important to always remember in places like florida where is been a fierce sense hit by the it was not actually as big as we thought. you get complacent. it is important to remind us not to do that, so i thank you for bringing that up again. >> thank you very much. if that was the standard, it would be the budget of the state of louisiana for decades, i am afraid. that may be what we end up paying, because of the nature of the disaster. we are pleased now to welcome our first witness, administrator craig few gate, who is the news

administrator of the federal emergency management agency. welcome, mr. fugate. ajj madam chair, a ranking member and other members of the committee. it's an honor to be here before your committee and talking about catastrophic disasters. so what is a catastrophic disaster, by one definition to use? the framework we define as a natural man many incidents including terrorism and the results sex or near levels of mass casualties, damage or disruption of severely of i to population infrastructure m -- zero economy and national morale of government functions. fifteen minutes town of 100,000 and have a catastrophic event in may have been catastrophic to the overall system so i often think we talked cast of a particularly at level of fema, looking at the events that have national impacts forces of those

that may be very localized that we can still respond with our normal process and resources to get in there quickly. solarize talk about catastrophic we're talking about those events that are magnitude is take on significance of impacting our national ability to respond with, recover and remove on from those. in particular i was interested in a conversation about stafford act in the opening statements and questions as to that stafford act, one is extremely flexible document and quite capable of doing anything as yet one else to need to do to make it more responsive. madam chair, and to lay out how i'm approaching this in my confirmation process and the two months i've been there. i believe i'm taking in three tiered approach because until i have guidance from congress on which way you are wanting to receive the most immediate thing we can do is look at our policy internally. and then just aphorist. that is our first up, i have

directed the two look at our guidance to adjust the issues that are being brought up on a are we doing that, limiting what we are able to do in the disasters. the second use of looking at the roles, the federal register receipt of our 44 which governs the rulemaking of the rules we have administered in a separate act and then look at this effort and as a whole but i think interfirst have to really look at what we have is bit one make sure it is not for scribing or preventing from using the tools and the stafford act to s. wayne we talked about catastrophic and think again we oftentimes look in the past and i am looking into the future and looking as some of the scenarios we still faces a nation, not only those that occurred but the other types of events we could

face, when california earthquake to a major hurricane and the gulf coast and florida hurricane that strikes hawaii and looking and developing plans a base around what the impacts are. i then one of the challenges we had oftentimes will plan to our capabilities and hope that disaster is not any bigger beer foam was and what i have found in history is if you don't plan for the potential impacts and look at how your system is applied one who with a false sense religion you are able to manage the evidence at the point of failure to have a catastrophic failure and not just a system that need to expand. i believe in partnerships one of the things i want to make clear is and we talk about disaster response particularly with catastrophic and fema is not a team, fema is part of the team under the federal system. we have the leverage and work as partners with our local states, federal agencies, private sector, volunteer,

community-based and the public to build a team that can respond to these very large scale events, some of which may reach the point i national level and the catastrophic. so to summarize what stafford act has a lot of tools in it but we must first in a look at our policy guidance which we are doing to determine what we can do within the scope of it stafford act to address the concerns raised in previous disasters and the ones facing. building 18 based upon whom the consequences we are facing in some of these events and building that capability by leveraging all of the resources of the country, not just looking and fema. and third and finally, the understanding in catastrophic disasters we must not continue to look at the public as a liability but look at them as a resource that we incorporated into our planning to oftentimes i run into challenges where we

have in many cases road plans for what i, the easy part of population and able-bodied adults to understand and have and that means to take care of themselves in the impact of a disaster. that is not the communities we live in. r committee's chairman of children, the above frail elderly and made up of people with disabilities in our tendency is to look of those folks after we wrote the basic plan to address the challenges. i think if you're going to be successful in any disaster including catastrophic you have to design plans that address the needs of the committee not just those posts that are easy to help. with that, madam chair, i will conclude my remarks and malcolm questions. >> thank you very much administrator fugate. when would you describe for us you're own background and an

emergency management, john a. began and how you rose to your present position? a lot. >> i started out in 1987 as a lead tenant with a al-awja county fire rescue determine, was to permit prayer frederick, i was asked to come in and work on the counties disaster plans in the -- >> where was this located? >> gainesville, florida. i began working in 1987 that february a career that took me for the next 10 years working at the county level as the bridges to manager. i had several large scale chemical incidents that we dealt with as well as numerous other storms, floods in advance but fortunately with tarkanian to hitting the candy was not directly impacted although we hosted evacuees from south florida. in 1997i was offered the opportunity to go to state and to serve as the bureau chief for premise response, i joined the team of late governor chiles and

again looking at the lessons of hurricane andrew and what happens to address the concerns the say had i join asean that was working hard with the florida legislature to continue building and improve upon that. we found out in 1990 how much we were able to foreign and that have over 200 days of your activity well fires, floods and hurricane george. the situation was such it was the first time on the east coast with accurate is an entire county during wild fires because of the threats. 2001 was as i go there bush to serve as the director of emergency management and that october serving in that capacity the 2004 hurricane season where we have for land falling hurricanes, between 2004 and 2005 we had with a total of eight hurricanes hit the state of florida. five of which are major hurricanes and in addition to that immediate aftermath of hurricane katrina at the request

of state of mississippi, we provided emergency management the sissons compact and ends up with 7,000 responders and spending $80 million in funds and running everything from search and rescue teams and communications and just about anything else that we could provide it to those local governments at the request of the governor. we also the state said resources to the state of louisiana but we ended that because of the proximity of the road systems and the fact we lost the rich focus of mississippi to brad the assistance. when governor bush stepped down and governor chris was elected, we appointed one month into his administration had intended to operate with 21 fatalities this summer where and to this spring and was asked by the presidents serving his administration and confirmed in may and have been serving as fema administrator for the last two months.

