Eleven days after record-breaking storms submerged Gary, Indiana, thousands of residents remain without power in a city where poverty is not background detail but the very condition that determines who survives a crisis and who does not. The storms exposed what disinvestment had long concealed — that infrastructure neglect and economic precarity, when met with disaster, do not produce inconvenience but genuine danger. In the sweltering heat that followed the floods, the absence of electricity became a question of survival for the elderly, the ill, and those for whom a spoiled refrigerator mean
Gary residents face desperation as power outages persist 11 days after deadly storms
Residents in poverty-stricken Gary face health risks from prolonged power loss during extreme heat, threatening vulnerable populations dependent on electricity for cooling and medical equipment.
When crisis comes, it falls hardest on those least able to absorb it
Mark
Why does it matter that Gary specifically is poor? Couldn't this happen anywhere?
Mimi
It could happen anywhere, but the consequences are not equal. In a wealthy neighborhood, people have generators, air conditioning in their cars, money to stay in hotels, access to medical care if something goes wrong. In Gary, those buffers don't exist for most people.
Mark
So it's not just about the storm—it's about what the storm exposed?
Mimi
Exactly. The storm is the trigger, but the real story is that some communities are built to survive disruption and others aren't. Gary wasn't.
Mark
What happens to someone on oxygen when the power goes out for eleven days?
Mimi
They either find a way to keep that machine running—a generator they can't afford, a hospital bed they have to fight for—or they face a medical emergency. That's not hypothetical in Gary.
Mark
And the food situation?
Mimi
A family's groceries spoil. They have no way to replace them quickly. So they go hungry, or they spend money they don't have. Either way, the storm costs them something they can't get back.
Mark
Is there a sense that this could have been prevented?
Mimi
Not the storm itself. But the speed of recovery, the resilience of the infrastructure—those things are choices. And those choices have been made differently in different places.
Le Pouls
- Eleven days without power in Gary's poorest neighborhoods has pushed residents past frustration and into a quiet, grinding desperation that no timeline from the power company has yet relieved.
- Extreme heat following the floods turned homes into hazards, threatening the elderly, young children, and those reliant on medical equipment like oxygen machines and insulin refrigeration.
- With no electricity, food spoiled and could not be replaced — for households already living paycheck to paycheck, the loss was not an inconvenience but an unrecoverable blow.
- Decades of infrastructure disinvestment in Gary left the grid fragile before the storms ever arrived, meaning the disaster did not create the vulnerability so much as it made it impossible to ignore.
- Residents are enduring rather than recovering, waiting on a restoration timeline that has offered little clarity while the conditions around them remain dangerous and the days continue to accumulate.
Eleven days after record-breaking storms submerged Gary, Indiana, thousands of residents remain without power in a city where poverty is not background detail but the very condition that determines who survives a crisis and who does not. The storms exposed what disinvestment had long concealed — that infrastructure neglect and economic precarity, when met with disaster, do not produce inconvenience but genuine danger. In the sweltering heat that followed the floods, the absence of electricity became a question of survival for the elderly, the ill, and those for whom a spoiled refrigerator means a week without food. This is a story not only about storms, but about what a society reveals when the lights go out.
Eleven days after severe storms dropped record rainfall across Indiana and flooded entire neighborhoods, the lights in Gary still had not come back on. In a city where poverty shapes the texture of daily life — where households operate on margins so thin that a single week without electricity tips into crisis — the outages had long since moved past inconvenience.
The storms were severe, overwhelming drainage and infrastructure alike. But the deeper story emerged in the aftermath. Without power, there was no air conditioning against the sweltering heat that followed. Refrigerators failed, food spoiled, and those dependent on medical equipment — oxygen machines, dialysis pumps, insulin that requires refrigeration — faced immediate danger. For residents already living paycheck to paycheck, the arithmetic of survival turned brutal.
The power company's restoration timeline offered little comfort as days stretched into a second week with no clear end. In neighborhoods that had already endured decades of disinvestment and decaying infrastructure, the storm felt less like a natural disaster and more like a confirmation — that when crisis arrives, it lands hardest on those with the fewest resources to absorb it.
Gary's poverty is not incidental to this story. In a wealthier community, an eleven-day outage would be a serious disruption. Here, it became a test of endurance measured in heat, hunger, and the quiet terror of those whose health depended on electricity they no longer had.
Eleven days after storms dumped record rainfall across Indiana and left the region submerged, residents of Gary were still sitting in the dark. The power had not come back. In a city where poverty is not a statistic but a condition that shapes how people live—where many households operate on margins so thin that a week without electricity becomes a crisis—the outages had moved past inconvenience into something closer to desperation.
The storms themselves had been severe. They brought water that overwhelmed the region's capacity to absorb it, flooding neighborhoods and infrastructure alike. But it was what came after that revealed the particular vulnerability of Gary's poorest residents. Without power, there was no air conditioning in the sweltering heat that followed the storms. Without power, refrigerators stopped working, and food spoiled. Without power, people dependent on medical equipment—oxygen machines, dialysis pumps, insulin refrigeration—faced immediate and tangible danger.
For those living paycheck to paycheck, the math of survival became brutal. A week without electricity meant spoiled groceries that could not be replaced without money that did not exist. It meant sitting in homes that became ovens as temperatures climbed. It meant watching neighbors, particularly the elderly and the very young, struggle in conditions that were not merely uncomfortable but medically risky.
The power company's timeline for restoration offered little comfort. Days stretched into a second week with no clear end in sight. In neighborhoods where residents had already weathered decades of disinvestment—where infrastructure had been allowed to decay, where services had been cut—the storm became another reminder that when crisis comes, it falls hardest on those least able to absorb it.
Gary's poverty is not incidental to this story. It is central to it. In wealthier neighborhoods with more robust infrastructure and residents with resources to relocate or purchase generators, an eleven-day outage would be a serious problem. In Gary, it became a test of how long people could endure without the basic systems that modern life depends on. The answer, it turned out, was being measured in days of heat, spoiled food, and the quiet terror of those whose health depended on electricity they no longer had.
Envie de l'histoire complète ?
Lire l'original sur CBS News ↗
Society & Civil Rights