U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

45–578 PDF 2009

S. Hrg. 110–827 

AFTER ACTION: A REVIEW OF THE COMBINED 

FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL ACTIVITIES TO 

RESPOND AND RECOVER FROM HURRICANES 

GUSTAV AND IKE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISASTER RECOVERY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 

Available via http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

JOHN WARNER, Virginia 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

MICHAEL L. ALEXANDER, Staff Director 

BRANDON L. MILHORN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

TRINA DRIESSNACK TYRER, Chief Clerk 

AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISASTER RECOVERY 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana, Chairman 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

DONNY WILLIAMS, Staff Director 

APRILLE RAABE, Minority Staff Director 

KELSEY STROUD, Chief Clerk 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Landrieu .............................................................................................. 1 

Senator Domenici ............................................................................................. 5 

Prepared statement: 

Senator Voinovich ............................................................................................. 41 

WITNESSES 

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 

Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a U.S. Senator from the State of Texas ................. 8 

Hon. John Cornyn, a U.S. Senator from the State of Texas ................................ 9 

Hon. David Vitter, a U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana .......................... 10 

Bill White, Mayor, Houston, Texas ........................................................................ 11 

Cedric B. Glover, Mayor, Shreveport, Louisiana .................................................. 13 

Lyda Ann Thomas, Mayor, Galveston, Texas ........................................................ 15 

Reggie P. Dupre, Jr., State Senator, Louisiana State Senate District 20 ........... 17 

David Dewhurst, Lieutenant Governor, State of Texas ....................................... 25 

Mitch Landrieu, Lieutenant Governor, State of Louisiana .................................. 27 

Harvey E. Johnson, Jr., Deputy Administrator and Chief Operating Officer, 

U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency .................................................. 30 

Ed Hecker, Chief of Homeland Security, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

accompanied by Gary A. Loew, Director, Civil Works Programs Integration 

Directors, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers .......................................................... 31 

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Cornyn, Hon. John: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 9 

Dewhurst, David: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 25 

Prepared statement with attachments ........................................................... 75 

Dupre, Reggie P., Jr.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 17 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 71 

Glover, Cedric B.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 13 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 57 

Hecker, Ed: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 31 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 106 

Hutchison, Hon. Kay Bailey: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 8 

Johnson, Harvey E., Jr.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 30 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 93 

Landrieu, Mitch: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 27 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 84 

Loew, Gary A.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 31 

Thomas, Lyda Ann: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 15 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 60 

Vitter, Hon. David: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 10 

Page

IV 

White, Bill: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 11 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 48 

APPENDIX 

Sheila Jackson Lee, a U.S. Representative from the State of Texas ................... 42 

Declaration Timeline for Hurricane Ike—Louisiana submitted by Mr. Johnson ......................................................................................................................... 112 

2-1-1 Preparation ..................................................................................................... 113 

Questions and responses submitted for the Record from: 

Mr. Dupre .......................................................................................................... 120 

Mr. Landrieu ..................................................................................................... 121 

Mr. White .......................................................................................................... 123 

Mr. Dewhurst .................................................................................................... 124 

Mr. Johnson ...................................................................................................... 128 

Mr. Hecker ........................................................................................................ 149 

Chart referred to by Senator Landrieu .................................................................. 152 

Map of Texas referred to by Senator Landrieu ..................................................... 153 

(1) 

AFTER ACTION: A REVIEW OF THE COMBINED 

FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL ACTIVITIES 

TO RESPOND AND RECOVER FROM HURRICANES GUSTAV AND IKE 

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISASTER RECOVERY, OF THE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:09 a.m., in 

room SD–562, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mary Landrieu, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Landrieu and Domenici. 

Also Present: Senators Cornyn and Vitter. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LANDRIEU 

Senator LANDRIEU. Ladies and gentlemen, if you would take your 

seats, I would like to call the Subcommittee to order. Thank you 

all and welcome to the Subcommittee on Disaster Recovery. Our 

hearing is entitled ‘‘After Action: A Review of the Combined Federal, State, and Local Activities to Respond and Recover from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike.’’ 

Let me begin by welcoming my Ranking Member, Senator 

Domenici, who is newly designated as the Ranking Member, but 

not new to this Subcommittee and most certainly not new to this 

Congress, having served for over—— 

Senator DOMENICI. Thirty-six years. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thirty-six years, in large measure on Budget 

and Energy Committees, but most certainly familiar with the subject before us. 

I also would like to welcome Senator Cornyn from Texas, who is 

sitting in on today’s hearing, and my colleague, Senator Vitter from 

Louisiana, and also Senator Hutchison, who will be introducing the 

Texas witnesses, and all three asked to join us this morning because of the importance of this subject. 

Let me begin by just giving a short opening statement, and then 

I will turn to my Ranking Member, and then after that I am going 

to ask Senator Hutchison to introduce the members of the first 

panel from Texas. I will do the introductions of the panelists from 

Louisiana, and then we will begin. We have three panels this 

morning. We have a very aggressive schedule for this hearing, and 

2 

we are going to do our very best to get through all three panels. 

We very much thank the mayors and Senators for joining us today. 

On Labor Day this year, there was not a television in America 

that was not turned to either The Weather Channel or CNN. Millions of concerned Americans were watching to see what was going 

to happen on the Gulf Coast as Hurricane Gustav bore down on 

that region and to understand whether the government would respond better at the Federal, State, and local level. I know that the 

people of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi received a lot of prayers that day, and we are all grateful for the prayers we received. 

And then just about 2 weeks ago, a very similar occurrence took 

place as eyes were turned to the Gulf Coast once again as Hurricane Ike came ashore in Texas and South Louisiana. The country 

watched with keen anxiety again as it appeared their friends and 

neighbors along the Gulf Coast would again face catastrophe. 

The hard part to understand for the people living and struggling 

through the aftermath of Hurricanes Ike and Gustav is that it 

seemed as though the second these particular storms did not result 

in catastrophic death tolls, although there were hundreds of people 

that lost their lives. The national cameras went off, and there is 

a sense outside of the Gulf Coast, I think, and particularly maybe 

even here in Washington, that things went pretty well. And I hope 

that this hearing will focus, yes, on those things that we did do better. We all learned in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and 

Rita. But we all know, particularly the mayors and the local officials that have been fighting these battles now for weeks and days, 

that all things did not go well. We want to examine what worked 

and what did not work. 

I want my colleagues in Washington to know, and people listening to this hearing, that we did not dodge a bullet. The bullet hit 

the Gulf Coast. It hit Texas, and it hit South Louisiana again. Following the disasters of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which we still 

have not in any way recovered from in South Louisiana, it has 

been a particularly hard blow. 

I think if it were not for Hurricane Katrina, which set the 

mark—that catastrophe was of such a nature that I hope we never 

will in any way receive a hit like that. But because that mark was 

raised so high, I think that there may be some idea that these 

storms that were Categories 2’s and 3’s did not really cause quite 

so much damage. If it would not be for Hurricane Katrina, I believe 

we would be talking about Hurricanes Ike and Gustav like the Floridians still talk, Senator Domenici about Hurricane Andrew that 

hit in 1992. These were very serious storms. 

So one of the central focuses of today’s hearing is to explain to 

the American people and to the Members of Congress what exactly 

happened along the Gulf Coast. How did the Federal Government 

respond this time? What lessons were learned and were implemented? What still needs to be done? We want to hear from States 

and cities and counties about what improvements were made, what 

new lessons did they take away, and finally, and most importantly, 

what is the path forward. How do we bring our communities back 

in a more forward-thinking, aggressive, and robust manner than 

we were able to do after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. 

3 

I am going to submit the rest of my opening statement, which 

is quite lengthy and outlines, I think, some very important facts 

about the damage that occurred, not just in Galveston, Mayor, 

which you have been so magnificently fighting for your people, not 

just in Houston, not just along the southern coast of Louisiana, but 

through many other parts of Texas and Louisiana, to served as a 

basis of this hearing. I will submit that for the record. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARY L. LANDRIEU 

On Labor Day of this year, there wasn’t a television in America that was not 

tuned to either the Weather Channel or CNN. Millions of concerned Americans were 

watching to see what was going to happen to the Gulf Coast and to understand how 

their government would respond. I know that the people of Texas, Louisiana, and 

Mississippi received a lot of prayers that day. We are thankful for them. A very 

similar thing happened just weeks later as Hurricane Ike came ashore in Texas. 

The country watched with keen anxiety as it appeared that their friends and neighbors along the Gulf Coast would again face catastrophe. 

The hard part to understand—hard for the people living through Hurricanes Ike 

and Gustav, and hard for the people watching, is that the second these storms did 

not result in catastrophic death tolls, the cameras went off. The media quickly 

turned to other topics. So, there is a sense outside the Gulf Coast that everything 

went well. FEMA is all fixed, we are ready for the next major disaster, and the Gulf 

Coast only suffered inconsequential damage. 

Colleagues stop me all the time and say things like ‘‘wow, you guys really dodged 

a bullet.’’ I’ve got to take the time to tell them, ‘‘oh no we did not.’’ Louisiana and 

Texas suffered massive damage from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. If Hurricanes 

Katrina and Rita had not changed our entire term of reference for what a natural 

disaster could look like, we would be talking about Hurricanes Gustav and Ike like 

Floridians talk about Hurricane Andrew. Hurricanes Ike and Gustav would go in 

the record books as events that dramatically altered people’s perceptions. 

So, one of the central focuses of today’s hearing is to explain to the American people, and to the Congress what happened along the Gulf Coast once the camera’s 

turned off. How did the Federal Government respond this time? What lessons 

learned were implemented, what still needs to be done? We also want to hear from 

the States—what improvements did they make, what new lessons did they take 

away. And finally, what is the path forward? How do we bring these communities 

back in a more forward thinking, aggressive and rapid manner than we were able 

to do after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita? 

With that, I would like to start by thanking my Ranking Member Senator Domenici and all the officials from the State of Louisiana and Texas for traveling to Washington, DC today for this vitally important hearing. I also want to welcome to the 

Subcommittee on Disaster Recovery, Senator Vitter, my colleague from the State of 

Louisiana, as well as Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn of Texas. All 

of us represent citizens who have gone through a period of turmoil, confusion, exhaustion, and devastation resulting from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. 

Hurricane Gustav formed as a tropical storm approximately 260 miles southeast 

of Port-au-Prince, Haiti, on August 25, 2008, and rapidly strengthened, entering the 

Gulf of Mexico on August 31—just two days after the 3rd anniversary of 2005’s Hurricane Katrina. The storm made landfall as a strong Category 2 storm at 9:30 a.m. 

with a maximum sustained wind speed of 110 miles per hour, one mile per hour 

shy of Category 3 strength. 

Nearly 2 million Louisiana residents evacuated, or about 95 percent of the population of south Louisiana, following mandatory evacuation orders in 17 parishes. 

More than 115,292 qualified for FEMA’s hotel/motel program, 2,087 evacuees remain in hotel room evacuees, and 374,898 people have registered for Individual Assistance from FEMA . 

Preliminary State estimates suggest that Hurricane Gustav caused $7 to $15 billion in property damage, or roughly 7 to 15 percent of the property damage sustained in Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. 

Insurers expect Louisiana losses from Hurricane Gustav to total between $4 and 

$10 billion. 

Gustav is projected to result in approximately $2 to $5 billion lost economic activity. 

Tropical Storm Ike developed on September 1st and quickly became a hurricane 

on September 2nd. At 9:30 a.m. CDT on September 13th, Hurricane Ike made landVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:45 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 045578 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\45578.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
4 

fall on Galveston Island as a strong Category 2 hurricane. Hurricane Ike brought 

maximum winds of 110 mps with gusts up to 125, and had a storm surge in some 

areas as high as 14 feet. 

Louisiana Parish officials report 24,774 flooded homes from last weekend’s hurri- cane. Terrebonne Parish was hardest hit, with over 15,000 homes flooded, 2,500 homes 

were inundated in Jefferson Parish. Another 6,500 homes were reported flooded in 

Cameron, Calcasieu, Iberia and Vermillion parishes. 

FEMA’s Office of Infrastructure Protection reported that Hurricane Ike destroyed 

28 oil and gas platforms. 

Power outages for Hurricane Ike-impacted States at one point reached a high of 

6.1 million. 

Hurricanes Gustav and Ike have hit these communities hard as they were just 

recovering from the one-two punch of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. 

In Texas, the City of Galveston was completely devastated. It is a city of 60,000 

people, and the storm impacted every single one of them. Between 10,000 and 

20,000 homes were severely damaged, and it is estimated that over 80 percent of 

all properties took on at least some flooding. The infrastructure of the city has suffered severe damage, rendering it uninhabitable for the 10 days following the storm. 

In Texas as a whole, 26 people lost their lives as a result of the storms. So far, 

over 248,667 households have applied for assistance from FEMA. Houston, a city 

that stepped up during the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, now needs 

the same in return. Thousands of households and businesses have severe structural 

damage. The long-term needs of evacuees have yet to emerge, but we must be ready 

to meet them, as Houston did for Hurricane Katrina’s victims. 

What we know from experience is that the real work of rebuilding homes, schools, 

communities, and lives begins now. And that is the purpose of this hearing. Now 

is when it counts. Now is when the actions of the Federal Government can mean 

the difference between an efficient, effective, timely, and intelligent recovery, versus 

an inefficient, ineffective, untimely, and unintelligent recovery. I view the recoveries 

from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike through a lens colored by the mistakes and lack 

of initiative that marred the first 21⁄2 years of the recovery from Hurricanes Katrina 

and Rita. This cannot be allowed to be the case for Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. 

