Apologists for the Bush administration have criticized efforts to blame people in the federal government for their negligent response to hurricane Katrina. According to them, we should wait until there is an official investigation before we assign blame - but is that really legitimate? Assigning blame isn't a game, it's a part of the democratic process.

Johnathan Cohn writes:

As commentators like The American Prospect's Matthew Yglesias have rightly noted, assigning blame happens to be a necessary, healthy part of the democratic process, in which voters hold their leaders accountable for mistakes. That's why, he notes, it's a bit unfair to call it a "game." Delaying this discussion until after the waters have receded would undoubtedly allow time for public tempers to cool, so that people are in a more forgiving mood once the debate over responsibility actually takes place. But what's the virtue in that? If public officials committed an act of gross negligence, as seems to be the case here, it's best to begin that discussion while the images of suffering are fresh--and the indignation over those images is still raw. [...]

The Bush administration might well have dithered even longer if not for the media coverage. While the powerful, startling images out of New Orleans had a lot to do with jolting Washington into action, the flurry of condemnations from pundits aghast at the lack of federal activity surely registered, too. In other words, blaming President Bush and his advisers likely played a significant role in getting them to act. [The New Republic]

The laying of blame on someone might be done in haste and, therefore, done incorrectly, but the people have the right to hold elected officials responsible for their actions as well as their inactions. Insisting that people wait and wait and wait before doing so sounds both like an effort to avoid responsibility and like the attitude that people can't be trusted to make judgments.

More information is needed in order to know the full extent of everyone's responsibility, but we have more than enough information to start assigning some responsibility now. Not doing so would itself be irresponsible — a sign of not caring that is every bit as inappropriate as some of the uncaring comments made by President Bush and those in his inner circle.

Read More:

• Guide to Ethics and Morality
• News About Ethics