Homeland Security Experts to Obama: Make Fewer Natural-Disaster Declarations
With an economy in shambles, two wars underway, and Osama bin Laden still on the loose, natural disasters may be low on the list of presidential transition briefings. But given that President Bush has declared a near-record number of disasters this year, perhaps they should rank higher.
A number of homeland security experts are calling on the incoming Barack Obama administration to declare fewer disasters next year.
Bush issued 74 major disaster declarations so far this year, including the most recent wildfires in California. With more than a month to go in the calendar year, that's already the second-highest number of disasters on record. Only 1996 saw more, with 75.
In 1958, by contrast, there were seven declared disasters.
Does the increase in disaster declarations prove global warming or reflect divine wrath? Hardly. "We're defining catastrophic down," says Matt Mayer, a former senior official in the Department of Homeland Security and author of Decentralizing Homeland Security: Protecting America From Outside the Beltway. "For every little tornado or flood, you are seeing a disaster declaration." Those events are certainly catastrophic to the local communities, he says, but don't rise to the truly catastrophic levels for which the disaster statutes were designed, such as the aftermath of truly historic storms like hurricanes Katrina and Ike.
"This isn't about managing disasters. It's about getting the federal government to pay for things," Mayer told a conference at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
Moreover, it invites moral hazard.
For instance, states are freer to under-allocate money for disaster planning and recovery if they know the feds will pick up the tab—typically 75 percent in a disaster. Mayer says that allows states to continue policies, like unrestricted home-building near shorelines or in fire-prone regions, which can elevate ordinarily controllable weather events into disasters.
Witness the arid semi-desert around Los Angeles.
"The state is with you; we're going to help to get your homes back and your structures back, to get your lives back," California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger told homeowners as the last embers of the most recent wildfires were being snuffed out. There was little talk of limiting development in the fire-prone hills that surround the city.
Far from disasters, they are regularly occurring weather events that should be expected, Mayer says.
"Declaring so many disasters means that state and local governments degrade their own response capabilities, while FEMA can't prepare for the truly catastrophic events because of the increased operational tempo."
Reader Comments
Building Confidence
We need to think about regaining the confidence of the American people. After watching their government continually fail to help citizens during times of crisis, they have lost confidence and their sense of security. In many ways, the recession is the result of lack of confidence.
Next time a disaster strikes, the people will start to regain confidence if they see their government helping their fellow citizens and taxpayers get back on their feet and back contributing to commerce. But, if they watch as their government once again fails to help citizens get back in their homes and business owners restore their businesses, then they will continute to lose confidence.
Accountability
I believe states need to use their resources to handle disasters, but they spend so much money on special projects that use money unwisely that it is ridiculous. There needs to be a special audit of all state moneys and major overhalls done to change the way states do business. I am sure the money for disaster relief and a lot of other relief can be found if we cut down on fraud, waste and abuse. For example, once public schools in California get certain money it can do what it wants with it. I know one school district that is spending money on settlements and cases they could have solved, and I believe it is not telling the public what is going on because provisions allow it to hide the expenses under certain categories they will not disclose to you without legal orders. This to me is excess and unnecessary waste. The federal government should not be a sugar daddy for the states. If states don't take responsibility for most of it's normal woes because they don't audit and cut unnecessary expenses from it's budget, what is the federal government teaching them about responsibility. Certain disasters are going to happen in all aspects of life, but some people don't want Uncle Sam in their buisness, but they want him to bail them out of their wrongly done or damaged personal business. Something has to give. While I am a democrat, and didn't like Bush policies, I think his ratings would have been poorer it he didn't help with some of the 75 disasters he called national disasters. He would have been dammed if he did or didn't. I really feel it is time for states to take control of their finances and build emergency funds and supplies to handle their disasters. The feds can't save everyone from everything.
disaster declarations
I responded as a volunteer to Katrina & Wilma for the state of Florida. I felt a lot of compassion for the people of Mississippi. I also responded to Wilma and was greeted with home made signs along the turn pike in Miami "Mr Bush where is my $2000". This only made me mad. The things I observed and there were many, has made me decide that I will not volunteer to go to south Florida again. Some places are disasters before the storm comes.
advertisement
