly it. you have a threat with this new technological capability that the law is not keeping pace with that is able to fly. on the other end of the spectrum, you have the more
capable crowd with a determined purpose that could use this for ill purposes. i like to say it is a revolution in aviation because it gives the aspects of the air force to an individual. only nation states used to own that capability; to do intelligence mobility and connective strike even. but now you can purchase one and you can have any of those capabilities from this. certainly you could have those capabilities. that has been shown in maryland there is an example of a small drone like this trying to deliver drugs and money into the cumberland prison. that happened on two other occasions. one in georgia and one in south carolina. it was drugs, cellphone, and money. small things they could carry.
there is your moability -- apple had a drone flying over the building and whoever was flying over there got the information on organizing the building through the drone. if you are overseas you probably heard last october about the flights over the nuclear power plants in france and in japan with the landing of the dji-fanning on the prime minister's house with a minuscule part of radioactivity in it just to send a message. >> before we get too much further one of the things that surprise me -- what is the threshold for the faa regulating these devices? >> right now there are two
aspects. number one, you can operate it commercially if you go go through the section 333 exemption purpose. >> what about being a hob hobby? >> the guidelines are light. they are avoid airports by five miles, 400 feet, and line of sight. but if you look at the actual regulations out there for a hobbyist you will find that line of sight is about the only one that really applies. you don't have to wait for a response but the guideline is to inform the airport you are there. you have to abide by the restricted air space. you cannot fly within 15
nautical miles of ronald reagan airport. but i doubt when you order your fanning online and get it shipped those instructions are on there. >> is there a size or weight on that sets up the limitations here? >> you talking 55 pounds or less and to tag on to what fred was talking about the regulation he is talking about is the faa advisory 91-57 in case anyone wants to look it up. it is not easy to find but you will eventually find it. you right. the biggest thing jumping out is using your good judgment. when you are talking about model aircraft and that is what we are talking about and not commercial flights because that is a notice for public rulemaking and we can tog about that shortly. it is really use good judgment. in the event you violate good judgment tenants, good airman
ship, you are looking at civil fines and penalties. i know, scott, you are going to talk about other laws that might apply but from the faa perspective that is what is out there. >> before we get into more of the laws what about, i mean it is pretty obvious to me there is privacy and privacy issue here that is raised by these small drones that anybody can operate. jay, do you have any thoughts on that? >> thank you. so, i think that the aclu and the civil liberties concerns around drones fall into two buckets. number one spying. and number two is the first amendment and the right to photography. so our big focus is putting rules in place to insure draion
used by local agencies are not a tool for mass surveillance. we don't have issues with swat raids or lost child or so forth. but we are concerned that national security agencies and especially local police departments will use them for mass surveillance. and individuals will use them for privacy invasions. we haven't called for regulations in that area because it is complicated. it is unclear what extent we will see which is like the kid flyling it down the block. peeping tom rules and harassment and trespassing rules. it is not clear much current laws will cover the things we will see as regular problems
when it comes to individuals engaging in privacy invasion. there is going to be a lot of innovation and we don't want to step on that but first amendment issues. we, the aclu, have had numerous law suits with police officers and people interfering with their right to tape situations. sir, you need to put that camera away is frequently heard. people harassed, arrested or worse for photography and we have won every lawsuit we have filled. the courts have pretty much found a first amendment right to photography. so that cuts in complicated ways against the privacy concerns here you can easily see.
i think we will see a clash before the national security establishment and agencies which have very genuine concerns and another thing that is powerful is industry. we tolerate huge carnage when railroads were new technologies and there was areas and crashes and mistakes. we tolerate huge carnage when it comes to automobiles. how much will we tolerate from drones in order to reap what the industry says is huge innovations, conveniences for all of us, really cool applications, how much will we tolerate? and in many ways, the civil liberties community doesn't have a dog in the fight. we respect there are real security problems and have been a lot of innovation and we like that. i guess the thing we keep an eye out for in that area is that security not be used as a
pre-text to prohibit people from using drones for photography by agencies that don't want to be subject to public scrutiny, by police forces that want to -- if they are dealing with a riot in a certain way and don't want to be subject to photography. the faa closed the air space for no reason other than to pro vent drones from flying over by news organizations. that is our interest. but we don't deny there are big security problems. we don't deny there are big benefits on the other side, too. >> let me ask you, steve, what just generally, what do you think about the regulation of the use of these things? and are there recourses in the law today or do we need to start from square run?
what are your thoughts on this? >> thank you. and thank you for allowing me to appear and saying anything i say is on my individual capacity and not with the department of justice. the regulatory framework is in two or three pieces at this point. you have the proposed regulation that has to do with commercial use that was mentioned. you have the faa and the 2012 mordernization act setting out a different frame for hobbyist and the other aspect is the faa has a number of regulations out there that apply generally to operating aircraft that we know are going to apply to uaf's. so for example, it is 14 cfr, 91.13, it is on your little thumb drive if you have picked that up for the conference. it is a regulation that prohibits the careless or
reckless operation of an aircraft and that applies to uaf's. there is a regulatory framework that applies to using the uaf's in a reckless way. >> and that is irrespective of the size. >> yes, irrespective of the size. as long as you meet the quality and elements. there are a number of statues that would appear into the space. some are specific to aircraft. if you are sketching an aircraft, you are violating section 796 and that is in the material. there are other ways of looking at existing statues with a creative application of a technology neutral lens. you could see how existing criminal statues and you can go into the that if we want how
those could relay or were thought to apply to a uaf circumstances if someone was operating the uaf in conflict with that. there is a legal framework. there may be gaps folks perceive but there is a legal framework that governs the unlawful use of a uaf. >> i am thinking outloud and we are talking about the legal and criminal ways you would confront improper use of the uaf but is industry looking at te technilogical prosecutitechnil e technilodtechnilodge solutions? >> yes, my company as a matter of fact. we write operation manuals and safety systems and help them through the faa triple a
exemption. we assist defense companies who do counter drones. so we help those who we like to fly and do something else for those why don't like. there are technologies. it is quite a challenge technology wise but there is a history of ground air defense that millitaries have and they have been able to take some of that technology and move it slightly in order to -- technologies -- in order to deal with this threat. it makes takes a multi approach. not one aspect is the silver bullet. but depending on the area you need to defend or protect it would involve a radar system, electronic surveillance, it would involve acoustic and long range optical cameras and a command and control system that will similate the data and tell