For instance, during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, FEMA took 2 years to make 

a decision as to whether survivors of the storms would be allowed to use Hazard 

Mitigation Funds, which are funds used to allow recipients to take steps like elevating their homes, buying storm shutters, and other protective matters. FEMA sat 

on the decision while it wrangled over whether certain rules should apply to the 

program. It wasn’t until the full Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed the SMART RESPONSE Act, a bill that I introduced at the beginning 

of this year to force FEMA to allow Louisianans access to the Hazard Mitigation 

funds, that FEMA decided to change the rule on their own. Many had already begun 

to rebuild only to find out that they would not be able to elevate. As a result, people 

had to wait 2 years in order to elevate their homes. 

Another equally important example was the length of time it took for FEMA to 

determine that communities there were completely devastated during Hurricanes 

Katrina and Rita and whose tax bases were completely wiped out, should not have 

to repay Community Disaster Loan. It took FEMA over a year to decide that these 

Community Disaster Loans, which are made to keep communities alive, helping to 

pay for overtime pay of police, fire, and emergency managers, and to maintain other 

critically important government services in the aftermath of devastating storms. 

These funds were used to keep the local governments alive as they had literally no 

money to fund the normal activities of a government, nor any means to pay the 

brave people that were fighting to rebuild these communities, and who at the same 

time were themselves survivors of the storms—that is neither efficient, effective, 

timely, nor intelligent. 

These examples were also reflected in the struggle with the Administration to get 

100-year protection for the levees, which according to the Corps is only 30 percent 

complete in the New Orleans metro area. 

Even to this day, the area outside the New Orleans metro area continues to be 

exposed to hurricanes and flooding. In particular, Terrebonne Parish has no Federal 

levee protection in spite of having an authorized project. The Corps continues to 

delay construction of Morganza to the Gulf, which resulted in flooding during Hurricane Ike that could have been diminished or prevented in Terrebonne Parish. 

Additionally, the two hurricanes brought silt and debris into Louisiana and Texas’ 

waterways that will require a significant Federal commitment to restore navigation. 

In fact, it is no exaggeration to say that FEMA’s efforts to become a true participant in recovery along the Gulf Coast began when I put a hold on the nomination 

5 

of FEMA’s witness today, Deputy Administrator, Harvey E. Johnson. At his confirmation hearing, I asked him whether he had been to the Gulf Coast, and he responded that he had only spent limited time, even though he was FEMA’s Chief Operating Officer at the time. 

As a precondition for allowing his nomination to move forward, I insisted that Mr. 

Johnson travel to the Gulf Coast and meet with State and local officials. To really 

perform his job, Mr. Johnson needed to hear directly from the people on the ground 

about what they needed and what they were facing. He made that trip in February 

of this year, and from that meeting a series of decisions were made that have moved 

the recovery along at a rate more consistent with the urgency of rebuilding a major 

American city. 

I want to publicly request that the Admiral to commit to convening the same type 

of meeting with the pertinent players in Louisiana and Texas in the coming weeks 

to kick start these recoveries into action. 

I want to speak directly to the people of the Louisiana and Texas who are going 

through the trouble of figuring out what to do, trying to find some sense of direction 

during a very confusing, frustrating, and difficult time. I cannot promise you the 

months to come will be easy. Rebuilding communities and lives devastated by 

storms is never easy. What I can promise you is that the recoveries from Hurricanes 

Gustav and Ike will not go the same way as the recoveries from Hurricanes Katrina 

and Rita, so long as this Subcommittee is in existence and I am here to lead it. As 

you can see from this panel, the Senators from Louisiana and Texas are here to 

show that nothing, neither party, nor State borders, nor any excuse by anyone in 

the Federal Government, will hinder this recovery. 

Now I want to speak directly to and send a very clear message to the Federal 

witnesses from FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers: 

If there is red-tape, you need to cut it. 

If you don’t have authority to do what needs to be done, you need to tell 

us what authority you need and we will give it to you. 

If you need more funding to help the people rebuild their lives, then you 

need to ask for it. 

If there is a roadblock that prevents the solution of a problem, you need 

to clear it. 

If there is something or someone within your agency, department, or this 

Administration who is preventing you from making this recovery efficient, 

effective, timely, and intelligent, you need to make it known to us, and we 

will help you find a way around it. 

We’ve gone through Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and learned enough lessons that 

there are no excuses and absolutely no tolerance for ineffective partnership with the 

States. Each Senator on this panel will be watching every step of the way to ensure 

that this happens. 

I know what the people of Louisiana and Texas are going through now, because 

the people of my State continue to admirably try to fight their way back to normalcy 

since Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. I know because I am one of them. It is the job 

of the Subcommittee on Disaster Recovery, this Senate, and this government to do 

whatever we can give the people and the State and local officials that represent 

them, the tools they need to get back on their feet. Anything short of that will be 

handled with the sharpest response possible from this oversight body. 

Together we need to do whatever it takes to be better for the people of Louisiana 

and Texas who have gone through the unimaginable. And I hope you are all committed to doing so. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Now I would like to ask Senator Domenici to 

add his opening comments. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DOMENICI 

Senator DOMENICI. Madam Chairman, let me just say that this 

is not my normal assignment. I think everybody understands who 

is in the Senate community that I am here because my good friend 

Senator Stevens asked me to take his place on this Subcommittee. 

And he is indisposed, and I will be glad to do what is necessary. 

I have a rather detailed statement, but I see so many wonderful 

witnesses who know more than I as to what really happened, and 

I will just put it in the record. 

6 

[The prepared opening statement of Senator Domenici follows:] 

OPENING PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR DOMENICI 

Thank you, Senator Landrieu, for holding this important hearing to discuss recovery efforts after Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. 

I know that you understand, better than any of us, what a daunting task it can 

be for a community to recover from a catastrophic storm, and I look forward to 

working with you to help all who were affected by these hurricanes. I also hope that 

the testimony we hear today will show us how far FEMA has come in preparing 

for and responding to catastrophic disasters, and how they can further improve their 

efforts. 

This year’s storms have caused significant and lasting damage to communities 

throughout the Gulf Coast. Some will need months, if not years, to fully recover. 

Latest estimates show that more than 800,000 residents are still without power, and 

thousands more remain unable to return home. 

Hurricane Ike was so large, it managed to flood tens of thousands of homes in 

Louisiana, while nearly destroying Galveston and wreaking havoc on our nation’s 

fourth largest city, Houston. 

This is something FEMA and state and local governments must be better prepared for. 

Although I understand evacuations were conducted smoothly for these storms, I 

am disappointed in the lack of preparation there seemed to be for sheltering, feeding 

and providing basic necessities for those displaced by the storms. 

After what we witnessed during Hurricane Katrina, FEMA should now be well 

prepared to house a large number of people in the aftermath of a disaster, and I 

am interested to hear how far they have come with a national disaster housing 

strategy. 

While it is always difficult to find a silver lining in the wake of such devastation, 

I believe there is some positive news to report. 

As you know, Madame Chairman, the 3,900 platforms in the Gulf of Mexico account for more than a quarter of the oil our nation produces, and more than 15 percent of our natural gas. 

The safety and integrity of those platforms was put to the test by Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, which reached our Gulf Coast just 12 days apart. Crews had a very 

short timeframe to prepare for their impact, shut-in production, and then evacuate 

to land. During the storms, platforms were battered with wind gusts in excess of 

125 miles per hour and waves more than 50 feet in height. 

Despite the intensity of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, the latest reports from the 

Department of Energy are encouraging. Just 1 percent of Gulf platforms were rendered inoperable, and collectively, those platforms account for just 1 percent of the 

region’s daily oil and gas production. 

The vast majority of Gulf oil and gas platforms sustained little to no damage during these extraordinary storms. Modern technology has allowed us to build platforms that can repeatedly withstand the full force of violent hurricanes. In light of 

these facts, it should be clear that there is minimal risk associated with offshore 

oil and gas production. 

In closing, I want to thank our witnesses for joining us today. I look forward to 

learning more from them about ongoing recovery efforts in the Gulf Coast states. 

Our thoughts and prayers continue to be with the residents of the Gulf Coast. I 

hope that we can all work together to get this region the help and resources it needs 

for a speedy recovery, and I will work with you, Madame Chairman, to make sure 

that happens. 

Senator DOMENICI. The only thing I added that I thought was 

significant, Senator Landrieu, is I added a summary of what happened to the oil production in the area because, once again, this 

area being one of America’s leading offshore production areas, kind 

of the envy of the rest of the offshores in the United States which 

are producing little or nothing for America, nothing significant happened to harm the environment or the production. And that is included in my statement because I think it is important. But the details in my statement try to cover the problems you have had and 

try to talk about the problems that the Federal Government has 

had. 

7 

I would like to say—which one is the mayor of Galveston? 

Madam Mayor, I just want to tell you something about your city. 

I know you are having terrible problems, and I do not know if it 

will ever return to its previous self. But for this Senator, when I 

was a young man, I had a lover who turned out to be my wife now 

of 50 years and 7 months. But she was going to medical school in 

the city of Galveston, and I was in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and 

I had 6 days, and that meant I had to drive to Galveston and see 

my wonderful woman for as long as I could and drive back. And 

so I did not think I was very good at driving long distances because 

I always complained that I did not sleep a lot. But do you know 

I got behind the wheel of my sister’s car, Senator Hutchison, and 

I drove without stopping, except for gasoline, from Albuquerque, 

New Mexico, to Galveston. If any of you put that up on a map, it 

is a pretty long distance. 

I guess maybe I would say to you that Galveston served a marvelous purpose, served as my rendezvous city to make sure 

that—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. So you are entitled to extra help because of 

that, Mayor. [Laughter.] 

Senator DOMENICI. If I could find the marvelous area where we 

were and we enjoyed each other like young kids, holding hands and 

the kind of things that we do, I would go out of my way to be helpful to that area, Mayor. But, frankly, I do not think it is there any 

longer. 

There was a row of trees, as I remember, coming in on the highway, and that is what was bad because at night, after 24 hours on 

the road, or whatever—which I do not broadcast because you 

should not do it. I remember swerving over, and I could not understand why there were trees in the way. But, actually, I was pretty 

far off the highway. That is why trees were in the way. 

But, anyway, we made it safe and sound thanks to you, and I 

am here to see what I can do as part of the Senate team to get 

the money and grants that you all need as soon as possible. Our 

laws do not always respond the right way, and you all will tell us 

about that, the community of Senators who are here, will tell us 

that these laws do not work very well, and we do not seem to fix 

them to work better. But we are trying our best, and we will put 

money in the appropriations bill this year, even though things are 

not ready from these two hurricanes. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Senator Domenici, and I hope 

part of this hearing is rebuilding and replanting those trees that 

we lost. And we thank the Senator. 

Let me ask Senator Cornyn for a brief opening statement and 

then Senator Vitter, and then we will turn to Senator Hutchison. 

Senator CORNYN. Madam Chairman, may I please defer to my 

senior Senator first? 

Senator LANDRIEU. Yes. 

Senator CORNYN. I would be glad to follow her. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Go right ahead. 

8 

STATEMENT OF HON. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS 

Senator HUTCHISON. Well, thank you very much, Senator Cornyn. I certainly appreciate that. And having been born in Galveston, Senator Domenici, I will tell you the palm trees still line 

Broadway where you drove in and maybe on the median there. But 

I assure you it is a signature of Galveston, and with all of our help, 

those palm trees will be in very good shape. 

Let me say that the two mayors here with me today and the 

mayors that I met with yesterday in the other affected counties 

have done a fabulous job. I have been with Mayor White, Mayor 

Thomas, either on the phone or in their centers where they are in 

disaster recovery for the last 2 weeks, and they are really serving 

their constituents so well. And I think today you are going to be 

inquiring about how everything else worked and how people 

worked together because these disasters are all ways that we can 

learn and do better the next time. 

This one is really bad. It is the worst I have seen. I told you I 

was born and raised in Galveston County. I have never seen one 

this bad. So I know that we have a long way to go, but the great 

thing is I know that our colleagues will help us. 

I have already been working with Senator Landrieu, also with 

Senators Harkin, Durbin, Bond, Chairman Byrd, and Ranking 

Member Cochran, on the disaster package that will be coming forward from our Appropriations Committee. I am very pleased that 

they are looking out for us, even though it has only been 10 days, 

and we do not have all of the estimates neatly packaged with a ribbon tied on them because they have not even gotten into parts of 

Galveston yet. 

So we are going to start with an estimate, and I am pleased that 

we have been able through all of our work together—Senator Cornyn, myself, Senator Landrieu, Senator Vitter—to make sure that 

Hurricane Ike is in this bill. It will not be everything, but it will 

be a very strong beginning when we pass our disaster package. 

In addition to that, our delegations, again, have been working on 

the tax extender package which we will pass today. This is for the 

low-income tax credits for rebuilding the housing that is going to 

be so desperately needed in parts of Harris County and Houston, 

as well as Galveston, Beaumont, Port Arthur, Orange, and all of 

Orange County/Bridge City, where I was yesterday. That is a very 

important component that we have been able to get also in the bill 

that is going to be passed today separately. 

I just want to introduce these mayors, and the Lieutenant Governor of Texas will be on the next panel, with your brother, the 

Lieutenant Governor of Louisiana, to talk about it from the State’s 

standpoint because the key here is that FEMA and the State work 

together, while we are doing our part in getting the funding. And 

that is what you are going to explore today. 

So I am very pleased that Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst 

is representing the State of Texas today, and I am very pleased to 

have these two mayors here presenting our case. I think that, considering when this storm happened, we are very far down the road 

to getting the emergency money that will be needed. We need to 

make sure the coordination of the local, Federal, and State are 

9 

working to get the money where it needs to be. That is the thing 

that we hear from every mayor, every county judge that we talk 

to. It is not just that we have gotten the money here in Washington. It is that they are able to get it on the ground where they 

need it. 

