第二节 历史 ——政府与救灾

Should　FEMA　be　privatized?

(联邦应急管理局是否应该私有化？)

这是一个辩论题，除了如下参考阅读材料外，课堂上还提供了正反方各4条论点。下面是作业的参考材料：

http://disaster.ifas.ufl.edu/pdfs/chap03/d03 07.pdf

http://www.fema.gov/disaster-process-disaster-aid-programs

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/31/what-sandy-says-about-government/?iref=allsearch

http://www.businessinsider.com/hurricane-sandys-impact-on-the-us-economy-2012-11

http://seattletimes.com/html/edcetera/2019559387_hurricane_sandy_forces_mitt_ro.html

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2005/10/the_role_of_gov.html

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-11-05/sandys wrath-gives-obama-boost-in-debate-on-federal-role

● Hurricane　Sandy　costs　are　now　ranging　between　$30~$50bn.

● The　state　definitely　cannot　handle　this　type　of　money　by　themselves.　It　is　too　much　pressure.　After　a　disaster　like　this　the　state　is　already　having　problems　so　they　need　a　fallback　system　such　as　FEMA　from　the　government　to　give　them　some　type　of　relief　that　they　will　not　have　to　provide　by　themselves.

● The　point　of　the　federal　government　is　to　act　as　a　fallback　system　for　the　states,　therefore　disaster　relief　needs　act　as　a　fallback　system　for　the　states.

● Does　any　of　this　changed　if　this　is　privatized?　is　federal　

tax　money　still　involved?

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/opinion/editorial-privatize-fema-wash-that-idea-away/nSsdp/

● 2004:　FEMA　was　generous　to　Florida.

● Normally　FEMA　repays　75　percent　to　state　and　local　governments　for　disaster　reliefs.　In　Florida　the　percent　was　90　percent.

● This　makes　it　much　easier　for　the　states　because　they　don't　need　to　worry　and　be　stressed　after　a　storm.　The　government　can　step　in　and　help　the　states　to　make　sure　they　are　up　and　running.This　causes　the　states　to　have　a　system　to　fall　back　on.

http://disaster.ifas.ufl.edu/pdfs/chap03/d03-07.pdf

http://www.ourbroker.com/news/privatize-disaster-relief 11-0512/

One　way　to　limit　government,　so　we　are　told,　is　to　dump　the　Federal　Emergency　Management　Agency　(FEMA)　and　outsource　disaster　relief　to　private　companies.　But　private　companies　need　to　make　profits.So　who　will　pay　for　relief　equipment　which　sits　in　staging　areas　unused　for　months　and　years?　Who　will　pay　for　the　specialists　needed　to　operate　an　emergency　relief　program?　No　less　important,　what

　would　private　relief　companies　charge　for　their　services　when　needed?

We　already　know　the　answer.　Wikipedia　reported　that　in　ancient　Rome,　“one　of　his　most　lucrative　schemes　took　advantage　of　the　fact　that　Rome　had　no　fire　department.　Crassus　filled　this　void　by　creating　his　own　brigade—500　men　strong—which　rushed　to　burning　buildings　at　the　first　cry　of　alarm.　Upon　arriving　at　the　scene,　however,　the　firefighters　did　nothing　while　their　employer　bargained　over　the　price　of　their　services　with　the　distressed　property　owner.　If　Crassus　could　not　negotiate　a　satisfactory　price,　his　men　simply　let　the　structure　burn　to　the　ground,　after　which　he　offered　to　purchase　it　for　a　fraction　of　its　value.”

As　both　Crassus　and　Hurricane　Sandy　show,　privatizing　disaster　relief　is　not　just　a　bad　idea,　it's　another　form　of　disaster.

● How　will　they　get　the　money　to　run　the　private　agencies？

● Some　citizens　cannot　afford　their　high　prices.

● Federal　government　will　provide　money　for　those　who　were　hit　by　storm.

● They will　prepare　for　future　hurricanes.

● 27　out　of　32　people　in　a　survey　would　prefer　federal　over　state　government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_States

● In　2009,　President　Obama　picked　a　professional　as　the　agency's(FEMA)　chief-Craig　Fugate,　the　well-regarded　emergency　director　in　Florida.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/09/business/09view.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

作业完成情况如下：

Opening　Statement

We　argue　that　Federal　disaster　relief　is　superior　to　privatization.　There　are　several　things　that　the　private　industries　accomplish　more　effectively　in　our　free　economy.　Private　companies　excel　in　mass-producing　products　inexpensively.

However,　some　things　are　best　left　to　the　federal　government.　Recovering　from　a　major　disaster,　such　as　Hurricane　Sandy,　can　be　viewed　as　a　matter　of　national　security.　An　effort　that　is　large　requires　great　investment　and　transparency.　Privatizing　this　effort　would　be　difficult　and　may　make　a　real　disaster　response　unpredictable　and　unreliable.　If　we　decide　to　downsize　FEMA　(Federal　Emergency　Management　Agency),　not　all　states　will　have　the　same　resources,　so　the　responses　will

　be　inconsistent.　We　should　focus　on　improving　FEMA,　not　setting　up　a　new　system.