>> he had to lay out the history because it is very important to the subcommittee. id has been the view of the subcommittee with that particular lane who are unforeseen disaster someone but even for the run-of-the-mill disaster at the federal level the way to respect what your testimony in the case with my opening testimony, my own opening statement says about responsibility as someone who has been there and done that and who has very deep and wide experience emergency management, we are pleased to lay that on the record because the president has appointed somebody who has what appears to be with experience in democratic and republican administrations, that

is important for us and the record to show because i'm going to ask you a question about this agency. it has been a thorn in the subcommittee cited and congress itself, it seemed to fall apart after hurricane katrina. nobody expected somehow people to rush in there like a knight in shining armor and rescue louisiana, but it did seem to know which side was up, lobs having saved by the coast guard and people from various states such as your own. who and the result was now pending legislation that would even take fema out of the department of homeland security so compromised and one of the first things i'd like you to

tell this committee bowater is about the independence of the agency within the department of the homeland security. when while fema was a nimble agency before that got on the ground quickly, that somehow would it became admired as a superstructure of the department of homeland security and that's why all of the decisions had to go from hawaii the administrator bruce simon you paygo bureaucracy that we ourselves have created in setting up the department to the detriment of fema. we passed -- we laughed, we

passed legislation making it clear that homeland security was not to compromise in the ability of this agency to move toward. i want some indication from you whether or not will fema it is today who as independent as anybody of would expect warm water given the fact that it is still in the department of homeland security, that goes to have the reporting dose, you are equipped and authorized to make decisions and give as to ask several bureaucracies before the decision is made in washington are made in louisiana -- any to know what the chain of command is in your own agency before we get down to the states having to then ask you something. how independence is this agency within the bureaucracy today? >> madam chair, i refer to the

secretary, the secretary reports to the president. >> there are no officials between you and the secretary? .. in >> that is very important for us to know. >> i have direct access to the secretary. we meet weekly. she has, working with her deputy, branched out on some of the things we are looking at in the quadrennial review. those are more a function of the secretary assigned the task. >> do you have to go to the secretary for everything? fema is given authority, pure and simple. we did not change the authority of fema when we put fema in the department of homeland security, so can you make most of the

decisions you have to make on your own? decisions you have to make on your own or do you have to say this is what i want to do, madam secretary, do i have yr@@@@@d@ h >> with this being a disaster, procurement matters in a disaster. would you have sign-off -- procurement son of poor matters in a disaster within your budgetary authority? >> madam chairman, yes. >> thank you, sir. we have understood that the bureaucracy has to clear some of your actions. that is not the case? >> secretary napolitano having served as the governor understands the role and responsibilities we have in supporting governors. there are many moving pieces within homeland security, but within a disaster itself, we are able to move forward and take the actions we need to take. and take the actions we need to take.

>> virtually as if he were an independent agency or not? i don't want to put words in your mouth. >> under my reporting relationship with the secretary we are able to perform or function. >> report is one thing permission is another. if we get into permission matters, the super sized disaster we are talking about will be supervised -- super sized repeated. what is the operations coordinations -- [inaudible] these names. [laughter] the average person really lose this comprehension once we get into the oc -- what is the office of coordination, when was it created, by whom and what is its function? >> i defer back to homeland security. that was created and has been a standing element prior to me

joining dhs and fema. we have the national response coordination senter record night with nasa operations center, other components within dhs cord need with operations center which gives the secretary visibility on a variety of issues including things such as border matters, coastal issues, other activities that occur within the department under her perfume as other components. >> now, yes dhs has created this office of coordination at dhs. now, as we look at statutory role of fema, we see conflicts with the role and many of the statutory plan mandated functions of fema itself. and the agency appears to be

relying on -- and this really does get the commission upset. sorry, the committee upset. because it appears to be relying on these outdated administrative documents. here's some more initials for everybody. hspd-5. now, this is exactly what we had in mind when we passed the katrina act and overruled these administrative documents. can you explain therefore in light of the post-katrina act why hspd-5 is still an outstanding administrative document and the role of the so-called office of operations coordination can prepare for in

responding to disasters. does this have a role and function and why in the world are you relaunching or does the agency appeared to be relying on administrative documents that have been overruled, overruled by statute? >> as part of the executive branch the prerogative and executive orders, and looking at those issued in previous administrations carried forward in this administration many of these are still under review. as to the -- with the post-katrina emergency management for mad speaks to and what may be potentially in conflict with hspd-5 or homeland security recognition number 55 aware of these issues but have been more focused on our role and responsibilities in administering our part of the program.

>> i am pleased to learn these matters are under review because you don't want to get congress twice revisiting, then you get us really mad and lose authority because we have the same problem with principal, federal officer. in fact, we have real problems with that one because we did revisit that one apart from the post-katrina act. we revisited it more than once because of what we had witnessed on the ground we had tight red tape after katrina. now the so-called principle federal officer, everybody who thinks the substance matter will have to pardon me while i get through these bureaucratic names that they paced on to functions where sometimes a function disappears or is in conflict with the statutory mandate.