So thank you, Madam Chairman, for bringing them here today, 

for listening to what they have learned, so that we can all be better 

in the future. Thank you. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you. Senator Cornyn. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CORNYN, A U.S. SENATOR 

FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS 

Senator CORNYN. Thank you, Senator Landrieu and Senator 

Domenici, for calling this important and timely hearing. And I will 

not repeat except to welcome Mayor White, Mayor Thomas, and 

Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst here today, and to say that I am 

proud of the great leadership that our local and State officials 

showed during a very trying time. And while Houston is trying to 

get all of this power back online and Galveston has long-term challenges that you will hear more about, I could not be more proud 

of what I saw as a seamless effort, cooperation between local, 

State, and Federal officials in trying to deal with this, not only 

plan for it, practice that plan, and then when the natural disaster 

came, to respond in a way that preserved human life as much as 

possible, and then made sure we were prepared to reenter and rebuild, as we will, with the help of the Federal Government and everybody from the Red Cross all the way up to Washington. 

I just want to say that, of course, Secretary Chertoff of the Department of Homeland Security has been down twice to the region 

since the hurricane. We had Secretary Mike Leavitt of HHS and, 

of course, David Paulison, the FEMA Director, and the President 

of the United States came down. And I am very appreciative of the 

responsiveness and attentiveness that they have shown to the damage and the needs and the hardships being suffered by people that, 

frankly, many of whom have no place to live right now and are obviously in a lot of distress. But we will be back, but we need some 

help, and I am pleased to hear Senator Landrieu and Senator 

Domenici make their commitments to help us do that. 

Let me just say finally that, as we are contemplating a bailout 

of Wall Street for somewhere on the tune of $700 billion, I hope 

that we keep in mind those who, through no fault of their own, 

have no place to live. And I trust that we will see a parity of treatment for all natural disasters, whether they be Hurricanes Rita, 

Katrina, Gustav, Dolly, or Ike. And I trust that will be the case. 

So thank you very much for your leadership, and thank you for 

working with Senator Hutchison and me and the entire Texas delegation, as well as our distinguished local leaders and Lieutenant 

Governor Dewhurst, to make sure that happens. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you. And we can submit these statements to the record. 

Senator Vitter. We want to try to get to our panel. Go ahead, 

Senator. 

10 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR VITTER, A U.S. SENATOR 

FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Senator Landrieu and Senator 

Domenici, for hosting this hearing and also thanks to all of our 

guests. I look forward to exploring a number of issues in questioning. I also acknowledge the enormous hit southeast Texas suffered, and we will all be there to assist you, led in part by those 

of us from Louisiana who have experienced that in the recent past. 

And I also acknowledge great work by so many folks at the local, 

State, and Federal level. 

However, in my brief opening, I just want to focus on one very 

specific area and concern. It stems out of my role on the Environment and Public Works Committee overseeing the Corps, and that 

is a real lack of focus and sense of urgency about some of our ongoing flood control work in Louisiana. And I will just make the point 

briefly by reading a letter that I sent yesterday to General Robert 

Van Antwerp, the Commanding General of the Corps. 

‘‘In June 2006, as part of the emergency supplemental appropria- tions bill, P.L. 109–234, I secured $30.024 million in Federal funding for repairs, replacement, modifications, and improvements to 

non-Federal levees in Terrebonne Parish. This funding was dedicated specifically to local work on levees outside of the Federal 

Government’s jurisdiction, and with its focus on local protection, 

the 2006 funding should have been provided without delay to begin 

construction immediately on stronger local flood protection. State 

and parish officials had concrete plans, which I provided to Congress and the Corps, and they were ready to begin immediately on 

construction.’’ 

‘‘Unfortunately, the Corps sat on this money for over 2 years, 

preventing it from having any concrete impact on the ground in 

Terrebonne Parish. Even worse, the Corps apparently squandered 

away some portion of this funding on a study in conjunction with 

Southern University in order to build a mentoring relationship 

with Southern, an initiative and priority of certain Corps officials.’’ 

‘‘These hard-earned taxpayer dollars were not appropriated to 

mentor anyone, including entities that know little or nothing about 

Terrebonne Parish flood control needs and little or nothing about 

the engineering involved. These dollars were approved to build real 

flood control on the ground in Terrebonne Parish immediately. If 

this had been done over the past 2 years as directed and intended, 

Terrebonne Parish would have been saved from a very large percentage of the devastating flooding it suffered over the past month. 

It is just that simple.’’ 

‘‘I have had it with this sort of bureaucratic nonsense that contributes directly to our extended pain and suffering. The fact that 

red tape and bureaucratic ineptness contributed to Terrebonne 

Parish’s flooding in the past month is unconscionable. There is no 

excuse for this flooding when $30.024 million was appropriated 

over 2 years ago to prevent just such damage. This is a clear example of broken government that has failed its citizens.’’ 

‘‘As you know, we are meeting Wednesday in my office on a select number of issues related to Hurricanes Gustav and Ike’’—including this one. ‘‘At this meeting, I need to hear from you on two 

points:’’ 

11 

1The prepared statement of Ms. Sheila Jackson Lee appears in the Appendix on page 42. 

2The prepared statement of Mr. White appears in the Appendix on page 48. 

‘‘First, why was this $30.024 million prevented from having an 

immediate impact on the ground in Terrebonne Parish? And why 

was some portion of it squandered away on a study in conjunction 

with Southern University?’’ 

‘‘Second, what is your precise plan to end all the studies and mentoring, immediately transfer the full $30.024 million to State 

and parish flood control officials, and get out of the way?’’ 

‘‘I look forward to a response from the Corps here as well as in 

my meeting tomorrow, and I bring this up first because it is very 

important in and of itself, particularly to the citizens of Terrebonne 

Parish; but, second, because unfortunately I think it is an endemic 

problem at the Corps and represents a much broader challenge.’’ 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Senator Vitter. 

I would like to begin our panel by saying that Congresswoman 

Sheila Jackson Lee has submitted a statement for the record, and 

that will be a part of our hearing.1

I also want to say that Mr. Johnson has been asked by me to sit 

through these panels. Would you please stand? Mr. Johnson, Deputy Administrator of FEMA, will hear directly from these local officials during their testimony. 

Also, Ed Hecker from the Corps is here to hear Senator Vitter’s 

statement and one that I will add on that same subject because 

part of the recovery of the Gulf Coast has to do with the Corps of 

Engineers. 

So let us begin, if we could. Mayor White, why don’t we start 

with you? In your testimony, we are asking you to limit it to 5 minutes. And then I will introduce Mayor Glover and Senator Dupre 

at their time. 

Mayor White. 

TESTIMONY OF BILL WHITE,2 MAYOR, HOUSTON, TEXAS 

Mr. WHITE. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I thank the 

Members of this Subcommittee. And, Madam Chairman, I do have 

detailed testimony that I would like to submit for the record. The 

last 10 or 11 pages are very detailed comments addressing points 

about removing bureaucratic impediments to response. 

The Nation’s fourth largest city is still 30 percent without power. 

You go through our streets, and there are walls of debris that 

shade the drivers, street lights not working, and we have thousands who do not have homes to return to from all income levels. 

Madam Chairman, you said it well, that because of the financial 

crisis and because people were not rescued off rooftops, then we 

fear sometimes that people will forget the enormity of the devastation caused by one of the most severe storms to hit the United 

States. When Houston and Texas respond, when our neighbors in 

other States have needs, Senator Domenici, you know that one of 

every 12 soldiers in uniform come from our State, and when we 

had, Senator, a quarter of a million people from southern Louisiana 

visit my hometown right after Hurricane Katrina, we tried to treat 

them the way that we would want them to treat us because we 

12 

knew that we are on the front lines of America’s response to a national disaster. Now we need your help. 

I will not talk about the amounts. Senator Hutchison, Senator 

Cornyn, and our Senators from Louisiana have been fighting for 

the dollars that we need that are proportionate to what has been 

done with other disasters. We do not want more or less than would 

be the share of these States. But I thought I could, Madam Chairman, within the remaining time highlight specific issues that you 

might consider addressing legislatively and in your continuing 

oversight of FEMA. Because we have other witnesses if I do not 

cover all, you can see these on pages 6 through 16 of my testimony. 

First, I would say that it is a very dramatic change from several 

years ago, and I have been dealing with FEMA now almost continually since Hurricane Katrina on various issues. I think Secretary 

Chertoff, Director Paulison, the President, Mr. Johnson, they have 

been very accessible, and you do not need to repeat things. And the 

people on the ground had a sense of urgency of getting things done 

and give proper deference. 

Having said that, for most of us the thing which is most important to us is when the money is going to be wired because for some 

places like Houston, we are in a better position to administer 

things than anybody else, and the fewer levels of review—we are 

conservative in our finances, fiscally responsible, high degree of integrity in the way we conduct local government. Much of it is done 

by competitive bidding statutes, and we do not need to go through 

eight layers of review. But having said that, I will tell you that I 

do commend—it is a new FEMA as far as this thing compared to 

what we were dealing with several years ago, and I comment them. 

Now, some of the improvements—and I will just mention some. 

I think that the FEMA Administrator should be given as much discretion to come up with innovative plans and programs that are 

tailored to the particular disaster. As a businessman, I will tell you 

that there are too many standard operating procedures and not 

enough judgment that are tailored to the disaster. 

We need to make sure that funds are advanced promptly. You 

know the crisis in municipal finance—not caused by us—but it will 

be—our access to the credit markets, especially for places like Galveston and Jefferson County and others, will be exacerbated by the 

fact that there is not municipal insurance for bonds and that the 

markets are seized, so that those Federal funds should be available 

early and directly. We cannot afford to do the float for FEMA and 

for the Federal Government out of the local pocket. 

Housing programs should be flexible and designed by the local 

authorities to meet our need. Senator Hutchison has been on the 

horn. They need some temporary housing in Orange County. In 

Houston, we have thousands of people who do not have homes, and 

there needs to be a voucher program and others that I could elaborate on. But we need to be able to design those programs locally. 

I will say, too, that Senator Vitter was talking about the Corps. 

They have a Blue Roof program where they can put a patch on a 

roof. They need to be able to take applications online. They say 

they cannot do that. A person does not poke a hole in their roof 

and damage it just so they can get the Federal Government to put 

up a tarp over the hole. The odds of fraud are very low, but the 

13 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Glover appears in the Appendix on page 57. 

costs of delay are very high because the next time a big rain comes 

through, then that thing that could have been a roof repair becomes a total replacement of the house because of mold damage. 

Could there be a few mistakes made if we do expedited procedures? 

Yes. But I just give you this as an example. 

And I will close with a final example that I would ask this Subcommittee to retain oversight on. We are doing debris removal on 

a massive scale, and we also have extra policing needs because we 

do not have traffic lights and we do not have street lights, and we 

want to make sure our citizens are safe. Believe me, our officers 

are complaining about the overtime. They are not asking for the 

overtime when you ask every person to put in overtime every night. 

We need to do that. 

In the past, including Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, it was not 

the people at the top, it was not the people at the bottom, but it 

was the people in the middle, generally IG or General Counsel, and 

both times we had to fight them and often not get reimbursed for 

debris removal in Hurricane Allison and in Hurricane Katrina because we could not prove that each log came from the storm. Well, 

it is easy to do it—I mean, if you just use business principles. You 

look at where your volume was before, you look at where your volume is after, and the difference—same thing with public safety expenditures. Give them the authority to use common sense. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. 

Let me quickly introduce Mayor Glover from Shreveport. In 

1990, he was the youngest individual to be elected to the City 

Council in Shreveport. He served there until his election to the 

Louisiana House of Representatives, where he had a distinguished, 

although short, career before his citizens elected him to be mayor 

of Shreveport. I know him to be one of the most able mayors in our 

State, and I am glad you are here, Mayor. Please proceed. 

TESTIMONY OF CEDRIC B. GLOVER,1 MAYOR, SHREVEPORT, 

LOUISIANA 

Mr. GLOVER. Thank you, Senator Landrieu and distinguished 

Senators, for giving me the opportunity to come here today and be 

a part of this distinguished panel. 

Shreveport, Louisiana, where I serve as mayor, is more than 200 

miles from the Gulf of Mexico, and we are some 300 miles removed 

from New Orleans. So I guess the question would be: Why is my 

viewpoint here today relevant? 

Well, it is one that is probably very similar to the one that my 

fellow mayor, Mayor White, had 3 years ago with regard to addressing the issues of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the evacuation 

of our citizens to safe areas during these challenging storms. 

In Shreveport, we sheltered—between the city of Shreveport and 

the city of Bossier City, in conjunction with the Department of Social Services, Red Cross, and others—well over 13,000 folks in shelters that had been officially stood up, and tens of thousands more 

who went into homes and hotels and unofficial shelters across the 

entirety of North Louisiana. 

14 

I have been asked to address what went well and what did not 

in the aftermath of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, and I would like 

to start by saying that all levels of government in this particular 

instance worked better together. We can do a lot, though, to improve our response to the next storm that we know will surely 

come. 

Clearly, in terms of what went right, the evacuation went well. 

Three years ago, 1.3 million people were evacuated from southern 

Louisiana; this year, almost 2 million. Unprecedented marshaling 

of resources at all different levels of government led by our governor, Governor Jindal, and others throughout the State to help effect this process. 

However, we know that there were still challenges to be dealt 

with, but I also would add that FEMA, the State of Louisiana, and 

local government, however, in this particular time communicated 

much better than we did in previous years. 

