Lawmakers are poring over the massive $99 billion disaster aid request that the White House submitted to Congress this week and are already signaling they want to see some changes.
While the idea of passing a comprehensive disaster relief package before the end of the year has garnered bipartisan support from every corner of the Capitol, members have not found consensus on how much money to spend or where exactly to allocate it.
The differences of opinion — most evident among House Republicans — threaten to undermine congressional leaders’ year-end push to approve badly needed disaster assistance as federal agencies warn that their recovery efforts are on life support.
Senate Appropriations Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) tried to get ahead of any funding fights during a disaster-focused hearing with administration officials Wednesday. She reminded her colleagues of the urgency of their work as communities continue to reel from the impacts of major storms, floods and wildfires in the past two years.
“You don’t argue whether to put out a fire; you don’t debate how much water to use or how many people to save,” Murray said. “You roll up your sleeves, you get to work, and you get help out the door — as much as needed, as fast as possible.”
She added, “Right now, the backbone of our disaster response is running on fumes.”
Indeed, the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s disaster fund is down to its last $5 billion, and the Small Business Administration has gone more than a month without money to approve new disaster loans.
The administration’s request calls for $40 billion to shore up FEMA’s disaster relief fund; $24 billion for the Department of Agriculture to support farmers’ disaster recovery; $12 billion for the Department of Housing and Urban Development to lead long-term recovery efforts; $8 billion for the Department of Transportation to rebuild roads, highways and bridges; $2 billion for Small Business Administration disaster loans; and tens of billions additional dollars for dozens more agencies.
The top Democrats and Republicans in both the House and Senate have pledged their support for a year-end disaster package.
‘It’s pretty large’
The Senate hearing, the first to focus on President Joe Biden’s latest disaster aid request, saw senators engage amicably with one another and with administration officials such as FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell. Not one senator expressed any significant concern with the request itself, and some even said they would support a second disaster supplemental sometime next year.
But in the House, members have already laid bare the kinds of partisan rifts over emergency spending that could push the supplemental negotiations down to the wire. Congressional leaders are hoping to approve a package before the Dec. 20 government funding deadline.
“I think it can be clearly reformed, or potentially pared down rather substantially,” said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), chair of the House State-Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee, without going into specifics.
Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), chair of both the conservative House Freedom Caucus and the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, was more blunt in his assessment of the White House’s request.
“It’s pretty large and completely unpaid for,” he said. Disaster funding is generally exempt from pay-for rules.
The request calls for more money for the Department of Agriculture than for any other agency except FEMA. It also proposes billions to help cover the rebuild of the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge in Harris’ home state.
Other Republican appropriators were more supportive of the request. Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), chair of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, pointed to the need to quickly fund infrastructure projects on military installations from Guam to Florida that have suffered significant damage due to storms.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have come out strongly in support of the funding for farmers who are facing historic droughts and the impacts of crop and livestock loss due to extreme weather.
Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), ranking member on the House Interior-Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, said Democratic appropriators were going to be briefed Wednesday on the details of the White House’s request.
Appropriations ranking member Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) told reporters that she plans to “go through it line by line” and will work with colleagues to make necessary tweaks ahead of the Thanksgiving break.
“There’s no doubt that there will be something that you want to maybe [change],” she said. “That’s going to happen in the next couple of days.”
Avoiding ‘maximally stupid’ approach
A number of lawmakers this week expressed concern about the short time frame for appropriating new money, noting the consequences of letting partisan differences get in the way of approving disaster dollars that are going to be needed sooner or later.
Criswell, who testified before three different committees this week, told lawmakers multiple times that FEMA may have to restrict spending before the end of the year if Congress does not refill its disaster account. It would be the second such restriction since August.
“A lot of the worst disasters have happened in red states just like they have happened in blue states, so I think there’s going to be pressure on everyone to get those negotiations concluded to figure out what the right number is and get it to the people that need it,” said Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.).
At the Senate hearing Wednesday, Hawaii Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz made his usual plea for lawmakers to fund and permanently authorize HUD’s disaster relief block grant program. It could help communities like Lahaina in Hawaii, which was devastated by deadly wildfires last year, with immediate housing needs after disasters.
“It’s not as if you’re being a fiscal conservative by not authorizing this program,” he said. “You’re just ensuring it is done in the maximally stupid way.”
He threatened earlier this year to potentially “get in the way of” a vote on a spending deal next month if congressional leaders do not include supplemental disaster funding.
“We don’t have to do this unintelligently,” Schatz said.
This story also appears in Climatewire.
