"Today, on this, the one-year anniversary of the Hurricane Katrina, my thoughts and prayers are with the victims’ families and all who struggle to rebuild in the Gulf Coast. But my thoughts are also focused on one question: how well prepared is the United States for another natural disaster?

Over this past year, the Senate Homeland Security Committee, on which I serve as a senior member, has been examining the mistakes made and proposing solutions. Some improvements have been made but in many critical areas much more needs to be done.

First, one of the critical mistakes was a lack of clear command and control at the senior levels of government. From the White House to the head of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the operative response - from the time the National Weather Service (NWS) first predicted the severity of the hurricane to well after it occurred - was one of disengagement.

Under President Clinton, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Director was part of the President’s Cabinet and there was no doubt who was in charge during a disaster. Now, the director of FEMA reports to the Secretary of Homeland Security, thus distancing the President from federal emergency situations. Critical information from FEMA should not have to go through multiple DHS offices to get to the White House.

Despite warnings from NWS and preparation by other federal agencies, FEMA never had enough boots on the ground before Hurricane Katrina struck. The only FEMA representative in New Orleans was a Public Information Officer sent to advance the FEMA Director’s proposed post-hurricane media tour.

Sadly, one year later, FEMA is not fully staffed. The agency has only 84 percent of its authorized strength of 2,400 people and its new head, R. David Paulison, admits he needs even more people. FEMA missed its June 2006 goal of being at 95 percent strength, so this year’s hurricane season is already undermanned.

FEMA’s recruitment problems are clearly related to the agency’s poor morale, which predated Katrina. Under the Bush Administration, FEMA’s budget was compromised. Since FEMA was folded into DHS, it has been deprived of funding and resources, including the transferral of large portions of its operating offices to other parts of DHS. 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 management tax associated with being part of a larger department.

In 2005, FEMA proposed closing its Pacific Area Office, located in Honolulu, because of budget shortfalls. I found this proposal unacceptable. I met with the FEMA Director who was able to quash the proposal.

Unfortunately, the President’s FY07 budget continues to sacrifice preparedness and recovery. As former FEMA director James Lee Witt has written, "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." Over the past few years, FEMA has been downgraded, dismantled, and demoralized. Its traditional mission of responding to natural disasters has been buried within a new, huge department focused on terrorism.

The President wants to keep FEMA in DHS. Senator Hillary Clinton and I have fought to give it greater independence. That is a battle that continues to warrant effort even if it means we succeed only in making it more independent within DHS, which must be capable of responding to both natural and manmade threats. DHS, with more than 165,000 employees, is a top heavy, hierarchical organization. The Department has the turning radius of an aircraft carrier when it comes to decision-making. This has to change. DHS needs to become more nimble like the Coast Guard, one of its component agencies, if it is going to succeed.

The bottom line is: progress has been made at all levels of government to respond to natural disasters, but this Administration fails to provide true all-hazards preparedness. Addressing this issue will be one of the biggest challenges facing the next Congress."