The levee systems in New Orleans, upgraded since Hurricane 

Katrina, worked just well enough. The televised scenes of water 

overtopping the flood walls in New Orleans were frightening, but 

the levees held this time. But there is still much to do to be able 

to ensure that New Orleans will be able—and the rest of South 

Louisiana—to withstand the next big storm that comes along. And 

I know that you all are well on the way, Senators, to addressing 

those issues. 

But there is, without question, much room for improvement in 

the Federal response to requests for things as simple as commodities. I can only imagine being the mayor of the 99th largest city 

in America, in that Mayor White is the mayor of the fourth largest 

and has some quarter million evacuees sheltering there, just how 

difficult it must have been to deal with the needs that we found 

ourselves dealing with in Shreveport and northwest Louisiana, 

issues of supplies as basic as towels for folks who need to be able 

to shower after 3 and 4 days. Cots that were ordered on the 1st 

of September, towels that were ordered on the 1st of September, 

other supplies needed to stand up and support these shelters that 

were ordered on the 1st of September did not arrive until the 17th 

of September. Another truckload came in the day after. We had no 

way to tell which materials were on their way or when they would 

arrive. As a result, our city government and numerous community 

volunteers and churches across the area stepped forward to do 

what was necessary to make sure that those critical needs were 

met. 

Official shelters that were stood up that had no shower facilities 

ended up having to improvise as we shuttled folks back and forth 

to our high schools and our football stadiums. And even my city 

staffer improvised a shower facility inside of one of the buildings 

on-site at what was an official State shelter. When it became apparent that those needs were not being met, folks stepped forward 

to do exactly what needed to be done and to make things happen. 

I guess the one thing that I would ask as we focus on all of the 

other issues involving and impacted by the storms that we not lose 

focus on the people. Just as the storms make landfall, we have to 

recognize that all of these issues will end up impacting us once we 

have effectively gotten our folks to safety. Issues like health care 

15 

1The prepared statement of Ms. Thomas appears in the Appendix on page 60. 

and effectively segregating our populations from sex offenders and 

other individuals who have warrants for their criminal activity 

need to be effectively addressed on the front end of our evacuation 

process, so that once we get them to safety, we can ensure that we 

do not end up further victimizing individuals. 

We also need to recognize that the process of evacuating can be 

a rather harrowing one, and so when you end up with individuals 

on buses for hours, many of them disabled, and you recognize what 

do they do after the 10th and the 11th and the 12th hour on that 

bus and they are in a wheelchair or they are an amputee or they 

are blind and they cannot make it to the restroom, what do we do 

for them? Those are the issues that we need to make sure that we 

keep focused on for those folks who have managed to be able to listen to and answer that clarion call to evacuate and to move forward. 

Also, once we have effectively evacuated folks and we begin this 

process of repopulating, we have to remember the stresses that 

people are still under and how do we manage to be able to help 

them effectively get home if we have asked them to leave and they 

have done so. And many of them find themselves with limited or 

no resources. How do we help them get home? Those who came on 

the buses, do they have transportation? One of the saddest stories 

that you can ever see—and I know you all have seen many of 

them—are to see those who have evacuated themselves, who have 

exhausted their resources while they have been where they are and 

have to reach out a hand, people who work every day but who do 

not have money to be able to feed their children, to put gas in their 

cars, to get back to devastated homes and devastated regions. We 

need to figure out how we manage to be able to help those folks 

as well. 

Then we also need to remember that there is, without question, 

a need for extensive wrap-around services for all of the folks involved so that we can make sure that we address their mental 

needs, their physical needs, and ultimately their social needs as 

well. 

Thank you, Senators, for giving me the opportunity to share with 

you today. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mayor Glover. Mayor Thomas. 

TESTIMONY OF LYDA ANN THOMAS,1 MAYOR, GALVESTON, 

TEXAS 

Ms. THOMAS. Senator Landrieu and distinguished Members of 

the Subcommittee, thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to 

discuss with you Galveston’s most immediate needs in response to 

Hurricane Ike, one of the city’s most devastating natural disasters 

since the 1900 storm which took 8,000 lives. 

The city’s structures—its port, University of Texas Medical 

Branch at Galveston, historic downtown business district, and east 

end, even its condominiums and second homes built according to 

our strict building codes—have withstood a surge equal to a Category 4 hurricane, virtually submerging the entire island in depths 

ranging from 3 to 18 feet. Although damaged, these structures 

16 

stand testimony to the fact that Galveston Island is a viable, valuable piece of real estate that proudly, this day, flies the flag of the 

State of Texas and the United States of America. 

The seawall that was built by the U.S. Corps of Engineers in 

1902, has proven its worth numerous times and is a constant reminder of the close relationship and deep appreciation 

Galvestonians feel for the government which came to their rescue 

at that time. My grandfather, Isaac H. Kempner, served the city’s 

government then and sought Federal, State, and New York banking assistance for the shattered city. Lessons learned from him and 

his generation of Galvestonians form the basis of today’s hurricane 

recovery plan. 

I must tell you that chills ran up my spine when I saw the name 

Ike selected for this year’s hit list. The irony, on the one hand, is 

that I, his granddaughter, might bear the God-awful responsibilities of helping my citizens dig out and bear up against a similar 

tragic event. The greater irony is that my grandfather, I.H. 

Kempner, was commonly called ‘‘Ike.’’ If I feared before, I instinctively feel now, that Hurricane Ike symbolizes much more than the 

destruction of Galveston. Hurricane Ike represents the rebuilding 

of our city. 

I appear before you to ask your help in giving Galveston and 

Galvestonians a new beginning, just as the U.S. Government did 

after the 1900 storm. We will require billions of dollars to rebuild 

all our infrastructure which took a terrible beating, strengthen our 

port, and repair and shore up the University of Texas Medical 

Branch, its hospital, medical school, research labs, and especially 

the National Biosafety Lab. 

These are the city’s economic engines. Are they worth saving? Is 

Galveston worth saving? That is the question you must decide. 

Here are some reasons why Galveston is worth saving: Our island has a long record of coastal defense. Pirate Jean Lafitte took 

advantage of this location. It was part of America’s defense system 

in the Civil War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, and 

World War II. It possesses a natural deep-water harbor closest to 

open sea lanes. The Pelican Island side provides frontline major offshore oil rig repair—an invaluable component in the Nation’s major 

petrochemical-producing and refinery region encompassing the Gulf 

of Mexico and East Texas. 

With adequate rail and bridging, the port can continue to serve 

this Nation, especially its exporting and importing of vital materials which will increase when the Panama Canal widening and 

deepening is complete in 2014. 

Gerald Sullivan, Chairman of the Port of Galveston Board of 

Trustees, will be happy to answer any of your questions regarding 

the port, and Dr. David Callender, President, will stand ready for 

the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB). 

I want to conclude my remarks with an appeal from my heart to 

yours. The citizens of Galveston have suffered severe losses. One 

whole section of town north of Broadway may be uninhabitable. An 

estimated 10,000 to 20,000 citizens lost their homes and possessions. 

We need help—lots of it—but first and foremost, we need you to 

continue your support and cooperation extended from the PresiVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:45 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 045578 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 P:\DOCS\45578.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
17 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Dupre appears in the Appendix on page 71. 

dent, Members of Congress, Homeland Security, FEMA, the Corps 

of Engineers, HUD, Red Cross, Salvation Army, the Small Business 

Administration, volunteers, and many others as well. Together, 

taking the comprehensive approach you have taken since Hurricane Ike appeared in the Gulf, we can address human as well as 

strategic and economic needs. 

Last, I want to thank and commend FEMA. Had it not been for 

FEMA, the city would not have recovered as well as it has to allow 

me, only 8 days after the storm and on the eve of our citizens’ returning to Galveston, to leave and come to Washington. Our representative, Jaime Forero, was at our side from day one, facilitating our response and recovery. His resourcefulness and ability 

helped to coordinate men and machinery, secure generators, PODS, 

DMAT, fuel, a disaster center, just to mention a few. 

Communication is always a deficit on Galveston Island. We had 

no power, no water, no natural gas, and sewage. FEMA was our 

lifeline working synergistically with State emergency management 

under Jack Colley and Sandy Coachman, the Federal Coordinating 

Officer. The Governor of Texas, Rick Perry, our Senators, our Representatives, and all our volunteers have done themselves and our 

Nation proud. I look forward to having another opportunity to come 

before you as we continue our recovery efforts and face new challenges that will undoubtedly require your support. 

Attached to my remarks is a detailed list of our needs and 

projects for which we are requesting funding. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mayor. 

Our final witness on the first panel is State Senator Reggie 

Dupre, who has served in the legislature since 2001. He is the chief 

sponsor of the State of Louisiana’s Coastal Trust Fund that was 

created with, in large measure, the help of members of this panel, 

most notably Senator Domenici, to help bring revenue sharing to 

the States of Louisiana, Texas, Alabama, and Mississippi. 

The State legislature has designed under Reggie’s leadership a 

trust fund, Senator Domenici, to help do some of the work that has 

been outlined by Senator Vitter and myself now for years, work 

that needs to be done, his insights into the challenge of all of coastal Louisiana, although his district is really represented in southeast, we are here to hear his testimony. 

Senator thank you for joining us. 

TESTIMONY OF REGGIE P. DUPRE, JR.,1 STATE SENATOR, 

LOUISIANA STATE SENATE DISTRICT 20 

Mr. DUPRE. Thank you, Madam Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for extending me the great honor of testifying before you today. 

Before beginning, Senator Domenici, you and I have something 

in common. Sixteen years ago, my first secret rendezvous with my 

wife, who was a resident of Dallas, was in Galveston. [Laughter.] 

Mr. DUPRE. So I just admitted to—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. What is it with this rendezvous, please? 

18 

Mr. DUPRE. I just admitted to the rest of the country where we 

were 16 years ago. 

My name is Reggie Dupre. I am the Louisiana State Senator in 

south-central coastal Louisiana, and my legislative district has the 

highest rate of wetlands loss of any area in the United States of 

America. I represent approximately 120,000 citizens in Lafourche 

and Terrebonne Parishes. 

I was born and raised in the same area. I also serve as Chairman 

of the Louisiana Senate Natural Resources Committee which has 

oversight over all coastal issues, including hurricane protection and 

coastal restoration. 

According to the Louisiana Conference of Mayors, Houma, Louisiana, the parish seat of Terrebonne Parish, will be the fastestgrowing metropolitan service area in the United States in 2008 at 

5.2-percent growth. For 2007 and early 2008, Houma, Louisiana, 

had the strongest real estate appreciation market in this country 

at an 11-percent rate, while the rest of the country was going 

through a real estate crisis. 

In the last 3 years, Louisiana has been hit by four major hurricanes. In 2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita struck Louisiana 

within 4 weeks of each other. Earlier this month, within 11 days, 

Lafourche and Terrebonne Parishes were devastated first by the 

winds of Hurricane Gustav and then by the waters of Hurricane 

Ike, with a 91⁄2-foot tidal surge inundating much of coastal Louisiana for a hurricane that made landfall in the Galveston area. 

Hurricane Gustav was a direct hit upon the Terrebonne/ 

Lafourche area, the first time since 1965 when Hurricane Betsy 

made landfall in my parish and the eye of a major hurricane went 

through Terrebonne Parish. And even though the center of Hurricane Ike was over 200 miles away, the flooding from Hurricane Ike 

was the worst ever experienced in my region. For the first time 

ever, tidal water covered portions of Main Street in Houma, Louisiana, over 35 miles from the coast. 

Over 15,000 structures in my area alone were impacted by Hurricane Ike’s storm surge. It might be difficult to understand, but we 

can recover quicker from Hurricane Gustav’s 100-mile-an-hour-plus 

winds in a direct hit than we will from Hurricane Ike’s tidal surge 

that made landfall in Galveston. 

This is a quote from the Sunday, September 14 paper, my 

quote—the biggest quote I ever got in 20 years of being a public 

official: ‘‘Worse than Rita.’’ Before Hurricane Ike, Hurricane Rita 

was our worst tidal surge 3 years ago that made landfall in Cameron Parish. 

We are not alone in dealing with natural disasters. I want you 

to know that when Louisiana’s coast is devastated by a natural disaster, when Louisiana is hurting, so are you. 

Lafourche and Terrebonne Parishes lie in the middle of the Louisiana energy corridor to the Nation. The Louisiana energy corridor 

is vital to the safety, security, and well-being of our country. Approximately 30 percent of this Nation’s oil and gas supply moves 

through my legislative district. The simple truth is, based on this 

energy-producing value to the Nation, acre for acre Louisiana is the 

most valuable real estate in the Nation. 

19 

For example, my district includes the only land access to Port 

Fourchon on the gulf, a single highway, Louisiana Highway 1. Hurricane Katrina caused a $1-a-gallon spike in gasoline prices in this 

country. However, it has been estimated that a total destruction of 

Port Fourchon will cause a long-term $2-a-gallon spike at the 

pump. The citizens of this great Nation cannot afford $6-a-gallon 

gasoline. 

I am amazed that Congress is currently considering opening up 

new offshore drilling without first ensuring the stability of the Nation’s top production area. 

The hurricanes further devastated important nearby barrier islands which are critical to the protection of the coastline from tidal 

surges. Hurricanes Gustav and Ike in less than 2 weeks have 

caused nearly half of the loss of our barrier islands. In fact, we lost 

one of our barrier islands, and here is another headline from September 16th in my local paper: ‘‘Terrebonne barrier island disappears after Gustav.’’ It is gone. All that is left is a sandbar. 

In terms of lessons to be learned from what went right and 

wrong, the old adage is always true. The best way to recover from 

a disaster is to prevent it in the first place. Cleanup and recovery 

are, in the long run, almost always more costly than prevention. 