but here goes. it is called by dhs the principal federal officer, pfo, conflicts directly with the statutory created federal coordinating officer so that something happens on the ground, no matter who comes, whoever is in charge stands up. this is a war when there is a natural disaster just like there is a war when there is in fact war. it got to know who is in charge. that is one thing katrina taught us to clean up. these duplicative functions were cited as a primary cause of the field response of the hurricane katrina. that's why we have some exasperation concerning this officer. now, i need to ask you whether dhs in fact seeks the repeal of

the statutory mandate put in place to avoid duplication, and whether the agency is continuing to rely on administrative documents that have been overruled by statutes, and you have said that is under review and for that matter the national response framework to attempt to regard these or disregard these statutory provisions. we need to know now because if we need further clarification when an agency simply is in contempt what we revisit again and we need to know what about these p.f.o. and f.c.o. -- by the way, we are joined in this inquiry by the other committee of which i served, the committee on homeland security, which has the same problem, cosigned with

us on letters and co-sponsored with us, the statutory repeal. so, could i have your answer? >> madam chair, i will have to defer some of that to the department, but as far as the f.c.o. goes it is clear toe the way the statute is written that the f.c.o. under the stafford act either emergency or major residential -- >> say that again please. >> i is my interpretation of the stafford act post-katrina emergency management form that clearly states when the president declares an emergency or mazar to become major declaration the federal coordinating officer has the authority to execute the stafford act. >> who has the authority, the federal coordinating officer? >> yes, ma'am. >> -- federal officer, highly paid official doing on the ground, and how am i to know if i come from out of state who is

in charge? >> under the stafford act declaration that will be the federal coordinating officer authorized by the president to support the federal response on behalf of the request of that governor. >> say that again. i'm sorry. >> the federal court needing officer on behalf of the president is authorized under the stafford act to coordinate -- >> how do you make this distinction to state officials, to ordinary citizens on the ground, and why does the -- if in fact the president of the united states has confidence in the federal coordinating officer, why would it be necessary to pay somebody else? to be on the ground the to report to the department of homeland security? >> madam chair, i will defer back to the agency. my focus is, again, i

authorities with the federal coordinating officer is appointed by the president when there is a declaration. that is clear that they have the authority on behalf of president record made federal response as well as administer the stafford act. >> after the koln chris patches a statute, search? >> i'm not disputing that. i am stating under my purview i appoint or make the recommendations of the who the president will appoint as a federal court in an unlawful search under the stafford act be read the principal federal official program is not something that fema -- is not something we administrate. >> well, let me indicate that the appropriations committee supports our view, particularly -- it would support it many times over now that we don't have money to spend on another top lawyer, beside the top layer that's already there. we've never had a satisfactory answer to why there should be to people on the ground particularly after hurricane katrina and that gave the disaster and we don't intend to

tolerate any longer, and if we find that such an officer is funded we will ask the appropriation committee to be funded, and we would expect this administration to abide by the mandate of congress. i'm going to go to mr. kyl and ask if he has any questions before i proceed further. >> thank you. mr. fugate, i appreciate in your testimony that you mentioned team work, that fema is a 18 but part of a team. i've noticed that after katrina there was a lack of teamwork among the different federal agencies. i am not sure what kind of steps you have initiated in order to better coordinate between your office and the other federal offices and agencies. >> rett now, congressman, my greatest challenge is the next

disaster working closely with several partners such as department of defense, north koln, working with national guard bureau, working with other elements. but i think some of the other parts of the team work hopefully we are starting to see some daylight in the state of louisiana. we've worked with the state. secretary napolitano has obviously been there. predecessor nancy ward made some significant personnel changes to begin moving forward, to begin that process that often times was seen as state and federal and local government as not being able to move forward. we've been working in our part to get projects committed to move the money and begin the rebuilding of the project that hadn't been in dispute. we've been working aggressively to address those challenges. but i think part of the discussion i have heard that as

a state i was very much aware of it is often times in a large scale disaster, catastrophic disaster there are other programs beside the stafford act that can be brought to bear. it works best when it's done looking at what the stafford act can do and other programs such as community block development dollars to address issues. when you look back and say what was with her can katrina in many cases we didn't play good job of looking at all the other federal programs matching those with the needs of the community and oftentimes looking at only one or two programs and not really having the ability to reach out across the federal family of programs that could meet those challenges or supports the needs of those communities. i will give you an example of children. we look at the plans and oftentimes right plants and forget the children can be 20% more than the population but if you look at children negative use there's not much of the stafford act other than talking about facilities as some things that get to that and i am not

sure we are the experts on that. there are other federal programs that have funds that go to local communities to support daycare and other issues. we should be looking how we partner with these sources and build that team so that in a disaster fema is not having to recreate a system that already exists. we are part of a team that can leverage that and provide assistance and work with those federal agencies that do this every day in the community so that we can meet the needs and that is what i think as far as building a team, going back and creating a new program if we already have one but making sure we are leveraging those programs that fema has with programs that exist every day and when disaster strikes making sure of the federal side we are working on a team to address the >> one of the biggest problems i saw after katrina was the lack of a time line and a lack of coordination between the different agencies. let's take the issue of health care, for example. it is one issue just to simply

rebuild the hospitals and clinics, but it is another issue to basically provide an area with housing, with economic development, all those issues all come into play. how do you see the month, for instance, -- had to see fema as a partnership in that recovery process, and is there -- should there be a point agency that possibly would have the power in order to coordinate and provide a time line for the different federal agencies to see who is responsible for what, when do they have to do it, in order to provide at least the area with a very clear path towards recovery? ery? .

