Analyze

The artical shows the political and government really influence the people's health and emergency. Haiti's government disappointed all the other oganisations and it makes the restore difficult after the eaarthquake and cholera epidemic. The artical descrpites the situation and fact in the 5 years after the disaster. In addition, the reactions of the involved organisations such as United Nations are shows the problem and the result that where the money go. There are also applied examples to support why the donation are not final go to the Haiti's people, and Haiti's government is deal-killer. Apart from this, the artical shows if there are not enough economic fund and medical supporting after disaster, there might be a epidemic comes up, and make the situation worse. All the donation and support are should be in good organisation to help people and rebuild the environment.

The main point is the lack of justice for Haiti in this rebuild process. They got huge amounts of dontions from all over the world in hopes of rebuilding the country to be better than it was. Insead, the vast majority of the money is not being spent in the right ways, and much of the spending is not being done in the most economical ways. The ways that the companies are going about rebuilding is much more wasteful than it has to be, thus using more of the money and preventing it from going as far as it could.  Additionally, the UN has created a cholera epidemic in Haiti and is not being held accountable for cleaning it up.

The article shows there are no specific nuclear emergency plants or Indian Point Disaster. The arounding environment is densely populated and no material educational to resisdent. The situtation are illustrated by image and quotations of many different representors. The main point is as the title shows, to urges expanded emergency planning for Indian Point disaster. The important thing is federal government need to support and guide the state and organisations. 

The main point was to discuss the controversy between these two, very different, safety and education zones for Nuclear disasters

The main point of the article is to report a conflict of opinions between the NRC and the Disaster Accountability Project on the safety of the communities surrounding the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant. The NRC and the company running the plant, Entergy, state that those communities within a 10 mile radius are required to have emergency evacuation plans in place should a nuclear emergency occur; those outside this radius, however, are not at as large of risk. The nonprofit, however, cites the NRC's report on the Fukushima disaster, where it recommended the US citizens within 50 miles of the plant should evacuate the area, and suggests that communities within a 50 mile radius of Indian Point have specific nuclear emergency plans at hand and prepared for use. Entergy says that the radius "provides a robust safety margin", and the NRC replies to the Disaster Accountability Project's statement by saying that the incident at Fukushima is not comparable to any nuclear power cite in the US, due to the size and number of reactors in the Fukushima plant.

This article discussses why Haiti can't "build back better" after the series of disasters that have come its way. The article mentions that Haiti has become reliant upon international contractors as aid when building back because of local and international distrust of the government. This combined with the fact that many public health experts think that the UN is responsible for the cholera outbreak has caused fewer donations, and those donations that are recieved to be used less efficiently.

The main point of this article is that efforts to restore and rebuild Haiti have not been done as they should have been. Despite the donations received to help, none of the funds have been used appropriately to transform Haiti. The lack of responsible spending has caused the transformation to halt and rebuilding efforts to fail. The ways in which organizations are spendng their money is irresponsble and wasteful. As a result, the current status of the country is not at all where it should have been. Also, the UN brought cholera with them, which has killed over 9,000 Haitians, for which they are not taking any responsibility. 

The article discusses why, despite overwhelming amounts of foreign aid money and five years, Haiti still mimcs a disaster zone. Thousands of Haitians still live in tents and temporary housing, cholera is still raging, and rebuilding projects have stalled. The article questions why Haiti is just barely staggering back to "normal" after being given such tremendous resources. It goes on to discuss how several factors curb Haitian progress, including political turmoil and economic discord. Generally, the consensus remains (internationally) that the Haitian government cannot be entrusted money to fix these issues and must be led through the process by outside agencies. Additionally, malpractices by UN peackeeping troops have only addded to the list of problems (aka reintroducing cholera) and soured relations between Haiti and the UN.

The main point of the article was that despite $13.5 billion in monetary dontions to Haiti, the country is not much better than before the earthquake. The article notes Haiti's ongoing political turmoil, a cholera epidemic (which the U.N. is underfunding and not taking credit for causing), and the system which stifles foreign aid to Haiti as factors for the lack of actual improvements to Haiti even with the large amount of donations they received. 

The main point of this article is that because of political and economic issues/ disagreements the people of Haiti continue to suffer from cholera and help is not in the near future. The author supports this point by bringing up statistics from the political turmoil of Haiti's government, money and support the UN has given, money from USAID, and support from the Health Ministry.