whoever is watching there is an issue and something approaching and then you have to determine the intent of that and it is gray area once you found it, cracked it, fixed it, what are you allowed to do engage it? probably depends on what you are defending. a national security asset like the president or nuclear instillation you would probably have one set. but overall we start to run into things scott was talking about. there is a law that you cannot shoot at an aircraft. and the faa said this is an aircraft when flown for the purpose of flight outside. if you shoot at a drone you can actually wind up in prison or fined. if a drone was hovering outside of your bedroom window with a
camera on it you could call the police not shoot it down? >> the lawyers question is -- >> let me jump in. what the reference is made for to folks who are interested. is title 18 u.s. section code 32 that deals with the destruction of aircraft. there is a state of mind of willfwill fillness. shoot it down should be looked at the with the statue. there are state statues that might govern or has a statue addressing peeping tom using
uaf. but it would violate section 32. >> self help is not suggested? >> anyone advising anyone planning to do that needs to be thinking about the statute. that statute had other applications week get into in terms of someone using a uaf to threaten an airplane. >> one thing that is asked is i don't have an answer is if you ground the aircraft with a net rather than destroying or harming it in any way >> i don't know the answer to the net. i don't know if they can damage or sue you for it. it is possible. talking about state law, it is relevant here. i want to touch for a second on that and where we are with state legislation. in the last three years, there
have been 380 separate bills to legislate drone use introduced. a lot were drafted with the assistance of the aclu and focused on government actors and privacy. so the majority of these proposals focus on government actors and prohibit for example, law enforcement, which is the primary interest/target of these bills and some that have passed actually into law, from using a drone for purposes of collecting information or evidence without a warrant. and then a lot of these bills carve out specific exceptions when it would be permissable. a number of the proposals don't include the consent exception which seems a little odd. the concern i had after looking
at the issue and the threat for lack of a bet term is that virtually none of these bills or laws address the top threat. so the focus has been on government actors and as we heard not so much on the private individual because frankly it is kind of -- i think as we heard, it is hard. it is a complex problem and how you address it. you have the surveillance privacy issue and the no kidding kinetic threat issue, right? because we talked about the threat here for a second and one thing you didn't mention fred is did anybody see the youtube video of the kid who created the drone and put guns on it and he is shooting things? i am seeing nods out there. that is relatively new but there has been a russian guy out there on youtube who hooked up machine guns to his drones and he is talking about look at the bad
guys over there. i don't think i know those guys. he flies it, he is watching them and in surveillance capability with the camera and shoots the dummies all apart. so none of these bills are addressing, some of them do, i don't want to say none because there have been 46 that passed and 28 in the last six months even. it is a significant issue that needs to be looked at. >> there is one or two states, i think oregon, that ban weaponization of drones and some have flat bans that only apply to the police so that would cover it. today there was news north dakota has passed a bill that
allows the police to use quote unquote non-lethal, which means less lethal, weapons on drones which has been a pretty strong agreement against any weapon weaponization of drones. i think that would help on both sides of the case. >> i think that would cover the north dakota law. if it is non-lethal and they use a drone to take it down. >> i can imagine some, josh, i think we have an idea for students who want to write a paper, the application of the
second amendment to an armed drone use for the supreme court court cases. keeping with this, and i am thinking industry has lot use for this information. all kinds of information can be gathered with the big drones. adding in big data to include -- i could see a commercial company saying we will keep track of your kid and equip the drone with facial recognition software. the kid is a minor so we will keep track and you don't have to tap into a cellphone and geolocate. any thoughts about that?
philosophically? legally? jason, i will spring it on you. >> like if you assign a drone to follow a kid to everywhere your kid goes? >> gives a new dimension to helicopter parent. >> i think they had that on the jetson's. >> that is the complicated issues about the privacy and there is a little bit here of not deciding cases that are not before us so -- >> i think jay and i agree this is another great topic for students out there to write their thesis paper on.
do you have any thoughts on this? >> this is an interesting area for a number of reasons. you can see the sample of the drones we are talking about and what is missing from this drone flying and what we have in the manned aircraft is a pilot who can look out and see what is going on. we have air traffic controllers that can spot the planes flying and move in different directions. i think technology has to catch up with where we are. to the extent it is developed we may see applications in rural areas but it is hard to imagine whether or not we will see drones following children in cities. and the tension that exist there is the tension between innovation and economic growth
versus safety and whether your drone has to have the capabilities and if they can sell it. >> i am going to take it in a wheel different direction. has anybody actually read the rules of public law making that just came out in february? one person? raise a finger? another hand? two people. i am a nerd. a -- this is a business. i have a business with drones that follows kids around.
>> it is designed to protect women when they go running. it can be seen from a smart device. >> so you are talking about the go-pro? >> it is a small uaf who follows a device or child who wears a device on their back and it circles them. >> there is a little mini drone apparently -- >> i was thinking something this big. this is a service. like uber or something. if the rules were passed as they were proposed it has to be visual line of place. you have to have the operator falloge oh owing the kid the whole time. it has very interesting
proposals. >> i thought i had the perfect idea since you have three boys. >> i am going to buy the hovering drone thing. >> at the same time, one of the things we haven't talked about and you wonder about civil liability and when i first saw the proposal for amazon delivering the disadvantage about being a lawyer is this. y you-look at that and everybody things this as a great idea and all i can see is a little kid seeing it land, sticking his hand up. what do you think about civil liability? jay said that in this country we do a lot of dangerous things. we have automobiles that kill 30,000 people a year and we
accept that but it would have been worse had it not been tr the civil liability revolution that forced the measures to be put in place for security. what dhaka -- do you think about the civil liabilities? good thing? bad thing? >> he is going off script for the record. i think there is a system where i can make a contribution and i think this may be one of those areas where we can decide eventually over time what is reasonable, what a reasonable person would do under those circumstances, what the expectation should be and i think it will come to some of the things you are talking about.
what kind of sensitive technologies, what sort of limitations there should be. i want to get quarks and a from the audience but i am thinking what should we be looking for in the future? do we need a comprehensive small drone or drone bill specialized or should we try to build off the existing regulations with a few tweaks being all we need? what does the panel think? >> let's look at it from the governmental point of view. >> i do think from a technology matter if playiregulations are put in place to slow it down, we are seeing drones bought and the world is supplied with stupid people that will do stupid
things and just drones that fair. a lot of birds are territorial i read and will attack drones. the more drones chris crossing the sky will be falling down and crashing and causing accidents. i cannot begin to imagine where this is going to go. but the legal system is going to have to balance it. we don't know the balance between innovation and safety or what have you. when it comes to privacy, we hold out that it may turn out to be necessary to pass laws to protect privacy if all kinds of mass privacy innovations turn out to not be covered by existing laws. the faa has stayed off of that.