In terms of what went right, evacuations from Hurricane Gustav 

went very well, with the contraflow that was done by the State. 

FEMA and other State and Federal officials were embedded in our 

local Emergency Operations Centers. We learned a lot from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. I think the Federal response was fantastic 

preparing for these hurricanes. For the first time ever, the unified 

command structure developed after September 11, 2001 was successfully implemented, I think, at the parish level, in Terrebonne 

Parish, right after Hurricane Gustav. 

Another success story is building codes. Everywhere I went, I 

saw where building codes were used, both commercially and residentially, those businesses and homes survived much better. So 

building codes do work. They are a little bit controversial, but they 

do work. 

Also, the new technologies that you all provided since Hurricane 

Katrina, especially with 700-megahertz radios, worked very well. I 

was able to speak to my sheriff 100 miles away from me—I was 

in Baton Rouge, he was in Houma—in 100-mile-an-hour winds, and 

we were able to speak and communicate and able to get him MPs 

immediately because of this new technology that Congress provided 

us after Hurricane Katrina. 

In terms of lessons to be learned, behind the devastating hurricanes, our second biggest problem is the timing and bureaucracy 

involved in building protection projects. 

Senator DOMENICI. Would you say that again, please? 

Mr. DUPRE. Our second biggest problem behind Mother nature is 

the timing and bureaucracy involved in building our protection 

projects. Just to go along with what Senator Vitter said, as stated 

earlier, over 2 years ago we were able to secure $30 million for 

local levees, and we have not seen a penny of construction yet. 

What we have seen, a lesson to be learned since Hurricanes 

Katrina and Rita, we have seen an overreaction on standards from 

the Corps of Engineers. Some of that criticism was justified; some 

20 

was unjustified. But because of the criticism from Hurricane 

Katrina, they have developed standards which are unreachable by 

local and State governments. Now it is costing $40 a cubic yard to 

build levees, and we just cannot afford the—— 

Senator DOMENICI. What do you mean, ‘‘standards’’? Standards 

for what and on what? 

Mr. DUPRE. Traditionally, we would build levees from site borrow 

material. Now they are saying we can no longer do that, so we 

have to bring in sometimes hundreds of miles away borrow material, which is very expensive and the point I am trying to make is 

some levees are better than no levees, and that is where we are 

at. We cannot afford to sometimes meet these standards, especially 

for non-Federal protection. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Senator, I am going to have to ask you to 

wrap up. We have to move this panel forward. 

Mr. DUPRE. Well, just since 1992, Madam Chairman, we have 

started our hurricane protection project from Morganza to the Gulf. 

You and Senator Vitter are very familiar with this. The critical 

mistake we made 16 years ago, citizens in my parish, is that we 

put our full faith in following the Federal rules. We should have 

just went on our own and asked for forgiveness instead of permission. 

My request is simple. For my area, we are asking for the same 

consideration as the New Orleans area: Full Federal funding of the 

authorized hurricane protection and coastal protection projects, including the Morganza project. Specifically, we are requesting $1.5 

billion to build Morganza in accordance with the authorized chief’s 

report, $150 million for immediate non-Federal levee needs, and 

approximately $500 million to restore and protect about 50 miles 

of barrier islands with rocks between the Mississippi and the 

Atchafalaya Rivers. 

What we are looking for from the Federal Government is not a 

handout but a helping hand. We have already done a lot of work 

at the State level. You know we raised money both at the State 

and local levels from taxes. And as Windell Curole always says, 

‘‘Elevation is the salvation from inundation,’’ as we all know. 

I will be happy to answer any questions. Thank you for having 

me today. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate it. 

We have two more panels to finish before 12:30, and Senators do 

have questions. So I am going to ask each Senator to limit themselves to two questions each, and then we are going to move to the 

next panel. 

Let me ask my first question to the mayor of Galveston. Mayor, 

we have read your full testimony. You have made some excellent 

recommendations. You indicate that over 20,000 citizens in Galveston have lost their homes. I cannot recall immediately how 

many schools and churches you have lost, but I am assuming it is 

dozens of both. 

Would you have a word to share with us about your general 

thoughts about your long-term housing needs and what we should 

focus on for you now? 

Ms. THOMAS. Yes, I will, Senator. At this moment, with the help 

of FEMA and the Red Cross, our citizens are going to—most of 

21 

them are coming back tomorrow. Some of our first responders are 

obviously already on the island. We are seeking shelter over in 

Texas City because we really cannot shelter anyone on the island, 

and our medical situation is so serious that the fewer people we 

have, the better. 

As far as housing is concerned, we are hoping to get enough 

money from HUD at some point so that we can begin to rebuild 

some of the houses that have been lost. Galveston is only 2 miles 

wide and it is 35 miles long, and the entire West End, which is 

about half the island, is completely inundated and will not be back 

up probably for months. 

So we are working with FEMA to reconstruct, if you will, some 

apartment houses and that sort of thing on the island. Right now 

we are finding shelters. Long term is simply to rebuild some of our 

neighborhoods, and our neighborhoods, as I said earlier, on the 

north side of Broadway whose population is mostly low- to moderate-income citizens, their houses were not that well built to begin 

with. And that is where we hope to be able to concentrate some rebuilding for our citizens so that they can return home and live 

there, and not in a shelter. 

We are also working, of course, with FEMA on apartments and 

hotels across the State that have agreed to possibly 30 days or 2 

months’ stay. I know that FEMA generally has at this point a 30- 

day limit on paying bills at the hotels and apartment houses. I am 

sure we are going to need to ask FEMA to extend that 30-day period to possibly another month or two. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. And my last question is to you, Senator. 

Based on the request that our delegation has put in the Corps to 

expedite the building of the levees in Terrebonne Parish, what has 

the Corps told you to date about their plans to move forward? 

Mr. DUPRE. The congressional delegation, after 15 years of doing 

their studies, finally was able to get us authorization in 2007, and 

then Congress overrode the Presidential veto of the WARDA bill 

last year. Immediately thereafter, the Corps said, well, this project 

post-Katrina is going to exceed the 20-percent limitations from the 

1986 WARDA, so they wanted to reevaluate the whole project. Now 

they are telling us as of yesterday they would need in excess of 

$1.5 billion just to build the authorized project, which does not 

meet maybe the 100-year level of protection. But we know that, 

and we are willing to take on that liability. But we need some protection to secure our communities. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. Thank you. Senator Domenici. 

Senator DOMENICI. I want to thank you all, those of you who 

have testified with reference to the response of the Federal Government and the Federal Government’s agencies, FEMA and others. I 

am very pleased that you have acted credibly and answered truthfully in stating that they have done their job well. We do not hear 

many accolades. All we heard for months and months, the bombardment when things did not go well. And the President of the 

United States probably was criticized more on that issue than anything except the war. And now it seems like we were hit much 

harder and by more, and more devastation, and it was handled 

properly, say all of you, and those that follow you. And I think you 

have to be publicly honest in saying the Federal Government have 

22 

some laws that are not so good, if I understand what you think, 

but as far as implementing the laws that were there, it was done 

well. 

Is that true, Mayor White? 

Mr. WHITE. So far, so good. 

Senator DOMENICI. Yes, sir. Well, you need the money, and it 

looks like the law says you cannot get it yet, and that is a flaw in 

the law. And we are going to give you money before you have everything ready, and then you will get more later. The law as it is 

written does not do very good for situations like this because you 

have to have everything bona fide-ly evaluated and appraised and 

a nice ribbon around it, and you have to give us a box full of shoes 

and say here is the size and the shoes, please pay it. We cannot 

do that because you cannot even get out and see the damage yet. 

So that is what you are saying, so far, so good, right? 

Mr. WHITE. Yes. 

Senator DOMENICI. But so far it has been all right. Is that right, 

Mayor, the Federal Government’s action to help your city? 

Ms. THOMAS. For Galveston, our relationship with the Federal 

Government has been excellent. 

Senator DOMENICI. How about you, Mayor? 

Mr. GLOVER. My mother hates it when I put it this way because 

she is a retired school teacher and it does not quite meet her grammatical standards, but the way I have termed it is that it is ‘‘better, but not better enough.’’ 

Senator DOMENICI. What? 

Mr. GLOVER. It is ‘‘better, but not yet better enough.’’ 

Senator DOMENICI. OK. Well, that is good. I mean, that is ‘‘gooder, but it is not gooder enough.’’ 

Mr. GLOVER. Exactly. [Laughter.] 

Senator DOMENICI. I never said that to my mother, but she is not 

around or I would try it on. 

And how about you, Mr. Senator? 

Mr. DUPRE. The actual response pre-Gustav and through it from 

FEMA and other Federal agencies was very good. We have learned 

a lot of lessons from Hurricane Katrina. 

Senator DOMENICI. All right. Now, let me ask all of you, and any 

one of you who feels like the question has an answer—if it does not 

fit, do not answer it. But I look at the disasters over the last 12 

months or so, and I happened, by hook or crook, from New Mexico 

where we are mostly dry desert country, I am in the middle of 

them. I am in the middle of Louisiana’s offshore royalty case where 

we passed a law that has actually changed the way we are going 

to treat offshore properties forever, although we still have some 

holdouts that say what we did is not going to be done for the rest 

of the offshore. You understand what I am talking about, sir. 

But let me tell you what I am bothered by. I look out there and 

see where in New Orleans and now in Galveston, the two that I 

see most vividly in my own mind’s eye, and I see hundreds of 

houses ruined. Water has already covered them, and nobody is 

going to live in them. They are hanging half down. But every now 

and then, there is a decent one that did not get it, so it is 50 good 

ones and a bad one. It seems to me that there is no current instrument at the State or Federal level that really allows you to go in 

23 

and resolve the issues for that entire area in ways that are real, 

where you can own the property and pay off the owners and do 

something with it in a major planned manner. 

Am I correct that there is no way to do it in an organized, 

planned way but, rather, one house at a time? 

Mr. DUPRE. That is exactly correct. We only react to one residence or one business at a time rather than entire neighborhoods 

or entire communities. 

Senator DOMENICI. Well, I want to tell you something, sir. I 

think you are pretty much expert on laws, and I would suggest to 

you that you look at something and see if it has any relevancy. For 

some, it is a nasty word, but I was a Republican mayor of a city, 

and I had a downtown area that would have 13 blocks of property, 

and all of them were little 121⁄2- and 25-foot ownerships, and then 

there would be a big building. And then there would be 50 people 

who had bought 25-foot lots over the years, and so I had a downtown that could not go anywhere. And even though I am conservative, I borrowed the Federal urban renewal law and acquired all 

13 blocks for the city of Albuquerque. We paid everybody, and 

there was a little complaint here and there, but they all got top 

dollar. And then we redid it in a way and sold it back to them, the 

private sector and the public. 

I wonder if you would look and see if you think in a flood disaster of certain types that something like that might be a relevant 

piece of legislation that might help in these situations that seem 

to have no end. 

Ms. THOMAS. Senator, I would like to respond to that, if I may. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Go ahead. 

Ms. THOMAS. Your idea, Senator, is a good one because it is not 

a house here and a house there. It is the neighborhoods that are 

gone. And if the city had the opportunity to revitalize neighborhoods because of help from the Federal Government, the people 

who live in those neighborhoods could eventually come home and 

have an opportunity possibly to even buy the house because of the 

Federal financing. 

Senator LANDRIEU. That is what these neighborhoods look like. 

Ms. THOMAS. So your idea is a good one. 

Senator DOMENICI. How about the Senator there? Do you have 

anything to say about it? We want to move on. 

Mr. DUPRE. And this also goes for rural areas as well as urban. 

In my district, Hurricane Gustav totally destroyed a small Native 

American community called Isle de Jean Charles, 75 families. You 

may have one or two houses that survive. It is the same scenario 

you were talking about. We have to do something for the entirety 

of that Native American community. 

Senator LANDRIEU. And I thank the Senator. We are really short 

on time. I want to get to Senator Vitter, and then we are going to 

move onto the next panel. But this is, for the press, a picture of 

what Galveston and some parts of Cameron Parish in Louisiana 

look like and other parts of Texas look like. This is what New Orleans looked like, what parts of St. Bernard looked like, whether 

they are in cities, or outside. 

Now, FEMA’s only answer to this right now is to pull up a trailer 

and park it right there. That is currently the FEMA plan. 

24 

Let me say clearly as the Chairman of this Subcommittee, it is 

wholly unacceptable. Our delegation tried to pass a better plan 

after Hurricane Katrina, but we were thwarted. So let’s hope when 

we try a second time that the message might get to this Administration, that we need more than trailers and bottled water to build 

communities back. 

Now, let me say, Senator Vitter, if you will go forward with your 

questions, and then we have to move to our next panel. 

Senator DOMENICI. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

First, a quick statement. Mayor White, you mentioned the tens 

of thousands of Louisianians Greater Houston so graciously hosted 

after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Let me say for the record my 

wife and I and our four kids were six of them, and we had a wonderful experience north of Houston, including a wonderful semester 

for our kids in the Sci-Fair public system. So thanks to all of your 

citizens in Greater Houston for that, and that certainly will not be 

lost on me as we deal with Hurricane Ike. 

Mayor White and Mayor Thomas, I wonder if you could briefly 

comment on the significance in your mind of tools on the tax side, 

particularly regarding rebuilding and housing needs, things like 

GO zone-type incentives and low-income housing tax credits. 

Ms. THOMAS. I am going to let Mayor White go first because he 

is probably better versed on this subject than I am, and then I will 

follow up and say whether I agree with him or not. [Laughter.] 