One　question　I　hope　our　opponent　has　the　answer　to　is　how　the　state　will　pay　for　these　private　agencies.　Private　industry　is　a　significant　part　of　our　economy,　but,　you　get　what　you　pay　for.　Privatizing　disaster　relief　might　save　the　country　money　in　the　short-term,　but　would　come　at　great　expense　in　the　future.　Our　country　depends　on　effective　disaster　relief,　and　this　is　not　something　that　should　be　compromised.　When　it　comes　down　to　safety　from　catastrophic　events,　people　want　to　know　that　the　federal　government　regards　their　issues　with　national　importance.

(作者：薛楸禹)

开场白

我们认为，联邦救灾优于私有化。在自由经济的条件下，有些事情由私营行业运作更为有效。私营企业在规模化生产方面的成本更加低廉。

然而，有些事情最好是交给联邦政府去执行。比如从飓风桑迪这样的重大灾难中恢复，这可以被视为国家安全问题。这是一项需要巨大投资和广泛的透明性的工作。如果把这项工作私有化，将会十分困难，而且可能导致对灾害的响应变得不可预期和不可靠。由于各州资源情况不同，如果我们决定缩减联邦应急管理局，应急响应会不一致。我们应该着力改善联邦应急管理局，而不是建立一个新的系统。

我希望辩论的另一方回答这样一个问题：如果缩减联邦应急管理局，州政府应该如何向私营机构付费？私营部门是我国经济的重要组成部分，但是，得到必须要付出。灾难应急部门的私有化在短期内可以节约国家的资金，但未来需要付出巨大的代价。我们的国家依赖于有效的救灾，这一点不容妥协。当巨大灾害平息以后，人们希望知道联邦政府把他们的事情当作国家大事来看。

(译者：王训建)第三节 戏剧表演

——独白：表哥之死

The Monologue

(Sit　down)　That　can't　happen.　That　makes　no　sense.　Why　every　bad　thing　happened　to　me?　Why　my　cousin　died?　I　can't　believe　it.

(Stand　up)My　cousin　and　I　were　best　friends.　He　never　yelled　at　me　or　hit　me　once.　He　was　like　my　brother.　The　best　brother　forever.We　did　everything　together:　eating　food,　playing　sports,　watching　TV.　(Pause)(Go　to　pick　a　baseball)　I　remember　that　he　played　baseball　with　me.　We　threw　ball　to　each　other.　You　can　see　our　happy　faces　everyday...　WHY?!　WHY　DID　DEATH　CHOOSE　HIM?!　WHY　DID　HE　HAVE　TO　DIE?!　WHY　CAN'T　I　HELP　HIM?!　(mad)　Why?!　(sad)　I　don't　understand...

(Pause)　The　old　things　are　gone.　For　now,　the　only　thing　I　can　do　is　to　stay　here　and　wish　him　at　rest.But　I　really　want　to　play　with　him　again!　But　that's　only　a　dream.　He　was　gone.　I　can't　forgive　myself.　I　shouldn't　yell　at　him　that　day.　He　just　lost　my　play　disc.　So　what?　That's　my　fault.　I　am　so　sorry.　(hide　my　face　behind　my　hands)

(作者：薛楸禹)独白：表哥之死

(坐)不可能！这简直没有天理！为什么所有的厄运都降临在我一个人身上？我的表哥竟然死了，不，这不可能！

(站)他是我最好的朋友，他从没欺负过我，甚至连大声对我说话都没有过，他就像我的亲哥哥，永远是我最好的哥哥。我们形影不离，一起吃饭、一起做运动、一起看电视。(停顿)(去捡起一个棒球)，我们经常在一起打棒球，每天都过得很快乐……为什么？！为什么死神偏偏选择了他?！为什么他必须死?！为什么我帮不了他?！(发疯)为什么?！(悲伤)我不明白……

(停顿)曾经的一切都已随风而逝，现在，我唯一能做的就是祝福他的灵魂在天堂能得到安息。我多想能和他再在一起玩儿啊！但这只是个梦，他已经走了。但我却不能原谅我自己，那天我冲他大喊，仅仅因为他弄丢了我的光盘，现在想来，弄丢了光盘又如何呢？表哥，是我的错，对不起。(用手捂住脸)

(译者：王艳)

国内教师评语

本段戏剧创作主题明确，表现了失去亲人的痛苦哀伤，情节合情合理，剧情发展自然。虽然着墨不多，但人物形象刻画得很好，性格鲜明，主人公一显一隐，“我”情绪上的起伏自然流畅，由开始的拒绝接受，到深情回顾过去，再到拒绝接受，最后回到安静和忏悔。人物语言和动作的表达都很充分，隐在后面的另一主人公“表哥”，人物刻画得也是性格饱满鲜明，通过“我”的回顾，一言一行跃然纸上。符合戏剧矛盾冲突明显的特点，很有张力，表现力很强。