but, yeah, others could probably answer better than me when it comes to what is best it the industry. >> i think the tension you raise between first amendment rights and privacy rights is interesting. and that will help us out. >> i think we are at a point in history where we were when we went from the horse and buggy to cars. we had rules that were great for horse and buggies and probably tried to apply them to cars when they firs t came on the trail and we are doing the same thing now. there is no dedicated law yet. we are using laws of aircraft to govern these. we are trying to make it but it is slow progress. the technology for these is moving ahead at moore's law doubling every two years. so the has to be some change and unfortunately the era of free flight of these is probably coming to an end to, you know,
the modelers out there, if you will. i believe eventually we will have to come to some form of licensing or registration. doesn't matter the age. but when you buy one it should be registered and licensed. there is a lot of anonymity while flying a drone right now. you are holding this which is like a flight deck here. we talk about the drone but this piece is important. when that drone is up there flying and that person is not at risk that is a mindset that person has to think what they do with that drone is going to be watched and they have to be accountable for what happens in this. in some cases i don't think we are there yet. >> the moral hazard hasn't been allocated. >> i am a little unsure of
predicting the future on this but the things you are seeing with the hobbyist is going to put pressure on congress to go back and revisit what was a fairly hands off approach to the hobbyist that was alluded to in the modernization act. so we might see work in that space. in terms of the threat the panel has been focusing on, the faa does have the authority with the secretary of defense under title 49, united states code section 401-03 sub-b sub-3 to issue r regulati regulations that have to do with the national security space so we may see things in that area. you talked about homeland security and the difficulty of
getting things through congress. there are 16 bills pending that mention uaf with none making significant progress but we may see enhancements to penalties to discourage some of the hobbyist use by increasing the penalties. i think we will see different movement in the regulatory space as well as different movement in the state and federal regulatory in this regard. >> one of the things i thought when joe was doing the introduction and you used to see birds outside of the plane and now we might see uaf. i know don and fred -- birds can do a lot of damage to an airplane. they can bring an airplane down. and i am wondering, and i hate to say this, whether we have to have a big disaster and then get
an urge to have a lot of regulations. what do you think about that, dawn, and what else were you going to cover? >> i would hate to think we would wait for something like that. we had a drone land on the white house lawn in january. there is a flurry of activity after that where people talked about how the hell is this possible? what do we do in response? and not shortly after that we had a gyro copter land on the capital line and that highlighted a number of problems including detection which no one saw it on the big radar as the air traffic controllers were looking out. just to kind of go back where we started with what the general said this threat isn't emerging. it is real. this is real. you know the fact that president merkal was standing on the stage, on a podium with dig
dignutarries and one flew up in her face. anybody seen that? one head nod. thank you. this threat is real and going back to the question about the kind of legislation we need and if it needs to be comprehensive. i would submit you do. i feel we need a comprehensive, federal legislative scheme on this topic that deals not only with the government but also with private individuals as well to a certain extent. and you know, because right now, and especially the counter uaf pieces, and where you sit determines where you stand obviously i am in the military and i would love to see, especially in the states, because you have this patchwork of different laws out there and
for a national guard member and i know we have one speaking on the last panel, this applies to the state level. people are not thinking about this. as a military member, i am saying if you are not thinking about this, this isn't in the legislation, this could hurt some of the big problems you are possibly training and exercises we need to do to perform or overseas mission. and we can talk about the laws of that and taking that into affect. there are other laws that need to be addressed including the federal trespassing law. it doesn't prohibit someone flying over a military base and looking. because it really applies to the
ground. if someone is defending the base and defends itself should the air force get sued? i think there should be something in the federal tort claims act about that. i think this needs to be looked ought all around. >> i think it is constitutional moment when it comes to the industry and the future may be determined by a single incident or accident or terrorist attack or what have you that happened soon. i think there is a lot of pressure for regulations. some of the proposals i have seen include making every drone no matter how small have a transponder so anybody can see
not only where any drones are in the area so that will help on the privacy front and who owns those drones and that could be a deterrent to certain bad behavior although it would prohibit anonymous photography. after the white house incident there were proposals, in fact the manufacture of the drone, building in geo fencing and taking a technology that is out there and putting the fencing into it so it can be controlled in a centralized way and that will raise hackles on you are allowing centralized control to technology and what about not being able to tinker with technology and we don't like regulations of technology. these are drones, aircraft, and we regulate cars because they are dangerous and doesn't it make sense to mandate aircraft. >> let's open it up to some
questions. yes, ma'am? would you mind coming up -- some of us our hearing is maybe not as good as it once was. it is sad that you may have to suggest the major incident before we get agreement on how to proceed. the things i have found interesting when we discussed is the difference of opinion as to whether or not the drone really could be used to take down a commercial aircraft and that is something that i have asked. i get answers that suggest people don't think it is possible because a drone flies in the way a helicopter flies and it would not be sucked into
the engine and it would bounce off the outer metal shelf. so i am just asking you what you think about that? >> thank you very much. these can be a danger to an airplane. it may not hit the airplane. but if i wanted to be a bad guy i would take a few of these and not just one, a few, and they only cost maybe $300, and you would put them up on a approach to a major runway, you pick it. and let the airplane fly to it. actually, depends on what i want to do. bring down the airplane or cause billions in damage in a day because what is the reaction of the airport authorities going to
be when all of those drones are sitting out on final approach? probably going to divert the planes to other different fields until they can use a counter system if they have one or find the operator of the particular drones and seize that activity. if you want to do a determined effort you have to think about what the bad guys do. bring down the airplane or send a message. >> or just interfere. you have probably seen in the paper quite frequently where drones are interfering with medical choppers. that has been pretty routine. more recently in california is the wild fires. everybody out there filming the fires couldn't get the
single-engine aircraft -- aircraft in to help drop it. we can parade a list of horrible ways you could do that. >> there is an assumption in the media if a 747 hits a hobbyist drone it would be catastrophic but people say it would not. it would take out the engine but that is not essential for the aircraft these days. >> i think fred might agree, and dawn, there has been pretty weird little things that brought down airplanes that you would not expect. this young lady here. >> i am going to reintroduce
myself. i live in harlem among the harlem river and we recently had a drone on the 26th floor fly into a neighbor's bedroom and the adjoining building for us is the new lead bus depot. we spotted the guy on the street doing it and shoed him away. what can i do if i see a drone outside of my window? can i shoot it? >> i think the agreement is pulling the shade is the option flight. but correct me if i am wrong, i think there are some peeping tom statutes and that is why i asked the question can we pull out our pistol -- >> his uncle is special forces.
you are just saying basically we cannot do anything but pull the shades? >> honestly, i have like six binders in my office of various statutes or proposed legislation and i cannot recall off hand if new york has actually passed a law and if they would have a provision that would prohibit that activity. i don't really know. >> ma'am, we are going to do a militia. >> i think part of the problem is let's say hypothetically you did shoot down the drone and are in the middle of the city where is it going to land? one thing we found in military operations is in urban areas is when the enemy is shooting at your planes a lot of their ammunition ends up landing back in the city and a lot of
collateral damage. the iraqis would shoot missile and i remember getting blamed for some and going to look at them and it would be an iraqi missile. >> some states have laws, like oregon, has a law making it unlawful for a person to make a photograph or fly or own aircraft without permission. there is peeping tom laws that might be technology neutral but states could apply. there are statutes that could govern this the question is if you are in a state or location with the statute and elements of the crime has been established in terms of the state of the mind of the actor and the other elements of the statute. >> if it were a government or police drone it would be a violation of the fourth amendment.
upper story window is reasonable privacy. >> if you see a drone and it is being operated where it is not supposed to be operated, means you have a sense of where it can be legal and can it isn't, certainly outside of your bedroom window is probably not the place for it to be flying, first thing i would do is everybody looks up when someone says drone. you should look down. there is a guy or somebody out there in the flight deck of this. it just happens to be on the ground. he is probably within a mile. >> you raised another super interesting question about whether or not somebody's typical homeowner policy would cover a drone operation even as a hobbyist. >> i don't know the answer to that. but i think that is a question people need to ask. it will be interesting to see
how the drone industry handles this. >> fred, any thoughts? >> and there is a third order of affect that probably wasn't intended but if you see this guy it is probably best to call law enforcement to deal with it because this guy is flying. he is in a flight deck. there is a statute against interfering with a flight crew as well. it hasn't been tested in the court but if you go down the ground you might be in violation of his or her. most belong to the ama and the only problem with insurance is it is based on data for those of you who deal with aviation
information know so they can establish risk and price it accordingly. right now, there is no data on this. none whatsoever. 700,000 are going to be sold this year and if you crash it a certain percentage are wasted within a few day and there is no place to record that. the industry doesn't have the idea of the risk level of this. if someone wants to get an insurance policy on this that policy is going to cost two or three times what the cost of this actually is so guess what their decision is going to be when it comes to seeking it. >> another great paper for a law student. >> sir? >> we are on the general. i think the industry is going to
have to do heavy lifting. i used to do work before joining the government. fail safe is a critical thing. if you are going to send a product, particularly if it looks like the economics is to try to get the last mile to deliver things to people, you will have to be able to have it fail safely as it can which means over engineered and a lot more expensive than $300. same thing with automobile. cars are more money but safer than they were in 1964. there is something where the industry in its own interest starts thinking about how to design these things with geo fencing built in. ...
