GovernmentExecutive.com

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff offered an impassioned argument Thursday for keeping the Federal Emergency Management Agency within his department, saying that removing the agency would cost billions of dollars and undo efforts made in reorganizing the government since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Chertoff told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee during a hearing that removing FEMA would create a "schizophrenic" government response to disasters, where both the agency and the department would move into action in an uncoordinated fashion.

He argued that problems in the government's response to Hurricane Katrina last year were caused, in part, because then-FEMA Director Michael Brown tried to operate independently. "It seems to me to do this would have a huge budget impact [and] would invite precisely the kind of ... bureaucratic obstacles that were a problem last year," Chertoff said.

Lawmakers in both the House and Senate agree that changes to the nation's emergency management system are needed, but are divided on what to do with FEMA. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, and ranking member Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., have sponsored legislation that would replace FEMA with a new preparedness and response directorate, but keep it within the department.

For the first time, Chertoff publicly said trying to make FEMA an independent agency would cost billions of dollars. The Congressional Budget Office recently calculated that a bill in the House that would make FEMA an independent, Cabinet-level agency would cost about $1.1 billion from 2007-2011.

CBO originally estimated the cost to be $9.8 billion over five years, but readjusted that calculation after sponsors of the bill protested. Comparatively, CBO estimated that a competing bill in the House that would restructure FEMA but keep it within the department would cost $1.3 billion from 2007-2011.

Chertoff's appearance before the Senate struck a nerve in the House. Government Reform Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., and Transportation and Infrastructure Economic Development Subcommittee Chairman Bill Shuster, R-Pa. -- sponsors of the bill to remove FEMA from the department -- issued a statement late Wednesday in response to Chertoff's prepared testimony for the Senate hearing.

"To say Katrina's lessons learned merely point to a minor personnel problem is like attributing the Black Plague to a few rats," they said. "On the theory that all essential elements of the national response must be within DHS to function, half of Health and Human Services and large chunks of the Defense Department should be moved into DHS as well."

Chertoff said the argument being made by Davis and Shuster was "completely illogical."

House Homeland Security Emergency Preparedness Subcommittee Chairman Dave Reichert, R-Wash., put out a statement praising Chertoff's remarks. Reichert is a key sponsor of the bill that would restructure FEMA but keep it within the department.

There is also disagreement among members of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on how best to overhaul FEMA. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., supports making FEMA an independent agency. He noted that no witnesses at the hearing supported removing the agency, and asked for another hearing with witnesses who do.

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Government Management Subcommittee Chairman George Voinovich, R-Ohio, said he is not convinced that another major reorganization is needed, adding that the billions that would be spent on it could be put to better use funding interoperable communications.

COMMENTS

• Associated costs related to FEMA becoming independent again is a curious argument. Let us hear the discussion regarding the costs associated with DHS decisions made regarding the Katrina operation that were enormously expensive and are now resulting in headlines that seem to say: "FEMA . . . " rather than "A program devised by DHS . . . " In my 16 years as a proudly serving reservist with FEMA, I have never witnessed as much second-guessing or outright usurping of the decision process. FEMA's mission remains the same whether the affect on citizens was caused by a hurricane or a terrorist-caused event. The Stafford Act is clear. As a taxpayer I smell a search for money on the part of Secretary Chertoff. The most recent attempt to reduce the DHS funding to New York City is but one example of what is happening in DHS. Furthermore, I strongly disagree with Sen. Collins and am working to assist in providing clearer, more objective input to her staff and the citizens of Maine. As a voter in her party, I was stunned by the idea that FEMA should be abandoned. FEMA is not broken. Katrina, from the president on down, seriously stretched everyone's capacity to produce. We did not break, we merely stretched. GovExec.com reader Posted June 17, 2006 4:44 PM
• Of course FEMA should be separated from DHS! Chertoff should be ashamed of himself for saying that problems in the government's response to Hurricane Katrina last year were caused, in part, because then-FEMA Director Michael Brown tried to operate independently. Chertoff knows that wasn’t the case. In fact, DHS Deputy Secretary Michael P. Jackson was directly involved and can even be seen sitting next to Brown in the now infamous command center video. Chertoff is more concerned about not having the FEMA money to reallocate to other DHS priorities than any “schizophrenic government response.” GovExec.com reader Posted June 12, 2006 2:37 PM
• Just how would removing FEMA from DHS cost the taxpayers "billions of dollars"? Other than changing the logos on correspondence, memos and fax cover sheets, and on vehicles, this doesn't make sense. I would like to see an itemized list of what these costs would be. DHS tried the same lame reasoning to prevent the merger of ICE and CBP, as a previous poster so eloquently put it, despite testimony as to why it would be a good idea from outside experts, former managers, Congress, the media, and DHS employees themselves. The fraud, incompetence, and arrogance continues ... GovExec.com reader Posted June 12, 2006 2:41 PM