this question what does long-term recovery look like if we are successful. people can describe pieces of that but it often times seems to be hinged upon so many different aspects i think you're right. there is no one single federal agency that has all the answers. knowing from the perspective of fema and tools we have we obviously need to be a better partner. with that long term recovery mission resides within fema or other federal agency i think we all have to look at as you pointed out some of the things that have to occur to say we can afford is addressing housing. if you look a specific's housing programs their sheltered programs. programs. if we affordable housing solution at the end of 18 to 24 months we are keeping people and what should have been made shorter timeframe sheltering operations that we end up now three, four, five years later. we have got about 2400 folks in temporary housing units. these are sheltered programs

that should have had an outcome that said at the end we had an affordable housing on board to make that transition of the sheltering program and when it didn't occur we were still keeping people in what should have been a much shorter time frame but we didn't have that follow one. that i think is where we have to do a better job both at the state federal families describing the outcome and then going back on the federal side and identify who has already bought existing authority capabilities and oftentimes we look at some the mechanisms as not necessarily just funding the stafford act but looking at the other federal programs that would make more sense to provide the capability to than in the disaster response they have the programs that could actually deal with longer-term solutions versus many of fema's progress based upon a short-term response like activity or rebuilding activities based on damages and directors or storm. >> i have one last question to ask, madam share, if you don't

mind. mr. fugate, after speaking to different people more or less, and we come to the agreement that the stafford act does not prevent fema from reaching a lump sum settlement to speed up the recovery process. i know that recent law allows for fema to initiate a process but then the arbitration process in and of itself is a project by project arbitration which at the same time isn't at least in my view speed up and allow the state and local municipalities with flexibility to coordinate the recovery process. are you in the process of looking at ways that we could try to settle, allow states or a

city agency to settle with fema in a lump sum amount and then from there to allow the state and local governments the flexibility to have them initiate a recovery plan as they would see fit for their own communities? >> there's two options. one is to design a program that looks like block grants. we do an estimate, write a check and we are done. the problem is oftentimes disasters are so complex we don't know enough initially and oftentimes keep going back. i think a better option let's take a school system, the jefferson school system and instead of writing each building as a project what if we wrote the district as a project for the campus as a project and gave him more flexibility within those structures? i think the tendency to look at every item, every building has a separate project worksheet is

not something that necessarily lends itself to the flexibility door asking for our staff has to go back and look at is do we have the tools, can we with the stafford act to things that allow us to write projects based upon a function not necessarily each piece of that function. an example you raised was police station fire stations. we treated those as individual component but what if we step back and say let's look at the fire department for the city of new orleans as it is a project. to we have the ability to step back and not recreate station by station because that may not be the need given the change in population within the overall framework of what was impacted, what is eligible and how do we move forward. so we are asking the questions what is the best way to approach that and then look at if we cannot get there with our authorities we have under the stafford or see a far that would warrant discussions back to look

at the concourse would like to provide additional guidance in stafford. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. cao. with a new administration i think it is fair to ask our view, mr. fugate, in light of the of broad sight criticisms of fema center can katrina and recognizing statutory changes and improvements in the agency board and a wholesale overhaul of the agency be in order at this time to assure that it is a nimble functioning agency? >> madam chairman that is definitely the part of the contras.

my caution would be -- >> i'm talking about administrative overhaul. not anything the statute would say. i'm talking about the kind of things, chris expected to happen afterwards based on the administrative arm it had in place or do you think that administrative harm is now functioning to the level that is required and does not need to have a look at its functions in every department and aspect of the new administration. no change we can believe in? >> madame chair that is what we are doing. i've been here two months and able to bring a lot of folks back in that bring in state and local experience and i will be looking forward to my deputy coming on board. the senate will confirm the recommendation of the president that will have a person with city experience. we have people that have worked

in state government and we are building our leadership ranks of donner people that have done this had been in the field and have been customers of fema. the other thing is if you have ever seen our chart is far past any reasonable control and doesn't resemble what we do. and i've always believed firmly -- >> what does it resemble -- >> it looks like a spider. everybody reports to the boss and nobody seems to be able to figure out what we do. if you look at the chart i doubt anybody could understand what fema does behind firm believer that form should follow function. we should be organized by what we do and these are the steps we are currently going through as we build that team to look at how we've been doing things and putting emphasis on outcomes, not process. the other thing we've instituted is there is a tendency to think that you are going to know when the next disaster is going to be which we know is it true and i believe the best way to prove my point and to demonstrate our

competencies' is no notice exercises that take us to the point of failure and to assure ourselves we are learning the lessons of previous disasters and applying them to both of those threats we are familiar with and threats many people have never thought about. i just recently left the space weather prediction center in boulder colorado that deals with geomagnetic storms and looking at the potential impact of a major geomagnetic storm across the infrastructure. these are natural hazards that nobody has addressed the because more trouble than people realize. so this is approach based on -- >> what is the approach again, what are you calling them, please? >> we have within the national weather service an office in boulder, colorado that does nothing but mom to the sun for solar flares and geomagnetic radiation. in certain events, those storms can be so powerful as the impact, which of the part of the globe is facing the sun, power outages across most of the united states simultaneously.

>> anything example of? >> there have been storms so powerful in the northern tears in the country including canada there have been power outages with the damage to infrastructure. there is a historical record even to 1859 that it occurred today would result in about 90% black out of the power system of a better part of the globe is facing the sun when it strikes. >> how about the ice storms we had in the midwest just this past winter? is that a smaller version of when you're talking about? >> no, ma'am, ice storms are a feature of the atmosphere that is probably better understood. the weather that occurs or what they refer to as whether the sun's activity, we are currently sitting right now entering into what is called the next sola maximus of activity for solar flare, sunspots and potential for geomagnetic storms.

the defense based on a or vulnerabilities with dependency upon satellite technology for communications navigation as well as dependency upon the power grid or the top of hazards that we have to expose to the team through exercises and training because, again, we know a lot about hurricanes. we don't know a lot about the next disaster that's going to strike or when it's going to strike and we are going to get there by giving exercising to learn about hazards but also to make sure the team we are building both within dhs, within the federal family and state and local governments are faced with challenges that pushed us to the point where we are not just building a disaster response team for the things we are capable of. we are building it for the types of things that could impact this country. >> i'm going to get -- i'm going to ask ms. diaz dollar -- diaz-balart. these are climate change?