you were talking about before with any drone. there are some companies out there now german company, you can't shoot out of the sky, we disconnect the wireless network that the camera won't work. if you see a drone coming toward you, one is called cyborg unplugged. there are many of them. if you to ahead clearly taking into account you don't want the drone falling out of sky.
they don't fall out of the sky. they stablize if the pilot is no long are in charge. it is supposed to be line of sight. if you disconnect the camera with peeping tom problem, there are first amendment problems with the person right taking a photograph, but they're at window where she shouldn't be with peeping tom laws. 18 usc 32 or some other statutes? >> what you run into the minute you start to get into a signal or signal interruption, suddenly there are a whole bunch of fcc rules you're in violation of. so, once again, you know whoever is using that as the defense, they have to understand that they know the authorities they can use that defense against. in defense of a national security asset, yes. in terms of your personal home, i don't think you would be on
solid ground, i would find a good lawyer. >> i think other thing separate from the criminal statutes or the fcc statutes and regulations you might be violating you need to think about collateral consequences. if you're jamming a wireless signal. all of sudden people can't call 911 or someone's medical instrument is disconnected for some treatment that they're receiving, i think the collateral consequences that come from trying to interfere with or jam a signal need to be thought through. that is the same for military commanders and other people trying to defend their space against the drone. not just a question of, you know, whether it is violating a statute or a crime to shoot it out of the sky, it is the collateral consequences that may flow from particular acts you may take so that needs to be thought threw even assuming you can determine intent which is a separate question. >> i'm sorry. i was going to say you would assume it would stablize and
there are very resilient systems. there is redundancy in systems. i'm not an operator and i talked to enough people this is an assumption. you may send the thing into uncontrolled flight. will it land on school bus full of kids? where is it going to go. >> i think no matter what, if you're on the defense side of this issue you will have to have perimeter defense of some kind. if you are a nuclear power plant, no matter how much geofencing, a, someone can hack into the drone and defeat it. b, they can hack into other people's drones. that is whole another security threat of people hacking other drones but yeah. >> i'm sherry novak. quick question about the stadiums. talking to nfl, i can't go into details about threats but there are issues about public places
with drones, with things happening not just picture-taking. you don't want to give people's ideas but at same time you don't want the pro teams to have domes because they're afraid of things flying over. the faa controls this, there should be one standard law nationwide about public events. do you have any comments? thank you. >> right now there is, for any public gatherings i believe the number is 30,000 people for any stadiums while occupied there is a restricted zone that goes up around that venue. that would include nascar, football games, college games as well as pro. so, there is restricted airspace. that comes into the next question, what training do we give drone operators they have to look at notices to airmen when the temporary flight restriction zone becomes active. many probably don't know. that goes to aspect of public
affairs campaign if you will on the faa to get that rule out. that rule is there. if somebody violates it they can be fined or jailed for violating. there is at that aspect. >> that is the problem of the criminal nutcase who is operating it. i think probably next big thing is drone defenses, but, as we heard from our panelists, it requires a very holistic approach because it engages, engages privacy. it engages collateral, unintended consequences to include what happens with the, with the frequent space and so forth. it can have all kind of -- but that may be the next big thing. how can you construct a defensive system that acknowledges these other interests in a productive way? and i think ultimately it is going to come to some sort of balances like we have automobiles. we require licensing. the automobile has to be
inspected, but we don't go the next level we could. if we wanted to drive down casualties from 30,000 a year to 10,000 a year, you would have to take a test every year. car would have to be like a tank and all sorts of other things but we as a society decided there is balance there. maybe that is future of drones. i don't know. i would like to hear from our panelists. >> specific question about the future. >> yay. about, do you think that home defense against drones or at least, at big public events like that, is going, fred, or scott, do you think that will be the next big thing in industry? >> certainly. in this community, probably going to help it out, first time it happens at a stadium there will be just a few lawsuits against that. and if the stadium knew this was
potential threat, yet they did nothing and there was capability out there to do something that's going to drive action. >> i'm not even sure a dome would work because somebody could bring one in and operate it in a domed stadium. >> i would say this, in terms of my personal recommendation. there could be some authorities out there who don't have the capability to act. there could be authorities or state and local folks that have the capabilities but they don't know whether they have the authority. so i think what has to happen now, and my recommendation would be for federal, and state and local authorities who might be responding to one of these incident to actually, whether civilian or military they should all get together, do like a tabletop exercise, to say, okay, if this happens what are our legal authorities, what are our response authorities? if the discussions in those tabletop exercises disclose there are legal gaps or there are training gaps, then those discussions should lead to things that should happen. the time you want to respond to
incident to ask the questions, not when the drone is on the way. you want to have those conversations now. if the damage is done, we want to be able to prosecute or do something about it. but if we don't have the right response protocol in place because they haven't tabletopped it and haven't gotten together, maybe the evidence trail is not good and they can't respond. i think the larger point is for folks to look together to look what is going on in their jurisdictions, look at the vulnerabilities, talk to folks that are affected and try to develop something they can do right now in terms of response actions. >> tie on to that real quick, in my opinion it needs to be a cross-disciplinary approach as well. not just law enforcement, operators and lawyers. you need engineers and scientist as the table to explain what is in the realm of the possible vis-a-vis defense. then the operators say can we execute that? the lawyers to be able to say, here is legal policy or this is
what we need to do to get there. if everybody is not working together we're not going to have a solution. >> we need the ngo community and privacy advocates involved as well. we could go on for, the rest of the afternoon here but i think that what we've come cut of, and i can't really summarize where we ought to go better than what has already been done but i think we've at least no what the questions are and i think we, i know in my mind i thought of things that i hadn't really thought of about, like homeowners insurance if you have a drone. so i think we know what the questions are. now we have to go forward-looking for the solutions. i really, i really like your idea of having the tabletop and doing it before we have that desert one event. i really hope that we do it. joe, i want to thank you so much for allowing us some extra time. i really personally appreciate it. thank you.