Mr. WHITE. On the low-income housing tax credits, it is important to have some extra allocations, but you know the underwriters 

who purchase those are no longer in business. Some of the firms 

syndicated will be part of other hearings that I am sure you will 

attend. So I will personally try to get some large corporations and 

money pools if we are given an allocation. So we might be the 

broker and intermediary. It is helpful, but the markets have seized 

up, so you are going to have to innovate, and I am willing to do 

that if we get an allocation. 

And your first point had to do with tax incentive zones? 

Senator VITTER. Like the GO zone for Hurricanes Katrina and 

Rita, significant incentives on the tax side. 

Mr. WHITE. Yes, I mean, at the same time, Senator, we need help 

from the Federal Government to get back on our feet. At the same 

time, the fiscal set-up in the State of Texas that Governor 

Dewhurst and others are well reminded by, we pay for—out of our 

property taxes, we pay for our schools, our police, our infrastructure, our uninsured health care, our public facilities out of our 

property taxes, and mayors cannot really control the fiscal regime 

of the State, and there are some pros and cons. But if some people 

do not pay taxes, then other people are going to have to pay more 

taxes. And so I would just say that we have used tax incentives in 

the past, but if you are so heavily reliant on property taxes and 

then you have tax holidays—we would love it if the Federal Government were willing to just give us fiscal support forever, but we 

know that is unrealistic, and we probably need the help quickly so 

we can get back on our feet so people can be self-sustaining in the 

local community. That is what we need. 

25 

1The prepared statement with attachments of Mr. Dewhurst appears in the Appendix on page 

75. 

Senator LANDRIEU. I am going to have to call this panel to a 

close. Thank you very much. I really appreciate it. I am particularly encouraged that all of you have testified that FEMA has improved, and the coordination between governments in large measure this Subcommittee helped along with many other committees 

to contribute to that. But I fear that we have a long way to go in 

these recovery efforts. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Can we now hear from the lieutenant governors of the respective States, please? And as they are coming forward, both of these lieutenant governors are speaking on behalf of 

their governors and States, have been designated by each of their 

governors to appear today to give an overview. And we will begin 

with the Lieutenant Governor of Texas, who has been previously 

introduced by Senator Hutchison. And then let me take a moment 

to introduce the Lieutenant Governor of Louisiana. 

He currently acts as CEO of the Department of Culture, Recreation, and Tourism, managing more than 800 employees and a 

$165 million budget. Prior to this, he served 16 years in the legislature, and he also serves as a member of the Governor’s Office of 

Homeland Security Unified Command Group. I am very proud of 

the way that this lieutenant governor and governor worked together to help our citizens prepare for an extraordinary evacuation 

and reentry and now rebuilding after these storms. And I welcome 

you, Lieutenant Governor Landrieu and Lieutenant Governor 

Dewhurst. 

And if we can start, as agreed to, with the Lieutenant Governor 

of Texas. And if you all could limit your statements to 5 minutes 

each, and we may or may not have rounds for questions, we will 

just see, because we do have one additional panel of FEMA and 

Corps officials, of course that we are anxious to get to. 

Lieutenant Governor, thank you for being here. 

TESTIMONY OF DAVID DEWHURST,1 LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, 

STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Mr. DEWHURST. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Senator Domenici, thank you for being here. Thank you for your service to New 

Mexico and to our country. Senator Vitter, my pleasure, sir. 

I want to speak about the impact of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike 

and the performance of our Federal, State, and local agencies. 

Regarding Hurricane Gustav, Madam Chairman, we had spent 

tens of millions of dollars in Category B, Emergency Protective 

Measures, before we knew with certainty that Hurricane Gustav 

would make landfall in Louisiana, at which point we provided personnel, supplies, and resources to help our friends in Louisiana. 

Our attention shifted immediately to Hurricane Ike. As you 

know, Hurricane Ike struck the Texas coast nearly 2 weeks ago in 

what was one of the worst natural disasters in the history of the 

State of Texas. It affected 22 counties, 20,000 square miles in size, 

an area larger than the States of Rhode Island, Delaware, Connecticut, and New Jersey combined. 

26 

In this process, we moved 1.2 million people, 12,500 special 

needs with ambulances and C–130s. We prepositioned equipment 

over 300 miles, as the storm moved from Brownsville in South 

Texas all the way up to Beaumont near your border. We conducted 

the largest search and rescue effort ever in the history of the State 

of Texas. We saved more than 3,540 lives. We had 254 shelters up 

across Texas at a height of 40,000 people. We had 60 points of distribution outstanding, and one of the things I wanted to point out 

was our whole intent with our distribution facilities was to put 

them in the heaviest impact areas such as Galveston, Orange, 

Bridge City, and Chambers County and southeast Harris County. 

Now, people have asked—this was a Category 2 hurricane, but 

it was a Category 4 surge, completely washing over low-lying communities such as Galveston and Orange. In preparation for the economic impact, we have asked 770 cities in 22 counties that were 

in the storm’s path to submit our cost estimates. But due to the 

fact that most of the cities and communities are still restoring their 

basic services, we only have cost estimates from 95 of the 770 cities. 

Our first preliminary schedule which we are providing to you today is approximately $11.5 billion in direct costs to the State of 

Texas, the 22 counties that are affected, and the 770 cities which 

we believe are eligible for reimbursement. The $11.5 billion estimate on direct costs does not include any number from the city of 

Galveston, which to date has yet to respond to the State’s request 

for information. The city of Houston has turned in a preliminary 

number of $16 million, and we think that is going to increase. 

The second schedule which we are giving you today shows the 

total economic impact to the State of Texas with a breakout by all 

22 counties of $27.5 billion. We think that number will rise to approximately $35 billion. 

Now, I want to thank you for the 100 percent reimbursement on 

Category A, the debris removal. Our problem, Madam Chairman 

and Senators, is that it is only for 2 weeks retroactive to the disaster declaration. And as you heard from the mayors before, there 

is huge debris covering an area almost the size of the State of New 

York. I have been there. I have seen it. We have got homes that 

were destroyed with 8 feet of water going through. Texas respectfully asked for at least 60 days on debris at 100 percent. 

Second, we need help in our infrastructure, 100 percent reimbursement on Categories C, D, E, F, and G: Roads, water control 

facilities, buildings. In a heavy impact area, thousands of buildings, 

most water treatment plants, sewage systems, power lines were all 

knocked out. 

On individual assistance, Texas was granted 100 percent for 30 

days. As you heard from the mayor of Galveston, we need more 

than that. We have got 57,000 people in Galveston that have been 

evacuated, 18,000—we still have 14,000 in shelter. It is going to 

take us months until Galveston, Orange, and the other heavy impact areas are habitable. And we ask that this time period be extended. 

We have got a critical shortage of housing near the heavy impact 

areas. I have spoken with Senator Hutchison this morning and 

FEMA. There are trailers—we are going to make a request to 

27 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Landrieu appears in the Appendix on page 84. 

FEMA today for trailers. There has been a problem in the past, as 

you know from Louisiana, with formaldehyde in some of the trailers at a level too high for human habitation. As long as those trailers meet our State safety requirements, we want every one that we 

can get our hands on other than those that are needed by our 

friends in Louisiana. 

Let me just say that I share with your earlier panel my compliments on our Federal partners. I want to say thank you to the 

Red Cross and Salvation Army. They are going through a tough 

time right now. There have been a lot of natural disasters, but they 

have really stepped up as a partner. 

FEMA is critical to our recovery, and Governor Perry and I appreciate all of their work. We understand that the State of Texas’ 

role is that of a first responder: Pre-planning, evacuation, positioning our assets, conducting search and rescue. But we also know 

that FEMA is best equipped to lead in the recovery. So we will continue to work with FEMA and our other Federal partners, and we 

are going to have to rely on FEMA’s expertise and, frankly, its resources to help us provide housing, disaster and employment assistance, crisis counseling, Small Business Administration loans, 

and other forms of assistance. 

So this has been the most devastating storm in certainly the last 

50 years for Texas. We need your help, and thank you for your concern and my being able to speak with you today. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you. Lieutenant Governor Landrieu. 

TESTIMONY OF MITCH LANDRIEU,1 LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, 

STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Mr. LANDRIEU. Thank you, Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst, for 

those words, and, Madam Chairman and Senators, thank you so 

much for having us. 

I do first want to say on behalf of the people of Louisiana how 

much we appreciate our friends from Texas. I think Senator Vitter 

alluded to this, and, Senator Landrieu, you know this well, that 

after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the State of Texas, and especially Mayor White and so many other leaders, really reached out 

to us and helped us in a tremendous way, and we stand here today 

in communion with and in solidarity with all of our friends from 

Texas as a result of the damage they sustained from Hurricane 

Ike. 

As you know, the State of Louisiana sustained two storms, Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, and in the last 3 years, we have now been 

under the hammer of four successive, debilitating storms, the cumulative effect of which has been able to put every parish in Louisiana under emergency declaration. So when you combine the 

damage from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, I believe that all 64 parishes were declared in the emergency. In Hurricanes Gustav and 

in Ike, we have 14. 

Notwithstanding the fact that the levees held in New Orleans— 

I think Senator Landrieu alluded to this earlier—and the TV cameras left, there has been extensive damage in North and South 

Louisiana. As a matter of fact, at one moment during the storms, 

28 

we had deployed search and rescue missions all the way south and 

all the way north and were, in fact, evacuating and doing search 

and rescue missions in North Louisiana that had not seen water 

there in a very long time. 

The agricultural community in Louisiana is completely and totally devastated in North and South Louisiana, not once but twice. 

So we understand Texas’ pain, and we are here to, again, stand in 

solidarity with them as we try to speak to you, the leaders of the 

Federal Government as we seek assistance. 

As you know, there are a number of different components, Senator, to what we talked about. There, of course, is preparation. 

Then there is evacuation. Then there is immediate response, search 

and rescue, and then there is rebuild. Some things worked better 

this time; some things did not. And we need to focus on them as 

well. 

In Louisiana, as you know, 443 people were rescued; 51 people 

were lost; 25,000 homes were damaged. The estimated economic 

impact is $20 billion, $1 billion alone to the infrastructure; 217 

square miles of the coast were lost in Hurricanes Katrina and Rita 

and more in Hurricanes Ike and Gustav. And as we talk about 

Louisiana and Texas being our Nation’s energy coast and as the 

Nation really debates about our energy independence, it seems inconsistent not to spend a lot of time preserving what it is that you 

have before we fight about what we want in the future. 

Louisiana, as you know, has submitted detailed documents to the 

Senate about the recovery needs that we have. Unfortunately, we 

are physical testament to what we know Texas is going to be asking the Federal Government for because, as you know, we have 

been arguing and fighting and working with all of you to do that. 

But the basic categories are, as Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst 

said, a declaration of 100-percent cost share. You have communities in Louisiana that are on their backs that have for the last 

3 years just gotten back to even and are now struggling with being 

able to cover that cost share, and it is going to be very difficult to 

do. 

We are asking for funds for infrastructure repair and coastal restoration. As you hear Senator Dupre speak about earlier, the issue 

here is pay me now or pay me later. I think Senator Vitter alluded 

to this before, that $30 million was allocated for some levees in 

South Louisiana, and had they been built, most, if not all, of the 

damage that occurred during Hurricanes Ike and Gustav would not 

have occurred. It costs a lot more money to do it on the back end 

than on the front end. 

Of course, the agricultural and fishery industries—we produce 30 

percent of that for the Nation—are on their backs and need help. 

Emergency preparedness and readiness, I have to tell you that 

the National Guard, the State Police, NORTHCOM did a tremendous job in responding immediately to the disasters. And, of course, 

the health care and social services, many hospitals, private hospitals stayed open and alert and took care of our health care needs, 

and they need help as well. 

Generally speaking, in any type of homeland security emergency, 

you have three major areas that you have to pay attention to: One 

of them is clear command and control; one of them is coordination; 

29 

and one of them is communication. And I must say that on all levels in government, across the levels themselves and between and 

amongst governments, everybody did a much better job this time 

responding to the immediate crisis. I think that there is open debate and serious open debate about whether or not the preparation 

was adequate enough on the prevention side, and we will find out 

on the rebuild side whether or not things have been changed significantly enough, as so many people have said, to move money 

from where you have it to on the ground quickly enough. 

There were a couple of things that FEMA did much better this 

time in partnership with the State and Federal Governments. One 

of them was developing the emergency plans over the past 3 years. 

The second was the support for the emergency transportation. And 

the third was on-site assistance. Secretary Chertoff came down 

early, Chairman Paulison came down early, and President Bush, as 

you know, was there. But there were a couple of things that were 

difficult. The flow of the commodities and getting food to the 

ground was difficult. The delay in the pre-landfall declaration took 

longer than it should have. And, of course, the delay in the 100- 

percent cost share request is making it very difficult for communities to stand themselves back up. 

As we work through the next couple of months, we look forward 

to working with all of you to try to make this work better and faster and to try to get people back into their homes and back into the 

normal course of their lives as quickly as we can. 

Again, we thank you for your attention. We look forward to working with you, and we would be happy to answer any questions that 

you have. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you. 

Senator Vitter, I am prepared to pass on questions for this panel 

to allow time for us to hear from our Federal witnesses—is that 

OK? But if you all can stay around until at least 12 o’clock, I know 

we have a delegation meeting. I thank both of you for giving a very 

good overview of the damage in both of your States. Thank you, 

Lieutenant Governor Landrieu and Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst. 

And we will submit post-hearing questions to each of you, because 

part of your testimony is helping us to shape the aid package. So 

please be expecting some questions to each of you. 

Mr. DEWHURST. Thank you. 

Mr. LANDRIEU. Thank you very much. 

Senator LANDRIEU. If panel three will come forward, our first 

witness on panel three is Deputy Administrator and Chief Operating Officer, Harvey Johnson of FEMA. He came to FEMA in 2006 

after retiring as Vice Admiral of the U.S. Coast Guard where he 

served as commander for the Pacific Region. 