>> no, these are just the sun. we become more dependable on satellites and to geomagnetic storms. >> who is studying that, sir? >> the national weather service, as part of the space with their production service has been doing this. it it's one of those programs that is up and is not well known but the impact definitely within the industry are well known particularly in the sali industry. it is something when we send our satellites we played for. in fact, the space station is one of the prime customers because during certain radiation storms astronauts have to move into a safe location on the satellite to be protected during these storms. >> and of course we have had outages that took out great parts of mr. diaz-balart. >> thank you, madame chair. i had to step out for a phone call i had to take. thank you so much. >> you already touched on this

in general terms, but i just want to make sure i understand this. if we were to get hit by the great miami hurricane again and what dhs, as far as you know, send a p.f.o. team to florida, would the p.f.o. or the f.c.o. be in charge of coordinating the federal response? again and would that p.f.o. report to you or to the secretary of dhs? >> as i understand it, there would be a federal coordinating officer appointed and we would coordinate the response through the stafford act. as to the federal coordinating officer, if you remember back to hurricane andrew the president made a decision to appoint a cabinet official in that capacity to be the federal coordinating officer. so oftentimes it will depend upon the skill and expertise of the disaster as to whether or not would be a staff member that is routinely does it need to go

out on disasters. it could be a regional administrator. i could find myself in that position but it is the president's call as to who he points his federal court needed officers, but those authorities under the act and the katrina management for that would be vested in the federal court in an officer that managed that response and service and point of contact with that governor in supporting the governor's request for assistance from the federal government. >> and i understand that. there are different circumstances that could take place. but again, and it's just -- let's just assume that it's been, you know, a storm, regular storm, not quite as big peaden like maybe 37 you have to deal with the last couple of years in florida. [laughter] if eight p.f.o. as far as you know, would there be a pfo ent? -- sent?

>> it was very clear that there would be a federal coordinating officer. the program does not reside within fema, so i cannot speak to that. my understanding is that the federal recording officer would be the point of contact and would be the principal implementation for staff to react and would serve on behalf of the president. >> i understand that, but our concern is precisely that, that there is a sensitivity outside of fema that, who is in charge? i understand that you obviously think, and we believe, that you are right about that. i just want to make sure. this is not a decision you would make, but i just want to make sure that if there is a storm, and all of a sudden a pfo is sent out there, who is in charge? that is one of our concerns, and that is not the type of decision that you would make, but i just

want to know that this would not be in a group that we, frankly, are not so sure what they do. >> i report to the secretary. i serve as a principal adviser to the secretary and the president on emergency management. congressman, you know what i did before, the team that we built, and i think that is the thing i really want to focus on, is the individual is less important than the team. we got a good team, i think these issues become secondary to our response, but if we do not have a good team and are operating as separate entities try to assist the states, as these become things we have to deal with. with. >> and hopefully we can do with them before that happens. on this same vein and try to understand it really how it works, obviously another are a lot of stuff taken now to prepare for a possible resurgence, and the pandemic, was so hhs for managing the

medical crisis we understand that. dhs is responsible for managing the consequences. now, would the dhs or they send a p.f.o. team our various p.f.o. teams to by pass fema and with a again reports to you as the secretary crags i go back to the same issue but specifically if that were to happen, how that or? >> if we are outside this piece is the secretary is under on behalf of the president coordinating thinness of the family and support of hhs in dealing with issues we are not under stafford act declaration, that is a real potential here with this age one in one. if it does not reach the severity that would want a separate act declaration, you want to have the ability which

is not vested in fema but the secretary to coordinate on behalf of the president and those types of non stafford act events. this goes back to other questions such as dealing with things like national, the national conventions are dealing with g8 summons for you don't have a disaster or declaration, having that ability to provide a coordination across the federal family is one of the mechanisms and one of the tools that exists under number five. >> is there anything preventing the secretary from using fema outside of it stafford act? continue fema outside of the declaration? >> absolutely imperative one of the components work actively on the issues every resources to the table, in fact, there are capabilities when is a federal response not requiring on behalf of governor where fema serves as a coordination role supporting federal agencies such as hhs

would but can you look at what resources we bring to bear, how we apply that and again our primary capabilities are coordinating on behalf of the governor's request to resources of federal government, administering the stafford act. we look as fema our response capabilities other than for the nation is limited because we use other federal agency private sector in non impacted states and local governments as a the responders and a disaster. >> so the question as we now because of precisely that why not use fema it is available and again and this is again i am trying to and asking the questions and your obviously giving direct answers as you always do, but let me tell you what my concern is we have basically two separate structures now commencing disasters. we have fema and dhs separate structure. are you going to be looking and those structures as you are

looking at the rules and regulations, are you going to have the opportunity to look of those two stretchers and come up with recommendations to see again if there is a problem how we can streamline and make sure there is no confusion where state and local officials and we know there already is because we have heard that from them and maybe you were one of the ones on the state level giving some of those complaints, but there is clearly confusion right now. are you going to have the opportunity to look for is that something you will be able to look at and continued to push the secretary on? >> to be fair fema is part of the agency's planning for h1n1, we are not sitting outside, we are part of the team and the second thing you need to understand is that this tip of the transition at the new administration coming in the decision was made to go for the with the existing structures because when the first wave hits many athletes team had yet come on board and we were using their

existing plants to do for prices. as we have come to that we're looking at a second wave and continuing to examine how we're doing things within the p.f.o. -- dhs and that is a process in which to the secretary is aware of the challenges we face to better integrate all of our resources together so to be fair we are part of the h1n1 planning and it h1n1 stock at the very beginning of the new administration with a dozen have many other staff on board so they went and made i think a wise decision to utilize the existing planning documents and the concept of operation and they have since been looking at how to improve those as we go for the so as i have always worn it planning is a process, not an outcome that you necessarily get down and i think we are very much working on the process of how the best coordinate across a variety of france when there may be different agencies with leadership roles that won't fall into the purview of a stafford act declaration.