[applause] >> thank you, charlie. this is panel, i hope we can encourage to come back next year because i think so much is going to happen between now and next year in this space. also those papers can be written by law school student between now and then. i like to, we'll move to our next panel, supply chain. i will, without too much more ado get them up to join us in quick fashion. right after this panel we'll go to our popular reception. so stay with us. >> that will wrap up our coverage of a day-long homeland security conference hosted by the american bar association today. if you missed any of the discussion, you can watch it in our video library at c-span.org. tomorrow kicks off the democratic national committee summer meeting in minneapolis. the group will hear from presidential candidates lincoln
chafee, hillary clinton, martin o'malley and bernie sanders. we'll have it for you live beginning at 11:00 a.m. eastern on our companion network c-span. and president obama's in new orleans this afternoon ahead of saturday's 10-year anniversary of hurricane katrina. cbs white house correspondent mark knoller tweeting out picture of the president going door-to-door meeting with new orleans residents, with nair mitch landrieu. he is in it. are eme. a cheering crowd welcomed president to an area where homes unindated by the storm have been rebuilt -- inundated. president makes remarks at a community center at 5:00 p.m. live. we'll have it for you on our companion network c-span. we have scenes from st. bernard parish one year after the storm.
a c-span crew traveled to the area just outside of new orleans in august of 2006. they spoke with residents rebuilding their homes, fishes trying to provide services and toured areas destroyed by the floodwaters. this is been an hour. -- about an hour. [background noises] >> you can't describe it. that is your whole life gone completely. got nothing but cement left, and rubble. not only your house but your whole community. all your friends, phamly, everybody is gone. and now a year later, still your
family and friends anymore that you used to see. hell of a feeling. >> st. bernard parish is directly adjacent to orleans parish and city of new orleans. in the days after hurricane katrina entire parish stretching from the urban areas near new orleans to the rural areas south and east were underwater. >> it's been a year, you know. i think it would have been different the first couple months but after a year you're sort of numb. you don't feel it anymore. i used to cry every week, every other day for months on end, but not anymore. gets to the point you have to move on. >> there is nowhere to shop down here. they keep saying stories about walmart is going to reopen. but then you talk to walmart they said they're not reopening. it will take a good, i've heard 10 years before everything gets semiback to normal.
25 years before it is actually back to normal. but, who would want to come back and have to see this every day? >> i have my own house, me and my kids and my mom. but all that's gone. lost a job. all of it, everything. >> it is tough decisions people have to make in terms of what is best for themselves and their families. and i think this, the extent of this disaster is just unprecedented. not like they have a lot of experience to draw from. even people in other communities, i don't think we've seen anything like this in this country. >> coming up look at recovery efforts in st. bernard parish almost one year after hurricane katrina. c-span video journalist travels there to talk with residents and local officials about their personal experiences and the role the federal, state and local governments are playing in the area. first we travel to the shalmat
area of st. bernard parish. it is largest population center in the parish where most flooding came from over topped levee and canal walls and breach of industrial canal in new orleans lower '90 ward. we look at parish from chalmette high school, only one of two schools open in st. bernard parish. >> prior to katrina we were a community of 68,000 people. we had 14 public schools where we had 8800 students. it was more of a blue-collar, hard-working community. not an entitlement community. a group of people who were used to working very hard and making a way for themselves. when the storm hit, we were completely underwater, 100%. every, there was not a home, a school, a church or a building or business that was inhabitable after the storm. so with the entire infrastructure destroyed, we had
quite a way to go to at least to provide essential services for our residents. >> what is the population now compared to pre-katrina? >> pre-katrina it was about 68,000. now, it depends. some people say eight to 10,000. some people say 15 to 20,000. i think it is if you're here in the day time, you're somewhere in between those two figures. in the evening, you know a lot of people will come, work on their homes to rebuild. work on their businesses. in the evening maybe driving back to temporary housing somewhere else as they're trying to ready their own properties. we're seeing people coming back, gutting and renovating different subdivisions, especially those south of judge perez, closer to the river. those people in areas that may be a little more exposed i think are waiting until we get some
answers from our federal government in terms of the height and strength of the levees. in terms of the base flood elevations and how they will have to elevate homes. can they get insurance on their homes? that's another big issue. so until all of those questions are answered, and the, i guess, in tandem with that, with the louisiana recovery program, to help them out financially as well, until all of these things fall into place, there is a lot of uncertainty. we have no major grocery stores open. in fact we still don't have major grocery stores open. we have a few convenience stores and one full service store which was opened by a small business owner. so all the major chains, none of them are back yet. >> why is that? >> i think they look at it from a marketing standpoint. from the size of the community point. how many people are actually
back. and does it, i guess is it, is it financially feasible for them to do it this quickly. they're keeping eye on redevelopment and repopulation. as you can see with the recovery, we're coming back slowly. we're seeing progress. it is not as fast as we would like it to be but there is slow and steady progress. >> can you paint a picture, just even in this neighborhood across the street from this school what it's like when you drive back in there? >> well the first thing you see when you drive across the street we have an elementary school we have not yet brought back into service but in the parking lot you will see another small trailer community. those are trailers that we have brought in for our teachers and staff to live in. >> they're not fema trailers? >> well, we're hoping to get reimbursed from fema but we brought them in. >> okay. >> when you begin to compare costs in terms of what it took us to bring it in, for about $20,000 a unit we've been able
to pretty much them and set them up. you do your comparisonses what happened through the other sector. put it that way. but anyway, so we purchased a total of 100 -- 107 trailers. i have them at four different sites but when you walk across the street here, you will see 42 of them set up for our teachers and staff members. that was only way, especially back in november, i could get a staff at the school to teach the children because there was no place to live. anyway, you see that little trailer community adjacent or in the parking lot of one of our elementary schools. if you go further behind it into that subdivision, you're going to see complete and utter devastation. you will see very few people actually living there. gutted homes. some not gutted as of yet. some totally destroyed. you will see some trailers in front of the homes where people
are working on them but you're not going to see the vibrant community it once was. >> everybody out? we are having the lutheran recovery team helping me clean my house since last august when the storm passed by. a group of volunteers helping me clean up. doing a great job. now. >> this is august of '06. happened at august 05. >> a year this month. >> why a year later are you doing cleanup? what is going on? >> i've been working in texas. was out of the state. nobody to help me clean up is the main part. not really sure what is going on in the parish. not sure if the levees are going to hold up.
you know, not sure levees will hold up. won't sure what will happen in st. bernard parish until we have another hurricane season. until this hurricane season happens don't know what you're going to do? >> you're staying in texas? >> no. working in madisonville, louisiana. >> where is that. >> across the lake about an hour's drive from here. >> what is your status of the home? do you still own the home? >> i own the home, yes. >> and what type of interaction have you had with fema, federal government? >> fema, they are slow, needless to say. right now we have, got about as much as we can. they are providing some assistance to us, rental assistance. that's about it. >> could you give me an idea of what it was like last august? >> not sure if you could put that into words. you had to be there. we left before the storm, a day before the storm. we got to see most of it on television as we were leaving.
got to see the house and the water on the news. so it was hard to put into words, yes. >> when did you come back to see this? >> i came back in late september for the first time. i came back again in december. i came back last week. i'm here this week with these good people to help clean up. >> what has life been like the past couple months for you? >> just trying to get everything back to normal. trying to get the kids back to school. focus, going to work. trying to get back to a normal life. [inaudible] >> wow. >> hoping carpet -- not very well. >> unbelievable.
>> so this is your first house? >> yes. >> what do what do you think. >> well it is, you see how much damage. it is unbelievable. [inaudible] didn't see it on the news that it was this bad. >> [inaudible] [background noises] [inaudible] >> excuse me. i'm sorry. get out of your way. wayne, how long have you been living here? >> lived here for 12 years. >> any children? >> yes. two children, girl and a boy.