Our second witness is Ed Hecker, who is the Director of Homeland Security for the U.S. Army Corps. He has served as Chairman 

of the Infrastructure Security Partnership to promote critical infrastructure resilience since 2006. We particularly look forward to 

your testimony as you have heard from these lieutenant governors 

about the area of this disaster being in the middle of America’s energy coast and the importance of the infrastructure protection, not 

just levees but diversion projects and flood control that help this 

region to continue to benefit the Nation. Sitting with Mr. Hecker 

30 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Johnson appears in the Appendix on page 93. 

today is Mr. Loew, Director of the Civil Works Program, Integration Directorate of the U.S. Corps of Engineers. He is responsible 

for program development, defense, and execution of the Corps’ 

water resources development mission. 

I am going to ask each of you to make very brief, 2-minute opening remarks. Then we are going to get to a series of questions. Mr. 

Admiral Johnson, if we can begin with you. 

TESTIMONY OF HARVEY E. JOHNSON, JR.,1 DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, U.S. FEDERAL 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY 

Mr. JOHNSON. Good morning, Senator Landrieu and Members of 

the Subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the combined activities of Federal, State, and local efforts 

to respond and recover from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. 

These storms served as a prep for the most severe test of national, State, and local individual preparedness since Hurricanes 

Katrina and Rita, and where the 2005 storms exposed the Nation’s 

lack of preparedness, indecision, and an absence of coordination 

across all levels of government and among individuals, the test of 

Hurricanes Gustav and Ike presented just the opposite. The response and thus far the recovery from these 2008 storms provides 

evidence of extensive levels of preparedness, decisiveness by elected 

and appointed officials at every level of government, as well as citizens who elected to evacuate in record numbers, and a level of engaged partnership among States with the Federal Government that 

put the right capability in the right place and at the right time to 

save lives and property, minimize damage, and establish a much 

smoother road to recover. 

I think there are three keys to the success of our combined efforts. The first is preparedness. FEMA and our Federal partners 

view preparedness very seriously. We worked purposefully together 

to coordinate, assess, plan, train, exercise, and evaluate to ensure 

that we each had the level of preparedness independently and 

interdependently needed to achieve success in this recovery. 

The second of three keys is solid command and coordination or 

the command and control capabilities at the Federal, State, and 

local level. The emergency management structures in the State of 

Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida are impressive. They were forward looking. They executed their checklist 

thoughtfully and methodically. They adapted with the changing 

route and intensity of the storms, and they provided the public 

with the timely and consistent warnings and messages. 

At the Federal level, consistent with the National Response 

Framework, we were fully integrated into a unified command with 

the State. Our FEMA coordinating officers were predesignated, 

they were predeployed and worked seamlessly with the State senior coordinating officer. I wish to note that the governors, the parish presidents, the mayors, and elected officials fulfilled their responsibilities visibly and decisively as commanders, coordinators, 

and communicators. 

31 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Hecker appears in the Appendix on page 106. 

Secretary Chertoff was deployed to both States prior to and immediately following both hurricanes, as was Administrator 

Paulison. They encouraged evacuation, provided reassurance that 

all Federal actions that could be taken were being taken. And they 

actively guided the response and recovery through a number of 

challenges and trying moments, forthrightly, with directness, and 

without name calling or finger pointing. 

The third of the keys to this combined response was the strength 

of partnerships among Federal agencies and the State and local 

communities. From the Secretary to the governors to the mayors, 

from coordinating officer to the State coordinator officer, and consistently to the field level where individual team members coordinated air, bus, and train evacuations, planned out the delivery of 

commodities, registered evacuees into shelters, established feeding 

kitchens, evacuated hospitals and nursing homes, opened field 

medical stations, the combined activities of Federal, State, and 

local efforts were impressive and well performed. 

Madam Chairman, I do not want to view the response and recovery from these hurricanes through rose-colored glasses, but the 

level of preparedness, the command and coordination, and the 

strength of partnerships did serve the Nation well. Collectively, we 

demonstrated capability to respond effectively to the disaster. At 

times, these efforts were admittedly a bit rough. Not all things 

went according to plan, and we learned many lessons. We were 

challenged to get all our commodities to the right place at the right 

time. We learned that evacuation, for all of its challenges, can 

sometimes be easier than managing reentry of evacuees back into 

damaged and marginally safe communities and homesteads. And 

we now know that we need to strengthen elements of our workforce 

and find ways to make the registration process more timely and efficient. But from where I sit, the public was well served, and we 

made great strides at instilling confidence that the Federal, State, 

and local emergency management systems can work together effectively. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Admiral. 

Mr. Hecker, I am going to have to ask you to summarize your 

remarks. I know we told you 5 minutes, but we have run short on 

time. So try to summarize in 2 minutes, if you would. 

TESTIMONY OF ED HECKER,1 CHIEF OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, ACCOMPANIED BY 

GARY A. LOEW, DIRECTOR, CIVIL WORKS PROGRAMS INTEGRATION DIRECTORS, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

Mr. HECKER. Certainly. I am the Chief of the Homeland Security 

Office for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and I welcome this 

opportunity to present testimony on behalf of the Corps of Engineers. 

The Corps is part of the unified Federal, State, and local team 

that knows the emergency procedures and mission timelines and 

has exercised those procedures frequently. I believe the performance of both the unified response system and the overall team during these two events, combined with the highly successful evacuVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:45 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 045578 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 P:\DOCS\45578.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
32 

ation process, speaks to the success of our efforts to be ready for 

a flood, hurricane, and other events. 

Under the National Response Framework and in support of 

FEMA, the Corps has installed over 190 generators in the States 

of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi to provide temporary power to 

critical public facilities. We were able to begin installing these generators the same day that Hurricane Ike made landfall in Texas, 

which is unprecedented. 

The Corps has also worked at FEMA State and local agencies to 

develop a phased approach to debris management for rapid cleanup. 

For both Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, the Corps supplemented 

the States’ efforts to provide drinking water and ice. The Corps is 

also supporting important missions to meet the public needs for 

temporary roofing and housing in support of FEMA, as previously 

mentioned. Temporary roofing is an important mission for the impacted population, as mentioned by a previous panel, since it protects property and in many cases allows people to reenter and live 

in their homes. In Louisiana alone, we have provided temporary 

roofing to over 3,000 homes to date, and we have now initiated that 

mission support to impacted counties in Texas. 

In terms of work under the Corps’ authorities, the Corps Navigation Team worked in partnership with the U.S. Coast Guard, the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Gulf Intracoastal Canal Association, and the shipping industry as part of the 

Texas Joint Hurricane Response Team to survey and open the 

ports and coastal waterways impacted by Hurricane Ike. 

We did a similar task force effort as part of the response to Hurricane Gustav to work with the Coast Guard to quickly open ports 

and waterways. The Coast Guard is the responsible agency for 

making decisions on whether ports are open or closed and for establishing channel depth restrictions. The Corps has the lead responsibility for conducting and reporting channel condition surveys, 

removing sunken vessels in Federal channels, and performing 

maintenance dredging. 

There was seamless coordination between these agencies on survey results enabling the Coast Guard to issue Marine Safety Information Bulletins to reopen the channels and establish depth or 

other restrictions. 

Senator LANDRIEU. I am going to have to ask you to submit the 

remainder of your statement for the record, please. 

Mr. HECKER. OK. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you. Mr. Loew. 

Mr. LOEW. I have no opening statement. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you very much. 

Let me start with you, Mr. Johnson, and I appreciate that the 

process worked significantly better than it has in the past, and in 

large measure because for 3 years members not only of this Subcommittee but other committees, sometimes working with FEMA 

and sometimes pushing FEMA to places it did not want to go, I 

think laid out some new policies and procedures that obviously 

have helped. 

But my first question to FEMA is: How did you all declare some 

parishes entitled to 100-percent reimbursement and others not? 

33 

1The chart referred to appears in the Appendix on page 152. 

And let me specifically ask it in this way: The day after Hurricane 

Gustav made landfall, Governor Jindal of Louisiana asked the 

President to provide debris removal assistance to all 64 parishes 

and individual assistance to 54. Within 24 hours, FEMA concluded 

that only 34 parishes were eligible for debris removal and only 36 

parishes for individual assistance. Of course, when people are left 

off, they ask why. We asked on their behalf. And then since that 

time, several, but not all, parishes have been added. I want to specifically ask you what data was used within the first 24-hour period 

to make the original declaration. Were the same types of data required from each parish? And how is it possible that FEMA declared some parishes eligible within 24 hours of the governor’s 

original request, but took weeks to add others and still has not finalized that process? And then I am going to ask the difference between the 100-percent reimbursement given to the counties of 

Texas, and the 75/25 cost split for parishes in Louisiana affected 

by Hurricane Ike. Can you please respond? 

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, ma’am. Certainly I think this is a good news 

story in that typically, as you are aware, with a declaration for an 

emergency disaster, we require preliminary damage assessments 

typically for every county to be declared. In this case, with a major 

storm and the damage apparent, in less than 24 hours we were 

able to provide the first declaration back to the State. And what 

we used was two primary factors: Using reports from the Weather 

Service, we plotted every county that was affected by hurricane 

force winds; and, second, those counties that were affected immediately by storm surge. And, again, in less than 24 hours, we provided that declaration to the State. 

Then we followed typical standard procedure in that those counties that were not declared initially are conducting preliminary 

damage assessments. And we have added a number of counties on 

as a result of getting the information that demonstrates the level 

of devastation or damage that has occurred. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK, but let me ask you to just put your attention to this chart here, and if the staff will point this out, you 

have declared these 14 parishes in Louisiana entitled to basically 

the next level of recovery on September 13. But you did not declare 

all these parishes in the first sort of pre-land declaration, because 

obviously—if you will put up the other chart—there was some miscalculation made that was not corrected until September 18.1

So if you just look, it is very clear to see. These are the four parishes that FEMA declared based on your estimate of where the 

storm would hit of what would happen. 

Now, you made a wrong estimate. I do not know what you used, 

but you made a wrong estimate, because by your own calculations 

these parishes are the ones that actually took on substantial damage. Yet, FEMA did not change their Category B reimbursement 

schedule until September 18, 2008. 

So what is it going to take for you all to do that? 

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, first of all, I think those four counties are 

probably correct, four parishes correct, in the first declaration for 

Hurricane Ike. And then I believe the record could show that imVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:45 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 045578 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 P:\DOCS\45578.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
34 

1The Declaration Timeline for Hurricane Ike—Louisiana, submitted by Mr. Johnson appears 

in the Appendix on page 112. 2The map of Texas appears in the Appendix on page 153. 

mediately after the President awarding the declaration, Administrator Paulison added several parishes to the Hurricane Ike declaration.1

All of the parishes that had impact are now currently conducting 

preliminary damage assessments, and when those are completed, 

under Administrator Paulison’s authority, he can add those counties. 

Senator LANDRIEU. So are you testifying today that these 14 parishes in Louisiana will be granted the full declarations? 

Mr. JOHNSON. No, I am not. I am saying that—and, again, I do 

not recall exactly which parishes were in the initial declaration 

which have already been added on. 

Senator LANDRIEU. These were in the initial declaration, these 

green parishes. 

Mr. JOHNSON. And I believe some have already been added on. 

I just do not recall the names of—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. Let me suggest to you, Admiral, that in order 

for this recovery to be conducted according to the general rules, 

these designations are the first step. Then everything else follows, 

as you know: What they are entitled to in terms of reimbursement, 

etc. 

If this is not corrected within a very short period of time, I can 

promise you our situation in Louisiana is not going to get off to a 

good start. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Senator, as you know, the preliminary damage assessments, many have been completed. I have not yet seen the data 

that came from those. But as soon as we get those damage assessments in and evaluate them, then we would be able to add on those 

counties that meet the criteria. And we certainly are willing to— 

we want to do that, but it is not our job to ensure that the law and 

regulations are applied appropriately in all disaster events. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Have all the damage assessments come in 

from the Texas counties? They have not even entered Galveston 

yet. 

Would you all put the map of Texas indicating which counties 

have been declared eligible for Federal disaster assistance up there, 

please?2

Mr. JOHNSON. We applied the exact same methodology to Texas 

as we applied to Louisiana. In the initial declaration, those counties that were immediately affected by hurricane storm for winds 

and those affected by tidal surge were within the first 24 hours 

provided a declaration. We used the exact same methodology to do 

it so there would be equality between the States and the initial 

declaration. In Texas, as in Louisiana, they are conducting preliminary damage assessments today in those counties that were not included in the initial declaration. And I believe we have added on 

a number of counties in Texas, as we have added on parishes in 

Louisiana based on those preliminary damage assessments (PDAs). 

Senator LANDRIEU. My next question to the Corps is about this 

$30 million allocation to Terrebonne Parish. We allocated that 

funding actually through Senator Domenici’s Appropriations SubVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:45 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 045578 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 P:\DOCS\45578.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
35 

committee, of which he has been Chairman and Ranking Member 

and on which I serve. 

What is the status of that funding now? And has the parish 

asked you to release that money to them to get their non-Federal 

levees built? And are you willing to do it? Mr. Loew. 

Mr. LOEW. I will take that question, yes, Senator. The status is 

that since the funding was made available, we have been working 

with Terrebonne Parish to define, first of all, the portion of levees 

that would be repaired with those funds, they have approximately 

100 miles of levees, and we have settled now on two reaches of 

those levees that look like they are a good candidate for repair. We 

have done initial borings, site investigations, and other engineering 

work associated with those, and we have been actively working 

with the parish to identify borrow sites. 