>> i understand and i think this may seem like a great logical topic for cluster in your review of the department and again as to have her this is something is non-partisan, madam chair has actually gone to the point of writing the president and we want to make sure that there is no confusion that there obviously is right now because some states and local officials have told us there is so i again what i would like from you, sir, is if it is also the that will be looked at is something we need to be pushed on are in and it is of the love dad them feel it would make me feel more at ease but is obviously something that has to be looked at to make sure there is no confusion in that chain of command. >> anger san at. >> thank you, madam chair. >> thank you very much, mr. diaz-balart. a this is one of we have looked

at right munch companies to have a nail put right into so that it doesn't have to be brought up again and i appreciate your response. let me be clear, we are not objecting to anything that the secretary would do in the non stafford act events so long as it's not a federal home office coordinating officer appointed. are objecting -- remember who appoints the federal of cordoning office is a secretary as far as i know so it is in her power to appoint somebody who knows how to deal in with being on the ground and not unusual in the federal system for agencies like let's take agencies like hhs who has very many secretaries and these people have learned how to relate to the secretary at the same time

that they fulfill the statutory obligation and the committee is objecting to being ignored, having to adapt to the appropriations committee and the same we have asked for it to be defined and gave permission was of the secretary wanted is funded and we don't care what she gets funded so long as that is not a stafford act notion and as long as she takes that caveat we are on the same page and if we are not then it was site of the last administration continues in this administration is not a waste of time. is too many things we have to do. among them the three points talking about leftover from last administration, was to give the committee a report on one of the sense of size up to the wall and we've learned as we were dealing with the stimulus there was $3.4 billion in outstanding but disappears betweenssayed at louisiana and that the fema lead

to an outside ny response from the senator from louisiana to have it the president's appointed arbitrators, that is just how bad it has become. we were very embarrassed by it frankly it added time when most jurisdictions are begging for the kind of money that fema had not even gotten to the appeal. problem was at the point of decision and nobody has sat down to look at the various ways of its federal government and others have salas such disputes so we would like to know what at the status of the super $4 billion disputes has any evidence in dispersed and how much is left out of that amount? >> madam chair, i can give you some of those numbers and some are like this have to have a because it's an evolving process. i asked when i was originally

agreed on a 3.4 billion assets -- and i was asked what are these projects. they said this probably unwise is my based upon a concern that's current projects being written and will end up being appealed so how much is really being appealed right now? that number is roughly half of what is in the appeal process. many of those are working through the system through a group that we set up with a state of louisiana that were senior policy, very experienced looking at stafford act and many are being sent back down to the staff which two guide it to move toward on, with the 3.4 billion and asking for show me which projects are in the process it is what i have heard it was this was based upon outstanding projects work yet to be completed that the concern was there may be appeals there. but we have currently in house of the state of louisiana through their local sub grantees

that are appealing is right and have a billion and the others may yet be to come and go to the project. >> and les 3 billion in dispute? end of the notion that we even discussed with fema things like people who upon agreement with part is for the procedures used with then it brings to this so that the state of louisiana -- by the weather was a similar amount not as high outstanding in mississippi could get on with it. this is one dead and lock in that we need to say broken right away at a time when the economy is on its knees every where including louisiana and mississippi. >> i understand the. >> what is being done to break the deadlock between fema and the state of louisiana on $3 billion still in dispute? >> madam chair, as we go through the outstanding projects that

are being written, we have set up a team with a state in baton rouge that is a very high level. >> that consists of the party is. >> our staff and their staff that are working to max out as i explained to you when you pager courtesy visits committees have these parties have a structural problems and i'm going to lay this on the record so everybody knows what our concern is -- this is a structural problem. you're mandate is two keep louisiana and mississippi from getting too much money. the mandate of the state of louisiana and mississippi is to get as much from the federal government as they can. there analyze the deadlock so as long as you have people with a structural problem still at one another and i am not convinced that he will break the deadlock and what is your objection to having all parties agree upon a procedure like for example several states have agreed upon to solve a similar medicated

issues involving much more money. what is your objection after both parties would have us say, a final say as to what the procedure will be forgetting the others to break this deadlock considering you are keeping $3 billion from the citizens of that louisiana and this is very slow progress. made in the six months since we discovered this outstanding amount, most before you came here but guess what, administrator fugate, it is going to be your $3 billion of as you can give a timetable to get the $3 billion moving to the system and then if we see his lips and t problem is, to get money to people on the ground, to get it on the ground now, when the state needs in more than ever because of the combination of katrina and the worst economy since the great depression. we need to know what you are

doing with the $3 billion to break the structural impasse. >> as i said, madam chair, we are working with the tools that i have. i am looking forward to the ability to bring in a panel to give final adjudication of those disputes. >> would that be an independent party that both parties had agreed upon, sir? >> yes, ma'am. >> thank you very much for trying to do that. i think you see the structural problem, and there is no way to say, "well, we go ease up on louisiana and mississippi a little bit." there is no way to do that with any integrity. there is no way with integrity for the governors of mississippi and louisiana to press you for every dime expressly, and they want even more dimes. two years ago, the economy was not as bad. we are frustrated with the agency not seen the structural defects. we are not asking you to do