10 and seven. tell you truth, i'm really here, these young people came here from mesh ban to help me. i don't have to be here at all. this is the house and leave. after i got here, i saw them working helping them in a sense. making me feel better. they're helping me so i'm really helping them. this is what is really going on here. >> is that part of the bigger part in st. bernard, volunteer groups that are coming in? >> it is. a lot of young people came in to help. we need a lot of help down here though. we really do. i'm glad to have the guys helping me. i'm helping them. that's what i'm doing here today. i'm helping them. >> i guess, what i see personal items all around the place. what is it like? >> it has been a year, you know. i think it would have been different the first couple month but after a year, you are sort of numb. don't even feel it anymore. i used to cry every week, every other day, for months on end but not anymore. gets to a point you have to move on. so far feel good.
guys are helping me out and so i'm helping them. it's fine. >> what is it like for your kids to move? >> they, trying to put a positive outlook on it. get them to make new friends. everybody that was in st. bernard was displaced. everybody have to learn something new to find new friends that what they have to do, find new friends in madisonville. find new friends. same thing i have to do. >> what is the hardest part about the whole thing? >> what is the hardest part about the whole thing? >> the beginning, middle or this part? >> i think very beginning. knowing when we left here we thought we would be back in two days. that is what we actually thought. we had no idea this would happen. hardest part all st. bernard's parish is all displaced. friends, family, most of my family here, my wife's family, everybody is in a different place. it won't ever be the same.
the whole family safe, everybody is safe. that is hardest part. everything has changed. st. bernard has changed. it won't be like that again. >> that's hard. i may have asked you this outside, is insurance paying for any of this? >> i mean i had flood insurance. one of the few people in st. bernard that had flood insurance. so i had flood insurance. from what i remember, a quarter of people in st. bernard had flood insurance. didn't have enough. but i had some. are they paying for what we're doing here? no. these kids are taking care of it. i'm helping them, other than that, nobody is paying for this at all. this is strictly out of kindness of their hearts. that's what they're doing. >> have you talked to any neighbors staying in the neighborhood? >> i talked to a friend of mine, hadn't seen him in a year. moved a mile down from here. there is no neighbors around here. very few stores. infrastructure is not really set up yet. very few neighbors. no one really close. >> you drive around, see
supermarkets are closed still. >> only have one or two, not even supermarket. small convenience store we call it. they're supposed to be a bigger store opening up. a few stores opening up. it will be a little while i believe. couple years before st. bernard gets back to where it should be. maybe five years, 10 years, i'm not sure yet. i'm sort of hoping to clean up and see what happens next hurricane season. >> let me ask you when you drive around you see some of these small trailer park villages, what are they? >> that is the little fema trailer parks they set up. a handful of them. i don't really ride around to much. i come to my house and leave. there are few others. if they have some trailer parks, down the street you see trailers in front of houses. people coming down on weekend or might be living there. if you doesn't have flood insurance and that is your only house you have to rebuild the house. >> were you offer ad trailer? >> i was offer ad trailer, yes. i didn't take the trailer. >> was there anything offered in place of the trailer?
any money? >> rental assistance. that is what we're trying to get right now. >> you're trying to get it. >> yes. >> what type of process is that to go through. >> lengthy process. continuous paperwork filling it out giving it to them. it is a lengthy process. dealing with the government. a lot of bureaucratic tape. but we're making headway. hopefully everything will work out okay. >> gotcha. what part of the house this we're in? >> this was the kitchen area in here. i was actually in the middle of renovation before the storm. took a wall out. was in middle of renovation. this was actually kitchen. over there was the living room or den, if you want to call it. then right behind me was the dining room. down the hallway was three bedrooms we had. >> how old are your kids? >> 10 years old, girl, my son is seven. >> other bed rams back in there? >> right. my wife was a school teacher, first grade school teacher.
she is looking for a job in st. tam any parish. [inaudible] >> would you mind walking me over there? >> no. that's fine. -- st. tammany. >> tell me what is going on. >> we're going down the hallway to my daughter's bedroom. this is the half a bath we had here. this is my daughter's bedroom. did a pretty good job cleaning it out already. we had 10-inches of mud here. when i first came back, if you stepped in it, your boots would get stuck. there was 10 inches of mud. water was higher to take the insulation and sheetrock off the wall. >> how high was the water.
a foot off above ceiling joists. pulled down the sheetrock and insulation came down. it stayed here about eight days from what i understand. >> do you think this house can ever be lived in again with all the mold? >> you clean everything out. you pressure wash it. you steam clean it. and they have people who remove mold. they give you certificates and mold is removed. it will be fine. i think it will be fine. whether they're out for several months. >> you guys might want to sell this depending on -- >> probably sell it, yes. possibly sercs rent. not really sure. probably sercs yes. some people are selling their houses. i think they're selling them too cheap, actually. they are selling them too cheap. i'm not giving my house away for $30,000. that is what they're doing. i think it will come back so. >> you think it will come back but also said you don't think.
never will be the same. i think it will come back. i think it will. property value will go back up. i'm not sure what the property value is now? >> describe one thing, one thing the camera doesn't pick up is the smell. >> that's true. doesn't smell as bad as it did months ago. it would have been tremendous smell. it is a dryer smell. i think all the mud dried up. it really isn't that bad actually. i was in here and it was a lot worse than that. you have respirator on. as you pick up the dirt, people call it the katrina smell. the smell of the dirt. camera won't pick that up. >> we're walking down the hallway. >> yes, walking down the hallway, my son's bedroom is off to this side.
>> smell a little bit more here. >> yes. if you don't open up the windows, the, dirt doesn't have a chance to dry out. it stays more muddy. that bedroom wasn't open. you are going to smell it more where the window wasn't open. >> this bedroom here? >> that was the master bedroom, my wife's and i bedroom. >> they have a lot out already. >> you can actually move around there. don't ask me how -- >> [inaudible]. i won't. >> yes. >> wow. >> very unusual things floating around. we had garbage can in our bedroom. that garbage can was in the backyard. how it floated inside i just don't know. very strange things how was your wife when you came back for the first time?
she didn't come back until december. we came back in december for family reunion. they didn't come until month later. by that time she had seen video and taken 200 pictures of the house. you get desensitized. after you see it so much they are sort of numb. i think they are okay. we cried together for first time. after that you move on. you have to move on with your life. >> have your kids come back to take a look at it? >> they came back in december, yes, we did. we weren't sure we would bring them because they are young. i thought it was good thing to do because they come back. they're okay. they were trying to help me find something that we could salvage. >> sound like you're stronger because of this? >> there is no doubt. i think we all are. i know i am. wife. kids are too. something they will remember. i actually went through hurricane betsy 40 years ago. i was only 10 years old when i went through hurricane betsy. this is my second time. hopefully the kids go through it one time.
