[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 99 (Tuesday, June 19, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1336]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  H.R. 2775, A BILL TO AUTHORIZE FUNDING FOR THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 
                       PERFORMANCE GRANT PROGRAM

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JAMES L. OBERSTAR

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 19, 2007

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, today I introduce H.R. 2775, a bill to 
authorize funding for the Emergency Management Performance Grant 
(``EMPG'') program.
  H.R. 2775 authorizes $1.35 billion for Fiscal Years 2009 through 2011 
for the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(``FEMA'') to continue to implement the EMPG program. The bill codifies 
the EMPG program under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
Emergency Assistance Act (``Stafford Act'').
  EMPG is the Federal Government's principal program to build the 
capability of State and local governments to prepare for, respond to, 
recover from, and mitigate all hazards. Administered by FEMA, EMPG is 
truly a partnership between the Federal Government and State and local 
governments that has withstood the test of time. This grant program has 
been in existence, under different names, since the 1950s and derives 
its authority from the Stafford Act.
  As recent history has shown, despite the grave potential threat that 
terrorism poses, our country faces and responds to the threats of 
natural hazards far more frequency. The terror of Katrina is still 
fresh in our memories, and our Nation faces smaller-scale natural 
disasters every day. Just last month, a region of my district was 
devastated by a threat that started in the U.S., then roared across the 
Canadian border: not a terrorist attack, but a 75,000 acre forest fire.
  Despite the risk that our country faces from all hazards, EMPG 
receives a small fraction of what the Federal Government spends on 
terrorism-specific programs. In April, the Subcommittee on Economic 
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management held a hearing 
on the Federal Government's programs related to preparedness for all 
hazards. At that hearing, Members of the Subcommittee learned that in 
FY 2006, EMPG received only a small fraction--about 10 percent--of the 
funding allocated to terrorism preparedness programs.
  EMPG has a long, successful history of fostering true preparedness 
capabilities at the State and local level. The program requires a non-
Federal share of 50 percent, but state and local governments overmatch 
Federal funds by approximately $96 million each year. This 50-percent 
cost share is specifically designed to require State and local 
governments to contribute their resources to building strong emergency 
management capabilities. This is why, unlike many other Federal grant 
programs, State and local governments have not sought an increased 
Federal cost share for this program.
  Recently, some in Congress and in the Administration have sought to 
undermine and undo the EMPG program, by proposing changes that stand to 
gut the core all hazards nature of the program. I introduce this bill 
today to provide the current EMPG program with statutory reinforcement.
  The administration proposed in its FY 2008 Budget request that EMPG 
should be combined with terrorism programs. I am pleased that the FY 
2008 Homeland Security Appropriations bill, passed by the House last 
week, rejected this misguided proposal and funds EMPG as a separate 
program. The Committee on Appropriations recognized the importance of 
the EMPG program as ``the one true all-hazard sources of funding for 
emergency managers,'' as stated in the Committee report. In the same 
manner that Congress must wall off and protect the appropriation for 
EMPG, we must act to reinforce this program through an authorization.
  It has been suggested, in the other body, that the EMPG program be 
codified as an amendment to an act other than the Stafford Act. In 
fact, the Senate does exactly that in its version of the 9/11 
Commission Recommendations Bill (S. 4). This approach would be a 
mistake. If EMPG is authorized outside of the Stafford Act, DHS may use 
its administrative authority to turn EMPG into another terrorism 
preparedness program. This shift would undercut all-hazards 
preparedness and place States in danger of not being ready for natural 
disasters and other non- terrorism hazards, which are significantly, 
even drastically, more likely to occur.
  The Stafford Act is the natural and historic home for this program. 
The authority to prepare for all hazards must be kept together with the 
authority to respond to, recover from, and mitigate against all 
hazards, which is found in the Stafford Act. This view is supported by 
the nation's State and local emergency managers.
  One of the key lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina is that 
separating the programs and organizations that prepare for disasters 
from the rest of the emergency management system leads to sluggish and 
ineffective response. Recognizing this mistake, Congress reunited 
preparedness with the rest of emergency management functions in FEMA at 
the end of the 109th Congress, by passing the Post Katrina Emergency 
Management Reform Act. This reorganization of FEMA became effective 
less than 3 months ago, on April 1, 2007. Authorizing EMPG as a program 
separate from the other emergency management programs would begin to 
undo this much-needed reform, and reinstate the mistakes that led to 
the Department of Homeland Security's dismal response to Hurricane 
Katrina.

                          ____________________