Before I speak on our amendment, I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee for their hard work on this issue. We disagree on this one point, but I appreciate all they have done over the past year to ensure that the failures of Hurricane Katrina are never repeated.
As my colleagues on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee know, the placement of FEMA in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a subject that has troubled me since the concept of the Department was first debated in 2002. As a senior member of this committee, I can tell you that the structure of federal agencies matters. Combining too many disparate functions – some of which have nothing to do with homeland security – into one agency can be unworkable, which is a primary reason why I voted against the creation of DHS.
Some say reinstating FEMA’s independence now is brash and premature. Respectfully, I could not disagree more. To me, it was premature to place FEMA within DHS, a huge, terrorism-focused agency, where FEMA’s traditional mission of responding to disasters would be neglected. The FEMA of yesterday has been downgraded, dismantled, and demoralized which I believe contributed to the muddled response to Hurricane Katrina.
DHS failed as a department during Hurricane Katrina and failed to give FEMA the opportunity to succeed. During the Committee’s Katrina hearings, we heard numerous examples of information and initiative getting lost in DHS during the Hurricane Katrina response. Witnesses described sending information updates and requests out to the Department, never knowing where those messages went or if requested action had been taken. DHS was a black hole where information and accountability were lost.
Since FEMA was folded into the Department, FEMA has been deprived of funding and resources. FEMA has been forced to transfer significant resources to other parts of the Department. In 2003 and 2004, $169 million of FEMA’s funding was transferred to DHS, in part because of lost programs, but also because of a so-called management tax to help pay for shared services within the Department.
Congress and the American public never knew about these funding shortfalls because FEMA was buried within DHS. Former FEMA Director Michael Brown testified that instead of taking FEMA’s budget proposal to the President, he was required to clear the budget through another Undersecretary at DHS, then the Secretary, and then the President.
With a loss of funding and programs, came a loss of staff. FEMA’s staff has been reduced by 500 positions since 2003. And within the existing positions at FEMA, there has been a 15 to 20 percent vacancy rate over the past few years.
FEMA needs to be an independent, Cabinet-level agency to avoid having its budget and staff siphoned off for other activities within the Department. Restoring the FEMA Director to the President’s Cabinet will better serve America. Restoring FEMA’s place at the table will ensure transparency and accountability while allowing the Director to present funding needs directly to the President. In 1996, recognizing the importance of emergency response, President Clinton elevated the FEMA Director position to the Cabinet level. Former FEMA Director James Lee Witt said being a member of the President’s Cabinet allowed him to task other federal agencies more effectively during disasters and provided an established and direct line of communication to the President. There are those who argue that FEMA needs to remain in DHS so that the Department’s other personnel and assets can be accessed more readily. This is a hollow argument because under the Stafford Act, FEMA has the authority to utilize resources across the federal government during a disaster. The Stafford Act allows FEMA to task Health and Human Services, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Defense, and many other federal agencies during disasters. Should all those entities be incorporated into DHS as well? There is no reason the same mission assignment procedure cannot be applied to DHS assets as well. Separating FEMA from DHS not only will improve FEMA’s ability to manage preparedness and response, but it also will allow DHS to focus on its mission to prevent a terrorist attack. DHS cannot be all things to all people.
The dedicated public servants of FEMA agree. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents 1,200 FEMA employees, strongly endorses an independent FEMA. AFGE’s June 13, 2006 letter to Congress states, "(T)he merger of FEMA into DHS may have sounded good in theory, but in reality it has proven to be impractical and counterproductive. When Hurricane Katrina struck the U.S., the DHS structure simply imposed an extra layer of bureaucracy on top of FEMA, and wound up impeding, not assisting, the response."
Former FEMA Director Witt also believes FEMA does not belong in DHS. In a recent editorial, he stated: "Though most agree FEMA must be mended, we don’t have the luxury of gambling with another experimental restructuring of the department. And why gamble when a simple reversion to its pre-2001 incarnation would fix the problem?... As it stands under today’s DHS structure, annual hazards such as hurricanes, floods, and tornados are allowed a 25 percent focus, even though they have a 100 percent probability of occurring at some point. An independent FEMA would again give all disasters 100 percent of its attention." I agree with Mr. Witt. Fortunately, since DHS was created, there has not been another terrorist attack in the U.S., but there have been over 100 Presidentially-declared natural disasters. I support ensuring the U.S. is prepared for a terrorist attack, but we should not forget that natural disasters are guaranteed to occur every single year.
Mr. President, we have tried the super-agency approach, and now it’s time to get back to basics. I ask my colleagues to think about what is practical when they cast their vote on our amendment. Our constituents should feel confident that FEMA – and its resources – will be there in their time of need.
I urge support for our amendment. Thank you, Mr. President.