that's all i'm looking for. [inaudible]. >> for the most part you're seeing scatterings of people. two on this street. one or two on that street. that i think is going to be one of the major challenges for people, as you come back to redevelop your home, you have to look at the home to the right of you, the home to the left of you, the few down the block. unless we all begin to develop those sections at the same time, it is going to be very difficult to provide services to people and to have them feel the quality of life is there for them to bring their families
back. >> now, it is the beginning of august, which means school is starting soon. what is the situation here now with number of schools and number of students you expect? >> well we ended the school year with 2360 students on this one campus. we were bursting at the seams. so we have a second school that we have totally repaired, are ready to accept students. we're going to split the school into two. we'll have pre-k through sixth grade at andrew jackson. keep 7 through 12 at chalmette high school. we're expecting in excess of 3,000 students. which is really over 1/3 of what we had prior to the storm. and i think a very good indicator of the numbers of people who are coming back because if they have their children here if they didn't intend to come back. >> how many teachers do you now
have compared to before the storm? >> prior to the storm we were the largest employer in st. bernard parish. we employed 1200 people, of which 750 were teachers. now after the storm we have fewer than 400 people, of which about 300 are teachers. so we're down to 1/3 of our workforce and what we're trying to do is to make sure, it is so critical to put, to keep those class sizes smaller and to get teachers in there because a lot of our children, their educational experiences last year were all over the map. once that storm hit, we were only in school 10 days when it hit. then we reopened 11 weeks later. around kids kept coming in, in drips and drabs all year long. one day we get 10. next day we get 20 more. those children might have been in two, three, four, five different schools between the time they left us and time they came back.
some had under been to any school if they were moving from place to place. so it was difficult on teachers as they planned lessons because each day you were getting new students in with a different set of educational experiences. so it almost became an individualized program at that point. hopefully we'll be a little more stable this year in that regard and keep the class size small enough so teachers can work with them on individual basis to make sure everyone is brought up to where they need to be. >> many of the students and their families in st. bernard are currently living in various sized fema trailer parks that dot the landscape of the parish. >> those trailers are eight by 29 campers. if you ever lived this them, and i have, the last 10 months, they're not meant to be long-term homes for people. it is tough when you have a family in such a small, crowded
space. just something as simple as taking a shower is challenging because these areas are very cramped. you don't have unlimited hot water. so just daily living in those, in those trailers is quite challenging. and our children are living in those with their families. so it begins to have a complete different dynamic even within our school system. what we would normally have expected in children with homework and outside projects we have to totally readjust. so their living conditions really directly affect what is they can and can not do in terms of their educational program. so they're living in close quarters. i finally put in a trailer at least for our people, with washers and driers in it. think, there is no place to wash clothes. that was a big issue back in november, when we opened them for our people to live in. if you wanted to wash a load of
clothes, you had to drive 30 miles to find a place to do it because there was nothing in the parish. you had to go offshore or go through new orleans somewhere into jefferson parish which is the parish on the other side of new orleans. so at that point living, day-to-day living is definitely a challenge for people who have to make those adjustments. i guess what you have to understand is, people were not used to that. they were used to having actual homes, which they had spent their whole lives building, making a life for themselves. and then with those wiped out, an eight by 29 camper for their entire family. so it's rough going. >> it is coming back though, it is coming back. doing a good job bringing it back and stuff but like this is where people will be for nice little while though. >> how long have you been living here? >> i'm visiting.
i live in baton rouge. i'm visiting seeing people i know? >> is that right? >> right. i'm coming home but need to get better. >> did you move to baton rouge? >> i come on back -- >> you live -- tell me your story. >> we wasn't really going to leave. when we saw it was coming back at us, we didn't think it would be this much. we thought we had stuff for a while. if we took it if we know it would be this bad. we lost everything. we left with three or four days of clothes. all that, gone -- we had to start all over. it really has especially out here. >> you're from st. bernard's parish? >> what happened to your house? >> completely underwater. computers everything, completely underwater, baby clothes. we think it was coming back but nothing to come back to. >> is that right? what are you doing?
must have been hard to leave where you're from? >> it was. terribly. they were i came back and seen everything was gone. my job, lost my job. i coming back and forth to baton rouge with the parish. pay wasn't kind of right. i had to survive like you have to survive. i'd's been hard. >> what do you do for baton rouge? >> car place detailing, that stuff. barely getting us across. we're doing all right. >> who are you visiting here? >> right here. one of my aunts. >> what does she say about living in -- >> she all right. she want to get back home. that's it. she like nowhere like home, know what i'm saying? don't want to be here but nowhere like home for her. >> what is she doing about the home right now? >> yeah. she wasn't owner. she was renter. no telling if she will get that house back or not. >> right. >> i had my own house, me an my kids and my mom.
all that's gone. lost the job. it is all over, lost everything. >> so, what do they tell you about living here? >> it is all right. it is cool. everybody get along, mind their business. it is nice. it is all right. not too bad. it is fine. just for the time-being it is fine. hopefully we'll get a house. >> with are you, hoping to move back here? >> yeah. real soon. soon as it clear up a little more. but they're doing okay. >> what do you think when you drive around and look at homes or everything? >> i don't know what to think especially with my house. >> what is evident are of it? >> nothing. nothing. everything is out. nothing. >> did you have insurance? >> no. i was renter too. >> okay. >> got to start all over. we're in baton rouge. not like home but got to go where you got to go for now.
>> next we travel about 30 miles from chalmette to the rural town of hopedale where flooding in that part of the parish was caused by approximately 30-foot high storm surge coming up from the gulf of mexico through the canals, bayous, waterways into this commercial and sports fishing area. after removing most of the large items in the water such as homes and vehicles, the coast guard and fema are now overseeing removal of other debris in the waterways around hopedale. >> that's a good shot. >> and as you look at remains of some of the docks there, on the other side of the canal you can see the area where homes once stood before the storm surge and winds of katrina came in.
somebody rebuilding on some estimates. -- estimates. stilts. how high up is this? >> 21.5. >> 21.5 feet. >> 25-foot above sea level. across sea level right now. right here is 21.5 to the floor. >> and how much was the surge from katrina? wasn't it higher than that? >> so they say. i've been down here 50 years and i ain't never seen nothing like it. they came that it was 30. but you can go right around the corner right here, there is a little trailer sitting back there they put up before the hurricane. it is still there. >> is that right? >> need to get take pictures of
that want to see something amazing. real small trailer. looks just like a log cabin sitting on the road come over the bridge. go back over that little road. three of them he put up before the hurricane that made it. >> oh, really? >> one down here or two in delcoix and one down here. it made it. >> are you from st. bernard? >> i'm from right up the road here. >> how did it affect you? did you have water in your house. >> my house is gone. it was 16 feet off the ground and it left. >> oh, really? >> what are you doing? >> i'm working in mississippi now. >> is that right? >> i move. >> you moved there? not coming back? ♪ >> well i was here '65, only 11 years old. we thought that was bad, but it was nothing compared to what this was. i don't want to see this again.
