> Elizabeth Hensel

1^st^ Round of Tuesday, June 5^th^, Afternoon Breakout Session

FEMA Legislative History, Disasters and the Law, and Post-Katrina
Law/Legislation

Christine G. Springer, Ph.D., Director of ECEM at UNLV, was the
moderator of this particular breakout session. She introduced the two
presenters, Keith Bea and Lloyd Burton, as well as informed us that the
two other scheduled presenters, Martha Braddock and Maeve Dion, were
unable to attend. The purpose of the introduction she gave was to put
what was going to be addressed by both speakers into context while also
suggesting that Federal Emergency Management is absolutely based on
crisis after crisis, therefore making it difficult to predict, plan, and
manage, however, it is still extremely important. She began by posing
the question, "How long has Federal Emergency Management been around?" A
gentleman in the audience suggested 1927. Although she later pointed out
the importance of the year 1927 in regards to the Great Mississippi
River flood and what the Secretary of Congress at the time, Herbert
Hoover, did in response to the disaster, she informed us that the real
beginning of Federal Emergency Management dates back to the Act of 1803,
which is considered to be the beginning of federal policy to provide
relief after a disaster occurs. She then continued with a brief overview
of important dates in FEMA Legislative history, such as 1934 when the
Flood Control Act was passed and 1979 when President Carter at the
urging of the National Governors Association passed executive order
creating FEMA. It was not until the year 2003 that FEMA came under the
Department of Homeland Security.

Lloyd Burton, Ph.D., Program Director of the Graduate School of Public
Affairs at the University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences
Center, spoke next on the topic "A Constitutional Framework for
All-Hazards Management: Mapping and Mitigating Organizational Culture
Clash." He expressed that among the many concerns troubling public
administrators at every level of government in regards to their response
to natural disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina, was that of an
organizational culture clash between Federal, State and local
authorities; between civilian and military agencies; and within FEMA
itself. He began his presentation by asking the members of the audience
to participate in an assessment exercise. The people were then supposed
to write as many clauses from the preamble of the constitution in two
minutes. A fair amount of people were able to recite them aloud,
however, that was not the purpose of the exercise. The point he made was
that these clauses that are more so goals, tend to get in the way of
each other causing people to pay attention to particular ones rather
then how it should be, which is achieving all of them. Burton then
continued to mention the aftermath of 9/11 and how it was unfortunate
and destructive on both Homeland Security and FEMA. He then posed the
question, "What do the agencies all have in common?" The answer is the
rule of law and that no one is above it. Being that the two main
failings when it comes to different agencies with different missions
compelled to work together are structure of law and organizational
culture clash, Burton proposed a conceptual framework for understanding
within which all of these organizational relationships can be mapped. He
showed three different tables that linked the phases in the all-hazards
management cycle (mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery) with
the constitutional sources of authority (intra-governmental,
inter-governmental, and individual) for these governmental institutions.
The conceptual framework he proposed is a "legal GIS" system that can be
used to locate the flashpoint between different agencies when their
differences clashed in past disaster management incidents. The
influenced variables are causality, scope, scale, geographic location
and a determination of what the current management phase is.

Keith Bea, Specialist for the American National Government, Government &
Finance Division, Congressional Research Search, and Library of
Congress, spoke last in the breakout session on the topic, "Are We Done
Yet? Congressional Action (and Inaction) on the Development of Federal
Emergency Management Policy." He began by explaining to the audience
that although he was speaking on behalf of Congress, it was in an
entirely non-biased way. He then said that it truly comes down to
whether or not Congress is doing a good job. Bea asked the people if
they felt that FEMA should stay within the Department of Homeland
Security. A very resounding "no" was replied back to him from the
audience. He then asked, "Are we done yet?" He answered for us by
saying, "of course we're not!" To show why Emergency Management should
be kept separate from DHS, Bea illustrated several points that happened
in either Pre-1950 or Post-1950. For instance, he pointed out that
Pre-1950 Congress was considered the lead player and that disaster
relief during this period is what led us to becoming the welfare state
we are now. When speaking on Post-1950, he pointed out the 7 significant
amendments as well as the Stafford Act and the Homeland Security Act
that segued into a main point he wanted to address. The idea that he
expressed was that precedence is key when it comes to law. He then spoke
about victims needs and how it varies based on the hazard that occurred,
but that it has not really been addressed before. He then mentioned
larger policy and how it often times overwhelms the needs. Lastly, he
referred to how unanticipated concerns show errors in the system. One of
Keith Bea's closing statements of his presentation was, "Congress sees
gaps that need filled. They also show restraint." In essence, we have a
Congress that acts when needed, but also leaves items to the executive
branch.

During the Q&A part of this session, there were several questions, as
well as general statements and comments made. There was a question
concerning how much legislation effecting emergency management comes
from appropriation law and can they use the money in disasters such as
Hurricane Katrina. Bea answered that Congress does have the ability to
do so, but that the money is critical because without it nothing can be
done. Other questions were asked in regards to whether or not the Warner
Act will survive court challenges. Burton replied that the real question
is whether it will survive current Congress. A question that was posed
by a graduate student in the audience about the importance of research
led into a bigger discussion referring to special interest groups. Keith
Bea commented by saying, "research can plow the field, it can set the
tone, but will it be used at the last minute, as far as affecting
legislation?" Another audience member took his stance on the topic by
suggesting that research is meaningful and important as long as you have
political power. Bea agreed with this statement, but added that although
research is a good foundation, it very rarely results in policy changes.
The Q&A ended with a few brief statements made about the likelihood of
FEMA becoming an independent agency again, which then ended the session
on an amusing note when an audience member posed the question, "Should
DHS even exist?"