something for a year and all time, but we are talking about 30 days. like to know what procedure you will be using it with some kind of third-party was with the procedures both parties have agreed to use if any party can use it than it is not on the table. was set of actors if not in this, we are asking fema to advance of in the federal government has never done, we are impatient as other agencies with from our money have found ways to break impasses rather than lead to the money congress has appropriated if i may say so and years ago. it is unconscionable and within 30 days we would like to see what is the procedure, what is the name of the group or panel, when will it be operated, when our is best minds, and similar light what is the appeals

procedure unborn, the benchmarks for appeals procedure as well. my impatience reflects the amount still outstanding. you have, indeed, moved guess so much for a big has a lease using knowledge that there is a structural problem and we couldn't even get the prior administrations reg knowledge the structural problem. of that is what send -- the senator from louisiana went to the president and said this is what you will do, said that an arbitration panel and watch out for her because the next move to give a certain number of days was to set of the arbitration panel so we'd go to work this out, we can with the new administration and everybody and think intelligently understanding what the problem is. would you give us some guidance, first of all, let me say i appreciate what you said -- is just the kind of breaking fuel of a bureaucracy when you talk

about what we are putting in your staff to a hong. people have to understand what this acid do in order to break this impasse here and it's got to say as we look at this structure which by the way the state may not have looked at in decades. we must ascertain how much of this is due to lack of repair and how much to his can it go through this storm. i present to you administrator, that is an impossible task. but to come up with a figure is to come up with an imaginary figure in a figure that everybody can agree on, not a figure with a basis, in fact,, one would have to go back into the kinds of networking, mw

small kinds of calculations that ultimately nobody will have confidence in so when you say that as you are bringing to the table a kind of different vision, that is what we are looking for for the agency to do as difficult as it is where you say look at the project. and if you could just, you mentioned in passing in one of your answers, if you've just say something further about that it was very refreshing to hear because it means and when you hear the problem and see a problem ec id may be structural and was put fresh eyes on it to become a giant with a pilot project, but don't just keep going and it's a path is if you keep doing the same thing the same way you will get a different response. it would you lay that out of bed, the project, the notion persists the present notion you

are considering at least? >> absolutely madam chair and one of those challenges is on not interested in getting man -- minded dentist a poet the project is. if you have a fire station that is destroyed by disaster, the uninsured elements which are eligible under stafford act for replacement, which you are essentially doing is you are rebuilding a fire station. the fact that in his records which may have been destroyed in the original disaster and the plant there is no fire station is what is on to drive the project, we are going to replace the fire station if that is, indeed, -- >> what about the fact the state may have responsibility? >> madam chair, if that project is eligible the state has the responsibility as a grantee supporting him that local government through the grants process, but we should not be added to the burden on issues that two not get us back to the

original project which was of the station was a government function and eligible for assistance in there are uninsured losses than in this type of event we should be looking at what it will take to rebuild a fire station person is looking for things such as maintenance records which didn't exist because there were destroyed as part of the disaster can i thank you, and have said it. if you are moving in that direction we would be very pleased. let me ask the ranking member before i go for the if he has any further questions. >> actually, thank you, madam chair, i really don't but i want to reemphasize that i think the president found the best person in the country in the entire country for this job and that is why i am so insistent on a future that we have a clear line of command and that the person who knows what he is doing is the right man at the right time is the best in the country. if we get hit by another

catastrophe we don't learn it then and that he does not have is a the resources or the right chain of command and there is confusion because we do have the right person right now in that agency as i think is very evident in the time that the american people have had the opportunity to meet him. >> thank you very much, mr. diaz-balart. he has gotten his disaster after disaster and we are seeing evidence of that experience in response we are getting today and let me ask you about the last war complex that all of us have to a certain extent. and that is some complaints that fema has overcompensated fighting the last war when it sees another disaster it before its and that its doing but you expected to do, kind of lean

forward and try not to have happen what happens last time. what we had testimony before this subcommittee, for example louisiana was the drowning in ice. we had indicated some word that florida has to ask the secretary of homer and security to stop sending aid it, that this did have not asked for. would you speak to us about over compensation by fema? has it occurred and what did you intend to do while preparing, while meeting foreign in the event of a new disaster? >> madam chair, having been probably one of the folks that was concerned about how we were approaching the aftermath of a katrina in some cases i think

supplanting the role of local and state government and there is a danger. yes, the government can do more into a lot of that. the problem is local and state governments are not full partners in doing anything before requesting assistance in a large scale disaster there may not be enough if the only player in town is federal government. behind me is a lot of that team both local and state governments and i think to avoid this over compensation nature you have to build a team that trusts of unintended to work effectively as a team and not second guess. i don't want to leave it david maxwell hanging in if he has a request i haven't thought about but i should not be second-guessing him in responding outside of working with him as a team. team members don't do that, they were together. we are talking, working as a team but not supplanting is

other. we may be anticipating a very you see something coming so that when that request comes in vienna delayed in getting that help but a real scene doesn't second-guess and fell in line with another team and their. >> and feel free to ask the department not to send info requested matters will answer in a resource to this date, is that right prices. >> yes man in some quarters taken i was in federal and the reaction was i think probably. >> the taxpayers of davis is thank you. >> was looking pragmatically, states are going through tough times, it's the federal government is stepping up to the plate every disaster in states are less inclined to fund the programs and they should be funding, we will for the deluded are capabilities to deal with very complex disasters and people forget most of the resources that actually responded the to hurricane katrina were not federal

resources, their national guard and local and state law-enforcement fire departments, paramedics and other responders across the nation. if we continue not to leverage the capabilities of state and local government we won't have the resources the next time there is a disaster because we have built everything upon the government doing everything at such low levels that wednesday's increase in the high budget choices it's easy to go somewhere else will take care of us is that of taking the steps that many states do in the face of adverse budgets. to build and maintain the capability to respond to their citizens with our role supporting that announce a plan to end up our responsibility the governors have in their states during disaster. we don't believe in the domino theory or each level has to fill before the next kicks in, but we do believe we have to be 18 and that means everybody puts into the games we play as a team cannot depend on that one part of government to make sure we can meet the needs when disaster strikes. >> i just have a few more