i might not in my lifetime but i ain't taking a chance. i lost too much way too much. just everybody down here. you don't realize how much you lost until you start looking at it. thank god we never lost no lives. >> right. did you evacuate before the storm came? >> no, i was in my boat, in the canal with my 60-foot steel boat and my wife and youngest boy stayed on it. >> what was that like? >> not as bad what they claim. probably down here, but by the time it got to violet, it was giant water rush, not a violent wave. after the water came up, that is when you realized where we were is underwater. that means the whole parish was under the water. violette, when that gets water, there is nothing in this parish going to be dry. >> describe what it was like when you came back to look at your house. >> i come down here with
"nightline" with jake tapper from "nightline"? >> did you? >> he and i filmed whole thing. first time i seen it. you can't describe it. that is your whole life gone, completely. got nothing but cement left and rubble. not only your house but your whole community. friends and family everybody is gone. now it is going to be a year later and you're still, family and friends you don't see anymore that you used to see. hell of a feeling. you don't forget it. you will never forget it rest of your life. what are you going to do? >> did you have any interaction with fema, federal government, anything like that, money from the government? >> no. >> no? >> not yet but we're still waiting. >> you are still waiting? >> you have to road home deal coming back in. it is a possibility. >> what is that? >> might come all right. most to be a grant up to $150,000, if it works out you
will have a few people end up with their homes back. but they will not to sink that money down here. i wouldn't sink the money down here. you're going to have to get land somewhere else you know. i don't know. that is last straw. if that don't work, well, i'm not worried. i'm outta hire any way. >> you're back here doing a lot of work? >> yes, we custom boats and wharves. raise trailers. i partner with a friend of mine. the boy caring up them stairs. since september 16. we never started. we started salvaging boats on other side of the lake, cleaning out yacht harbor. we worked whole time there until we ran out of stuff to do. we moved slowly this way and went non-stop. >> i imagine you can do this rest of your life. >> it will be long time before it stops. we have a list unbelievable. this is what its coming to.
>> this seems unusual, doesn't it? >> no. they jack them up. this highest i've ever done. this is the highest. this is a very, very high one here. but, you know, if you want to stay down here, want to keep your stuff, i guess best way to go. if you go another who years without a hurricane, you have to walk on water. >> have to be afraid of heights. >> it is beautiful view. you need to climb up there to take a picture. you can see everything. >> is that right? >> oh, it is beautiful. this place is pretty well devastated. all the natural ridges are gone. look off to the back, dead trees. big beautiful oak trees, when i was a kid couldn't see through it. now, pretty well decimated. this place it will never be the same like it was. this is pretty little community. people stopped on the side of the road, shoot the bull.
everybody was friend. but -- >> can't help but see all the houses washed away. >> it is terrible. when i came down here i passed my house up. you live in one place, i had been in that one place since betsy. it was amazing to go past your own property and actually stop and back up because you passed it up. we were looking but it was so much debris and stuff. i got down there after they had cleared the roads. so i mean, i can't even imagine what it looked like with the debris on the road. but it was -- >> have a sense how many people coming back to the community? most of them -- >> most of the work we do are for sport fishermen. all the boat sheds and losts. lofts. ben was charter fisherman before the hurricane came. he decided to put his money back into the community, what's left of it. i guess he is doing number one,
trying to get it to the point where he tries not to lose what he lost before because there was a house right here. [inaudible] got him a trailer where his house was. >> that is fema trailer over there? >> yeah, right. [inaudible]. >> are you living in that trailer. >> leave living in fema trailer. correct. >> how long do you have to wait? >> took a while. took months. i had an rv at the time. i was living out of the rv. soon as i got a fema trailer i was able to sell the rv to pay for my pilings. robbing peter to pay paul to do all of that. i got no assistance from fema or anything. i'm doing this on my own. >> but you applied for the trailer when? when did you get it? >> took a few months. months. >> why? >> i know people took a lot longer than a few months. i don't know. i don't know what is wrong with the process.
it was such a big storm, such a big storm. covered such a vast area. i guess resources were spread thin. i have no idea. >> what happened to your boat? >> i took my boats out. i had, saved my boat. took them up north. >> what is life like for you right now? >> life is, fishing is good. there are no sewers here in st. bernard. no groceries to buy. there is no nothing down here. you have to bring your own food. >> were there grocery stores before? >> yes. big booming town, st. bernard. in the hotel area we had a couple of stores. >> st. bernard itself? >> st. bernard itself was big booming town. the whole parish is gone. it is knocked down. they have a few restaurants opened up in the town part but not many up here. >> what about phone service? is there phone service? >> no phone service.
cell phone service works. sometimes it don't. >> what about oakdale community? >> the people who are back, brought everybody close together. commercial guides and recreational guides. they saw who was busting butt down here. i started driving here as soon as i could. friends came down. i had people, customers came down from tennessee. they brought me lumber and stuff, you know. helped me rebuild my dock. everybody in the country came behind. that was great. can't say enough about people, they do have hearts, i do know that. >> what about was this a neighborhood before? >> yes. big fine place right here. and it's gone. >> do you know if they're coming back? >> don't know. a lot of people are. a lot of people are collecting insurance. insurance companies are not paying a lot of people. some people they're paying. a lot they are not. i don't know why. >> how do you think things
overall are? how has it changed you? >> ah, i know people have hearts now. you know. makes me cry but people have hearts. i just have to work twice as hard, you know. but i'll make it. i'm a survivor. commercial fishermen are like that, survivors. people who are from down here don't want to leave here. this unique community. >> what was it like when you came back after the hurricane? >> i came back not too long after. i crossed open water in my big boat and came down. you couldn't walk no roads. you couldn't, i came by boat. it was -- you couldn't recognize a house. every house was on the other side of marsh broken into little pieces of debris. just crumbled. i mean -- make you cry to see
it. these places were beautiful down here before. >> think it will ever come back to what twas before? >> i think it probably will. i think recreational fishermen will build it back, 10, 15 years from now. you will not see it now. thisfy right here is only guide working down here. they need workers in some other places. so nobody is rebuilding this town. you can't get, you can't get workers down hire. just don't have them. [background noises] [background sounds]
>> the neighborhoods of st. bernard parish are directly adjacent to lower ninth ward of city of new orleans and received some of the worst blood -- flooding in the parish. we conclude with final comments from the st. bernard school superintendent about the state of the relationship between the parish and the federal government. >> we're in arabi, louisiana, two miles that way is where the levee did not breach, right? this is the home that i was born and raised in.
they said we had 18 to 24 feet of water there. if you want to take in i will show you the damage. >> where are you living now? still waiting on my fema trailer. fema is a joke. i have no faith in the federal government at all. i have total faith in people because it has been people throughout the united states that have come down and helped us. you snow. fema lost my application for my trailer. three times i had to reapply. then they, i, my house was, at first deemed liveable. i told them then you go live in it. they said, with all the junk in there, that was in there before, because they didn't let us back in for so long, it was mold and everything. but right now i'm staying in slidell, which is about 30 miles north, right on the other side
of lake pontchartrain. it is just, it is disgusting. it is disgusting. >> what are you doing back here today? >> actually i'm helping out one of my friends who did get a fema trailer. she, i'm watching her son for her while she is at work. >> what about this neighborhood? >> everybody that lived in this neighborhood lived here for the longest time. that brought me to tears the other day. that was, the salas's house. there are children, they're like 18 and 15, i used to baby sit them. they, they were like, people who, like, could come in your house without enoching. you know that is how close our neighborhood was. that was the harrys house. it is gone now. had to be demoed. another person i will probably never live next to again. we have the medinas.
his house was just torn down. i mean. my boyfriend is in atlanta. i don't know when i'm going to see him again, but i don't know. want to go through the house? >> yeah. >> got to go through the side door because the floor fell in this room. please, watch your step. a little swampy. i usually clean my house. >> before we go in, why do you say fema is joke? >> fema is a joke because being, because i thought they were supposed to help people. and they're not. you know. for instance, how long, almost been a year. i'm still waiting on a place to live. i have a five-year-old. i'm still waiting on a place to live with her, you