Politics 365: The Speaker's Lobby: The Politics of Natural Disasters

Politics 365 - Chad Pergam

There may yet be a fight in Congress over emergency federal spending to cover the cost of the devastating tornado that impaled Moore, OK this week.

But there’s no fight yet. And there might not be one in the end.

Here’s why: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is flush with cash to respond to the immediate needs of the storm. FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) is stocked with $11.6 billion to help with the immediate aftermath. That appears to be sufficient for the time being. Last year, Congress infused FEMA’s coffers with ample funding so that when a major tornado or earthquake or hurricane struck, demands on the agency wouldn’t bleed it dry in a matter of days.

That wasn’t always the case at FEMA. In September of 2011, FEMA’s assets waned as Hurricane Irene churned up the eastern seaboard, threatening major metropolitan areas like New York and Washington, DC. Because Congress hadn’t injected FEMA with a fiscal booster shot, the agency was soon reduced to scrounging through the federal couch cushions, foraging for loose change. A similar scenario unfolded when Hurricane Katrina splintered New Orleans and the Gulf Coast during the summer of 2005. Congress was away for its August recess. FEMA’s funds dwindled. Both the House and Senate broke their respites for emergency, post-witching hour sessions to approve extra dollars for FEMA.

But the DRF is in good shape now thanks to Congressional action last year. It’s unlikely FEMA could draw down the DRF on the Oklahoma disaster alone. In other words, the primary response to the tornado seems fine. But it’s the second phase of the federal response which could have lawmakers reaching for their Tums.

Congress wears the scars of some sensational fiscal donnybrooks over the past several years. Lawmakers are still smarting from efforts to avoid government shutdowns, partially sidestepping the fiscal cliff and hiking the debt ceiling. But one of the more peculiar melees unfolded late last year and drifted into this past January.

Superstorm Sandy ransacked the New York City metropolitan area and pillaged states from North Carolina to Maine. The situations in New York and New Jersey devolved into crises as electricity was out for weeks. Some regions resorted to gas rationing. As a result, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I), New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) canvassed Capitol Hill, seeking a “robust” spending package to bolster the recovery. They hoped to score an $80-100 billion plan without matching spending cuts paired to the spending.

Congress and the president must reach an agreement each year on 12 individual appropriations or spending bills to run the federal government. But frequently, Congress adds a 13th or 14th bill on top of that. Those are called “supplemental” spending measures. Congress funded the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on supplemental spending bills and paid for Hurricane Katrina and other natural disasters with those packages.

But it’s a new day in Washington when it comes to the bottom line. And few lawmakers (particularly tea party conservatives) wanted to craft an additional spending bill that would simply cancel many of the fiscal savings they achieved.

In the waning hours of the 112th Congress in early January, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) yanked the Sandy spending bill off the schedule. Chris Christie was nearly apoplectic – particularly after calling Boehner four times that night without hearing back from the Ohio Republican.

In the end, Boehner punted until mid-January and the current 113th Congress. Lawmakers drafted a slightly different bill and narrowed the Sandy plan to $50 billion. The Republican-led House eventually approved the bill 241-180 – but with only 49 yea votes from GOPers. In fact, of the 49 Republican ayes, only 19 of those represented districts not touched by Sandy. Meantime, 179 of the 180 Democrats who cast ballots that day voted yes.

The sting of that experience hasn’t waned.

On Tuesday, the House Appropriations Committee assigned spending levels to all 12 of its subcommittees charged with writing bills to fund government programs in the upcoming fiscal year. Most topline spending figures were stark. In fact the subcommittee which allocates taxpayer dollars for the Departments of Labor & Health and Human Services experienced a cut which essentially sends it back to 1998 funding levels. So at this stage, no one knows if an extra spending bill would be necessary to help communities ravaged by Monday’s twister. After all, they’re still sorting through the wreckage. But everyone dreads that the answer to that question could be yes.

It was not a typical press briefing for the GOP Tuesday morning in the basement of the Capitol. Two hours before the event was slated to begin, the House Republican Conference added Rep. James Lankford (R-OK) to the speaking lineup. Someone affixed a piece of paper to the GOP’s lectern, indicating Lankford would speak first, followed by Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK). Only then would Boehner take the microphone.

“We have a lot of tornadoes in Oklahoma,” said Lankford, “But we don’t have a lot of tornadoes like this one.”

“They faced a storm that is hard to describe,” lamented Lucas. “It will be hard to overcome.”

Freshman Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-OK) stood nearby but did not speak. The remainder of the states House delegation, comprised of Reps. Tom Cole (R-OK) and Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), were already back in Oklahoma.

Tears welled up in the eyes of Boehner as he spoke of ordering the flags at the Capitol complex be lowered to half-staff. He remarked that Moore was the home of Cole.

And then came questions about whether Boehner and others could have trouble passing an emergency spending bill for Oklahoma.

“We’ll work with the administration to make sure that they have the resources they need,” Boehner said.

But here’s where the consternation kicks in. Only Cole and Lucas voted in favor of the Sandy aid package. Lankford, Bridenstine and Mullin all voted no. There were questions as to how these lawmakers might vote on such an Oklahoma spending measure if it comes to that.

Boehner was in no mood to relive the clash over Sandy – especially as the devastation was less than 24 hours old.

“Let me speak on behalf of all of our members, including those from Oklahoma,” Boehner declared. “We will work with the administration to make sure that they have the resources they need.”

The Speaker then abruptly ended the news conference and strode out of the room.

It was an uncomfortable moment. But not as uncomfortable as things could be for some members of the Oklahoma delegation if push comes to shove.

Back in January, Tom Cole spoke in favor of the Sandy relief bill during debate on the House floor.

“It’s pretty unusual in my state to go through a year without a tornado disaster,” Cole said. “Each time we’ve come and asked for help from the federal government. Each time, we’ve received help. Undoubtedly, we’ll be doing that again in the near future.”

Cole didn’t realize the prescience of those remarks back in January.

“It would be hypocritical in my view to fail to do for people in the affected region what I, and I know others have routinely asked for, in our own regions,” Cole concluded.

Also in January, Bridenstine spoke out against how leaders structured the Sandy aid bill.

“If we want to spend money for Hurricane Sandy relief, it needs to come from somewhere other than borrowing,” he said.

There are few in Congress who watch the bottom line as closely as Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK). Disaster funding for Sooners is no exception. On Tuesday, Coburn aide John Hart emailed reporters some notes about a possible aid scenario.

“It is crass for critics to play disaster aid politics when first responders are pulling victims from the rubble,” charged Hart in the missive.

He went on to note that “we don’t know if an emergency aid package will even be necessary.” Moreover, Hart said that if extra money was needed, “Dr. Coburn will not change his long-standing position on offsets.”

In other words, if a supplemental bill is necessary, Coburn will demand there be a mechanism to pay for it. To Coburn, it just can’t be additional spending.

If there is trouble, House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) blamed it on “the ideology of the majority party in the House of Representatives.”

It will take weeks to assess if any supplemental money is required to help regions flattened by the tornado. Additional money will be hard to come by in the era of sequestration, the massive mandatory spending cuts which kicked in back in March.

Congress may be able to sequester spending programs. But it can’t sequester natural disasters.

Online: Politics 365