[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 2671-2672]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                                  FEMA

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, in recent years in the State of Nevada we 
have had two natural disasters that have been very traumatic. One was 
in Reno, one in Las Vegas, and both were floods. The majority of the 
natural disasters that we have in America, are caused by water. There 
are earthquakes, of course, and there are fires, but most of our 
natural disasters have to do with water.
  As I just mentioned, in Las Vegas and Reno we had two devastating 
floods. They both destroyed property. Thankfully the loss of life was 
fairly minimal, but there were lives lost, nevertheless, these floods 
were devastating. Homes were washed away. Businesses were washed away.
  The one highlight, as I look back, was the fact that the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, was there and they did a wonderful 
job.
  They were there during the violent storms--the storm in Las Vegas and 
the one in Reno.
  I cannot stress enough how important FEMA was to the people of the 
State of Nevada. They move in quickly, set up first aid and relief 
stations, and constructed temporarily shelters. They set up a Federal 
office where they would meet with people to talk with them about their 
losses, whether or not there were emergency loans available.
  After the worst was over, FEMA, through something called ``Project 
Impact,'' set up a disaster mitigation project. In effect, what it did 
after the flood, was to help in Las Vegas to reduce Las Vegas' 
vulnerability to floods. Project Impact offers seed money to help 
cities all around the country allay the effects of natural disasters.
  In Las Vegas, officials worked with State and local officials on 
waste, to upgrade the sewer system, build ducts, install backlog valves 
to prevent flood waters from entering homes, and install barriers to 
prevent similar disasters from happening again. Project Impact has made 
a real difference in Nevada.
  The former mayor of Las Vegas, Jan Jones, said Las Vegas could not 
have gotten through the floods without the assistance of project 
impact.
  I credit this project with helping hundreds and hundreds of Nevadans 
bounce back from a very difficult time.
  Most recently, in fact yesterday, I was doing a radio program, 
National Public Radio, with Juan Williams. The program was interrupted 
because of the earthquake that took place at about 11:15 a.m. in 
Washington State. At the time I was on the radio program and he did not 
indicate the severity of the quake.
  Yesterday's earthquake survivors were fortunate that the quake 
occurred deep in the ocean, some 30 miles underground. Even though it 
was almost 7 on the Richter scale, the loss of life was minimal. At 
this point we only know of one person who died as a result of that very 
severe earthquake. Several hundred have been hospitalized, and several 
of them are hurt badly, but the impact, because of where it occurred, 
was lessened.
  Project Impact is a program that works. In the State of Nevada, with 
the money allocated to FEMA under Project Impact, the city is working 
on bracing schools, water tanks, working on bookshelves--things like 
that. The same is taking place, as we speak, in Seattle. Furniture and 
computers are being restored or repaired, and they have trained 1,600 
homeowners to shore up their own houses.
  I give this brief background to indicate that I think this new 
administration, wants to wipe out Government waste, they want to cut 
Federal spending, as we all do. I commend this administration for that. 
They want to save whatever money they can and return it back to the 
people in the form of tax cuts, and that is the right thing to do. But 
with all the good Project Impact has done, it is hard to understand why 
President Bush has targeted this program for elimination in his budget.
  In the budget proposal, the outline which was presented to Congress 
yesterday, the President canceled FEMA's Project Impact, saying that 
the $25 million Federal-city program has not been effective.
  I ask President Bush to reconsider. I am deeply concerned, because 
from the experience we have had in Nevada, this is a good program.
  I am also very concerned that the President plans to cut overall FEMA 
spending by 17 percent. This is wrong. He is going to cut this program 
by about $400 million, forcing us to come back with a supplemental and 
put this money in anyway.
  I do not know where the natural disasters are going to take place in 
America today. I do not know where the floods are going to take place. 
I do not know where the fires are going to take place. I do not know 
where the earthquakes are going to take place. But they are going to 
take place sometime during this fiscal year, and FEMA must have the 
money and resources to meet these emergencies.
  When people are hurt, when people are afraid, we need to have the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency have the resources to take care of 
these people. FEMA has done a remarkably good job. They have become so 
much better than they were.
  I say that our President, must take a look at what his people have 
recommended be done. This is the President's budget. He makes the 
ultimate decision. But I want those people who are working with 
President Bush to take another look at this. We cannot--we should not--
eliminate $400 million from FEMA because, I repeat, even with the full 
funding, it is very likely we are going to have to come back, as we do 
every year, for more money for these emergencies.
  Late yesterday, President Bush dispatched his new Director of FEMA, 
Joe Allbaugh, to the State of Washington. President Bush said Mr. 
Allbaugh would work with State and local officials to provide whatever 
help he could to the people of the State of Washington.
  We have seen the pictures of Washington after the quake--the still 
pictures in newspapers--and we have seen the disaster more vividly on 
television. Seattle and other places in the State of Washington have 
very serious problems, and Seattle is showing the Nation exactly why 
FEMA funding is necessary and the real impact some of these budget cuts 
would have on our cities.
  The State of Washington needs these moneys. Project Impact is a major 
reason that damage to Seattle was not more serious than it was.
  So as we find ourselves in this tax and budget debate, these are the 
details we have to account for these emergencies.

[[Page 2672]]

  I know Nevadans want a tax cut, and I know the people of Alabama want 
a tax cut. In every State of the Union, people want a tax cut. Nevadans 
and all Americans have worked hard to ensure this surplus. We have 
worked hard and they have worked hard to get it. They deserve a major 
tax cut. It is time to reach a compromise to make sure they can receive 
a fair tax cut, but it has to be one that pays down the debt and 
protects Social Security.
  We have to give people their fair share of a tax cut, but that does 
not eliminate programs such as FEMA. It has to leave money so we can 
have a prescription drug benefit. It has to leave money so we can do 
the things we need to do regarding education.
  So just as families plan for unexpected demands on their resources, 
we have the responsibility to ensure that this Nation has resources to 
respond to its emergencies, such as the floods I have talked about in 
Nevada and this earthquake that took place yesterday in Seattle.
  In the past, parts of our Nation have been devastated by unyielding 
wildfires and unforgiving hurricanes and earthquakes. Unfortunately, we 
will have these emergencies.
  I believe it is our responsibility to account for these inevitable 
commitments. The best way to do that is by preparing for the worst, not 
by reacting when lives have been taken and property has been destroyed. 
We need to be prepared, and we cannot be if we are going to cut Federal 
Emergency Management Agency funding by 17 percent. Certainly, we should 
not cancel FEMA's Project Impact moneys. These moneys are very 
important.
  As I said, with Seattle, Project Impact has helped make Seattle 
buildings more earthquake resistant. Without this, problems in the 
State of Washington would even be worse.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sessions). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________