Last September, I watched President Bush, standing in shirtsleeves before a majestically lit statue somewhere in New Orleans, promise on national television that the federal government would see to it that the Crescent City was rebuilt. Well, to put it simply, he lied!

Last September, the White House told Louisiana's Democrats and Republicans, state and local, in private, to get their act together and come up with a reasonable plan, one that would neither cost too much nor result in people rebuilding in flood-prone districts. To many people's surprise, they did.

In consultation with the Urban Land Institute, New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin (D) proposed a logical reconstruction of his city, with buildings on higher ground to be rebuilt first. Rep. Richard H. Baker (R-La.) proposed legislation to set up a Louisiana Development Corp., with sufficient capital to buy back damaged property, allow owners to move to higher ground as the mayor's plan dictated and let the state redevelop lower, wetter property as appropriate.

After much agonizing, state politicians from both parties agreed to back these ideas. Not everyone liked it, but there was no other option. Until last week, the administration was assuring Louisianans, behind the scenes, that they were on the right track.

Then -- suddenly -- the administration has switched directions. Early last week White House officials told Mr. Baker and other Louisiana politicians not only that they refused to support the development corporation he proposed but that they'd asked congressional leaders to cancel planned hearings on the Baker bill. At his news conference last week, Mr. Bush claimed that "the plan for Louisiana hasn't come forward yet." Was he misinformed or what?

Donald Powell, the administration's point man on the Gulf Coast, has announced that all reconstruction money will now be funneled to the Gulf through the traditional method of block grants, $11.5 billion of which Congress allocated last month. Already, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R) has said he intends to use his $5.3 billion of grant money to compensate the 35,000 Mississippi homeowners who, technically located outside the flood plain, were not required to have flood insurance but got flooded anyway. Although this program was criticized last month by some White House officials on the grounds that it encourages people living near the coasts not to buy insurance and discourages them from rebuilding in safer places -- this is the model that Mr. Powell, in another turn around, now says he supports for Louisiana, too.

But it can't be a solution for New Orleans. Given the larger number of flood victims and the more extensive damage, Louisiana's $6.3 billion will not go far enough. Nor will money alone solve the problem of the hundreds of acres of flooded neighborhoods or encourage people to rebuild in safer locations.
Louisiana politicians are now back to starting from scratch. Some are working on an alternative to the Baker bill, such as a mechanism to borrow money to set up a smaller development entity.

Mr. Powell's job is supposed to be one of "coordination," not policy maker or messenger with mixed signals. Without some mechanism to buy back land, the reconstruction of New Orleans will be slower and less rational -- if there is any reconstruction at all.

So much for the President's word on that!