The slowdown we have had recently is that of the borrow sites 

identified, we have been unable to get rights of entry so that we 

can do the engineering investigations on the borrow. We were recently down to two sites that we are working actively with 

Terrebonne Parish on now. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Would you be willing to pursue a pilot project 

in order for us to expedite this construction, which would amount 

basically to turning over the funding to Terrebonne Parish much 

in the same way that we allocate funding through the national 

transportation formula and allow them to do the engineering work, 

in light of the fact that we have failed this parish and many other 

coastal areas by not being able to build these projects more quickly, 

which is evidenced by the storm that hit. We need no more evidence than that. Are you at least open to a pilot project that we 

might try in Terrebonne Parish? 

Mr. LOEW. Since Senator Vitter’s letter, we briefly looked into 

that, and it is my understanding, Senator, that we do not have the 

authority to grant the money to the parish. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Would you be willing to ask for such authority? 

Mr. LOEW. Right now I am not sure that it would speed things 

up at all if we did ask for it, but it is certainly something we could 

consider. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. Senator Vitter. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you. I obviously want to follow up on 

that. 

First of all, the $30.024 million figure did not come out of thin 

air. It was based on specific priorities and specific plans from levee 

officials in the parish and at the State level, and those develop 

plans were given to Congress, and the money was appropriated. 

And those develop plans were given to the Corps. So why are you 

essentially putting that on the side and essentially ignoring it to 

start from scratch? 

Mr. LOEW. Sir, I do not believe we are. We have worked with the 

parish, accepted their plans. Initially, they gave us four reaches to 

look at. We have since narrowed that down to two that we are actively pursuing now. 

Senator VITTER. Well, the plans I am talking about, which were 

provided to the Subcommittee here and provided to the Corps, were 

for $30.024 million So obviously there is some miscommunication 

36 

because it precisely defined the work and the costs we are talking 

about. Are you aware of that? And did the Corps consider moving 

forward with those plans? 

Mr. LOEW. Yes, sir, we have. We have been actively working with 

the parish since the funds were received. We have had multiple 

meetings with them—again, working with them to decide which 

are the best reaches to work within the funds available. 

Senator VITTER. Why was a study initiated through Southern 

University? 

Mr. LOEW. We did not actually initiate a study, sir. Southern 

University has a geotechnical lab that is qualified to do geotechnical work for the Corps of Engineers. And the work that they 

have done for us includes site investigations, borings, technical 

analysis of the borings, and so forth. 

Senator VITTER. But additional funds were funneled through 

Southern University for other purposes and subcontracted out. And 

why was that done? 

Mr. LOEW. Well, often on our work, multiple contractors will be 

working on the same piece of work, and in this case there is an additional contractor called Shaw, which is advising Southern University on project management procedures primarily. They are also 

helping with the engineering investigation. 

Senator VITTER. Whose decision was it to structure this way and 

to involve these entities? 

Mr. LOEW. I would have to answer that for the record, sir. I am 

not sure. 

Senator VITTER. OK. If you could please follow up with me, particularly before my meeting tomorrow with General Van Antwerp. 

Mr. LOEW. Yes, sir. I certainly will. 

Senator VITTER. What amount of money has been expended on 

all of that? Do you know that answer? 

Mr. LOEW. Yes, sir. Approximately $1.2 million has been expended out of the total to date. 

Senator VITTER. $1.2 million? 

Mr. LOEW. Yes, sir. 

Senator VITTER. To the sources we are talking about, Southern 

and/or Shaw? 

Mr. LOEW. A portion of it, most of it to them, and then some for 

our additional management of the project as well. 

Senator VITTER. OK. In my letter, I specifically asked for every 

scrap of paper which constitutes written work product from that 

amount of money expended, which in my opinion has been a complete waste. Has that paper been amassed yet? 

Mr. LOEW. I do not believe we will have all of it for you tomorrow, sir, but we are working on compiling it, yes. 

Senator VITTER. OK. To go back to the request that this essentially be turned over to the parish and the State, I would note that 

my letter in the third to last paragraph is very specific, and the 

request it makes is something which is absolutely within the authority of the Corps. And it says, ‘‘I want the Corps to enter into 

a Memorandum of Understanding with State and parish flood control officials so that every cent of the $30.024 million can be essentially transferred to them to start construction based on their fully 

developed plans.’’ 

37 

Doesn’t the Corps have authority to enter into a Memorandum 

of Understanding, not write a check to them and walk away from 

it, but enter into a very simple document where the Corps has a 

role but a limited role and allows progress to move forward at a 

much more rapid pace under the leadership of parish and State officials? 

Mr. LOEW. Sir, that is a good question, and, again, I checked into 

it very briefly since receiving your letter, and it is my understanding that we do not, that we cannot transfer our executive 

agency authority to execute this work. So I believe the only way we 

could do it is if we were to basically open it up for a public bid and 

then let the parish bid on it. 

Senator VITTER. You cannot work with partners on projects? 

Don’t you do that all the time with private contractors? 

Mr. LOEW. Yes, sir. 

Senator VITTER. So why can’t you have a Memorandum of Understanding with parish and State officials to move forward based on 

their developed plans? 

Mr. LOEW. Where we do work with partners is generally on costshared work where they provide a part of the cost share of the total 

project and they can provide what are called in-kind services, that 

is, work they do themselves can be applied against the project. In 

this particular case, it is 100 percent Federally funded, and that is 

why I do not think it applies. 

Senator VITTER. Well, maybe you missed another part of my letter which noted that the parish and the State have now amassed 

three to four times the amount of money we are talking about from 

the Federal Government, which they want to contribute to meeting 

their own flood control needs. So, in fact, just in dollar terms, not 

only is this a partnership, but now the Federal Government, because of dragging its feet, are the junior partner in dollar terms. 

So under this scenario, why can’t the Corps enter into a Memorandum of Understanding to allow this to happen on a much 

quicker pace? 

Mr. LOEW. Sir, I think what I would suggest—in a day, I was not 

able to find a way to do that. But if you will allow us to look into 

it in more detail, we will investigate that. 

Senator VITTER. Well, great. I look forward to you all finding a 

way in 2 days, and I look forward to meeting with General Van 

Antwerp tomorrow afternoon. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Senator Vitter. 

Our time is almost concluded, but I do have another question to 

the Corps, if I may. The Calcasieu River ship channel is a critical 

channel for the security of this Nation’s energy supply. We have 

been focusing on a problem of deep significance in Terrebonne Parish, but I want to shift your attention to southwest Louisiana, 

which is sometimes overlooked, and we want to make sure it is not. 

How much funding, do you know, will it take to restore the 

Calcasieu River ship channel to its authorized depth? And what is 

in the budget today? If it is not sufficient, what is the Corps’ position in terms of getting emergency funding to get this channel 

dredged to its authorized level? Because it is a crucial channel, as 

you know, between southwest Louisiana and southeast Texas. Mr. 

Loew. 

38 

Mr. LOEW. Yes, ma’am. Actually, I have some good news there. 

The total cost to repair the damages to the Calcasieu channel and 

Lake Charles area, the Corps of Engineers projects associated with 

the channel, is approximately $40 million. That includes not only 

the channel dredging but also damages to containment areas and 

to jetties and four shore dikes. 

What we have done, we have a contract undergoing now to 

dredge a portion of the outer bar of—or, excuse me, the inner channel. Today we issued another $4.5 million so that they can award 

a hopper dredge contract to dredge the outer bar area. We will 

combine that with another $2 million that we expect to get during 

the continuing resolution period, and we will be able to clean the 

outer bar area. 

That leaves us short about another $7.5 to $8 million for channel 

dredging in the Calcasieu and Lake Charles area. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Are you prepared to ask for that in this disaster supplemental? 

Mr. LOEW. Yes, ma’am. We have identified that requirement. 

Senator LANDRIEU. So the total request for the Calcasieu River 

will be something around $40 million? 

Mr. LOEW. Yes, ma’am, that is correct. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. And, finally, I just want to call attention 

to something that is very concerning to the Chairman of this full 

Committee. I have had several hearings on this, as some may 

know. This is the housing plan that, after Hurricane Katrina, 

FEMA was required to come up with. There are seven blank pages 

still in this housing plan, Mr. Johnson. The reason I was pushing 

very hard for this plan to be finished, which is something that you 

and the Secretary of HUD must do, is because I was anticipating 

that there might just be another major disaster on the Gulf Coast. 

I want to read the titles of these pages: 

‘‘Overview of disaster housing programs for Federal, State, tribal, 

and local governments and nongovernmental organizations. Under 

development.’’ 

‘‘Methods to house disaster victims where employment and the 

resources they need for living are available. Under development.’’ 

‘‘Summary of programs for special needs and low-income populations, including provision of housing units for individuals with 

disabilities. Under development.’’ 

‘‘Disaster housing group sites. Under development.’’ 

‘‘Programs to promote the repair or rehabilitation of existing 

rental housing. Under development.’’ 

‘‘Additional authorities necessary to carry out this strategy. 

Under development.’’ 

And, finally, ‘‘A summary of guidance on disaster housing assistance available under the Stafford Act Relief and Emergency Assistance Acts, including eligibility criteria and application procedures. 

Under development.’’ 

I most certainly hope this development is going on in the next 

24 hours because the mayor of Galveston and the executives of 

many cities and counties and parishes in Louisiana are hoping that 

you all have some ideas other than blank pages. 

I am going to close this hearing with this comment: We have 

made significant progress, and I know I offered great leeway here 

39 

for people to testify about all the good things that happened. But 

I will stake my reputation on the fact that before the final story 

is told, there will be chapter after chapter after chapter of bankruptcies, of people losing their houses, of cities struggling to recover. So I would just caution everybody before we start patting 

each other on the back about what a good job we have done, let’s 

work harder to get these pages filled, to get a housing plan and a 

community redevelopment plan, and expedite the protection that 

people along the Gulf Coast most certainly deserve so they have 

levees that do not break, they have flood control systems that they 

can count on, because there have been billions of dollars of damage—in just the last 4 weeks, billions of dollars of damage. And 

this is not from people’s greed like what happened in large measure on Wall Street. These people are innocent victims of a government that will not work hard enough to get a plan to protect them. 

The hearing is adjourned. Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 12:06 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(41) 

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR VOINOVICH 

Madam Chairman, thank you for calling this hearing to discuss efforts to respond 

to and recover from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. I am glad State and local officials 

from Louisiana and Texas are here today to tell the Subcommittee about their efforts as well as their perception of Federal efforts in response to those hurricanes. 

Louisiana and Texas were hit hard by Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, and our 

thoughts and prayers are with all the people of those States. 

But Hurricanes Gustav and Ike did not only impact the Gulf Coast. On Sunday, 

September 14, the remnants of Hurricane Ike caused a wind storm in Ohio with category one hurricane force winds over a sustained period of time across the State. 

That storm led to at least seven fatalities, almost 2 million customers without 

power, and 450 school closures. On Wednesday, September 17, Ohio’s Governor 

asked the President to declare a statewide emergency as a result of the wind storm. 

The governor’s request estimated $7 million in requirements for assistance. 

I understand the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is working 

hard right now in the Gulf coast and across the country in response to a number 

of recent natural disasters, and I appreciate those efforts. But I am told that it is 

going to take almost a month for FEMA to work with State and local officials in 

Ohio to complete Preliminary Damage Assessments relating to Ohio’s September 14 

storm, and I want assurances for my home State that FEMA is going to do everything it can as quickly as it can to help Ohio recover from this wind storm. 

Thank you. 

42 


45578.001
43 


45578.002
44 


45578.003
45 


45578.004
46 


45578.005
47 


45578.006
48 


45578.007
49 


45578.008
50 


45578.009
51 


45578.010
52 


45578.011
53 


45578.012
54 


45578.013
55 


45578.014
56 


45578.015
57 


45578.016
58 


45578.017
59 


45578.018
60 


45578.019
61 


45578.020
62 


45578.021
63 


45578.022
64 


45578.023
65 


45578.024
66 


45578.025
67 


45578.026
68 


45578.027
69 


45578.028
70 


45578.029
71 


45578.030
72 


45578.031
73 


45578.032
74 


45578.033
75 


45578.034
76 


45578.035
77 


45578.036
78 


45578.037
79 


45578.038
80 


45578.039
81 


45578.040
82 


45578.041
83 


45578.042
84 


45578.043
85 


45578.044
86 


45578.045
87 


45578.046
88 


45578.047
89 


45578.048
90 


45578.049
91 


45578.050
92 


45578.051
93 


45578.052
94 


45578.053
95 


45578.054
96 


45578.055
97 


45578.056
98 


45578.057
99 


45578.058
100 


45578.059
101 


45578.060
102 


45578.061
103 


45578.062
104 


45578.063
105 


45578.064
106 


45578.065
107 


45578.066
108 


45578.067
109 


45578.068
110 


45578.069
111 


45578.070
112 


45578.071
113 


45578.072
114 


45578.073
115 


45578.074
116 


45578.075
117 


45578.076
118 


45578.077
119 


45578.078
120 


45578.079
121 


45578.080
122 


45578.081
123 


45578.082
124 


45578.083
125 


45578.084
126 


45578.085
127 


45578.086
128 


45578.087
129 


45578.088
130 


45578.089
131 


45578.090
132 


45578.091
133 


45578.092
134 


45578.093
135 


45578.094
136 


45578.095
137 


45578.096
138 


45578.097
139 


45578.098
140 


45578.099
141 


45578.100
142 


45578.101
143 


45578.102
144 


45578.103
145 


45578.104
146 


45578.105
147 


45578.106
148 


45578.107
149 


45578.108
150 


45578.109
151 


45578.110
152 


45578.111
153 

Æ 


45578.112