questions, about every couple months the national press all over the united states using a story war on let us call them the last most vulnerable victims of katrina who are still in trailers. would you give us a status reports on where these last, where we are placing these last victims who have before us are you came into office, hud, fema, they testified they have housing for each and every one of the victims of katrina. neither hide nor fema has broken down who we were talking about, how close they were whether they were disabled people, whether they were people waiting to build their homes, just to they were in the first place and so they have it all went together by the press. how many are there, how many are left? your predecessor in just before

leaving office promised nobody would be put out in the street to a chorus the committee does not object to that. recently announcing that to violate the stafford act and keep people receiving federal funds in perpetuity but we would like to wipe the slate clean of the last victims of katrina knowing that they are now some place and that is a appropriate for them. >> yes madam chair, right now there is approximately little under 2400 families that are still in fema housing. we have been working aggressively. >> otherwise known as taylor's? >> some are table -- trailers and some are mobile homes began working to do case work and we were working with the state of louisiana, we are able to enlist one of the other partners in the vast it was like to do this as part of the team to help in that transition. but i think that you're point is

well taken, there is an end to the program's. the fema program for shelter programs or in design to be long term so we have to add to the make sure that we're doing the case or to identify the resources of mastaba the needs of the families but we have to bring conclusion to the process and i face is in florida were again many of the challenges had to be worth one on one in in some cases is literally took the final notice that there was no wonder federal assistance to make decisions to move on forces those people that two not have the option and needed to be moved into other programs providing dissolution the case or is there is an one-size-fits-all has to be based upon where the family is, will they get back in the home running other options but there is a point where you have to have a closure to what the options then we have to be able to close

that program. >> yes, because you do not have a right under the stafford act to be where you were before, to be close to work. all of that brings hardship, but not hardship sufficient to keep you with federal funding forever. and i understand from staff that you have submitted a breakdown. we will look at that break down and continue to work with you. this large question that i posed to you in light of your deep experience, we felt that we could pose this question to you about a catastrophe, a catastrophic disaster, and i want to ask this question because we need to know whether the stafford act that we have relied on since 1988, 20 years of reliance on one statute, very broadly framed, would seem to

encompassed just about everything you think of, whether in light of the experience of katrina, in light of the experience, for that matter, after 9/11, catastrophic even though it involves less area and even fewer people, when you consider katrina, in light of that experience, you, administrator, are a deep thinker in this area, and we do not want to be caught with the notion that nobody knows what a catastrophe is, and maybe we do under the statute. we have no opinion at this point. at this point. but we really don't want people running to us and saying, see, we've got a whole lot of people to and let us count them for use so we need to get all of the that extra help lead to a game to louisiana and mississippi. they will duets. you heard perhaps with rep. and

looks judge give us a whole new standard option based on the budget or this city and the state. that is fine two have been that when people see what in patois we had to do on in katrina, we had to pass a post katrina and to and even had to pass a bill was never death of the senate's which may be violating the stafford act to try to a given some additional assistance to louisiana and mississippi. it ultimately i think that we did give them and, of course, that have been through statutes, we will aim to the state we'd match, but the other parts of it to the that were in this act that didn't get past came as a result of testimony from people from the area and the testimony was given on the basis that we

are talking about one time only to train a stop where you find it that what the residents or the stage or the city cannot move, cannot act because fema is not sure why what is authorized him to give in this kind of situation. we want to ask you, should congress began to look toward describing what a catastrophe is, by definition it some kind of definition of our guidance, whether that is warranted in, should we look toward the kind of consequences of an objective and benchmarks that would guide to all concerned. does the president needed authority? that would send from the top the notion this is an extraordinary

events? have you given any thought to that or do think we should be giving thought to it at this time? >> madam chair, usually when i hear these discussions and having been and is a long time i break into two things, and i looking at cost sharing go to 100%. >> that was the only one of the things. >> that would be one way to look at it and the other way to look at if you look better system we tend to reward, we don't reward states that do more, our cost share sunset 25 percent state and local and no less than seven represent federal share and we have the option to go up to 100% heretofore is our best and is what triggers the next level. rees said per capita impact to go to 1910 and obviously katrina was off the scale and made sense but oftentimes i find that we don't look at it from the standpoint of not only the consequences of how much more is the state doing with their own money that is offsetting the cost to the federal government

and only going to see the cost shared go up when is it reaches a certain per capita were in a very tight narrow part of that disaster so i am looking at how the cost sharing not only ones because of the size of the disaster by how you use it as a capability of encouraging state and local governments to a better job of managing disasters? i got acid this by the wise man, one of this as the directors of fema and asked me is there anything if they could reimburse the state and i said not much propound and said that as part one and the second part of those is one of you wish to have only one program to administer in a cast of a disaster to take care of everything in ms. case you need to expand this be systematically or do we want to look at the existing federal programs already there's such as community block grant dollars and and how we build a system that takes greater advantage of existing structures and existing

authorities and make a better plan to integrate stafford act and other federal organizations including in many cases usda from the programs in the rural states and parts of states so that rather than creating new structures and mechanisms and the disaster we get what we are have. >> with those before not the temporary assistance but for ongoing assistance? >> yes, ma'am in many cases take hud, most of d.c. with the fema programs are short-term to buy time to get it there is not find to be housing at the end of the fema programs we are unable to get out of whatever programs they've got to recognize early in a disaster that the hsing that will be available at the end of the fema program would not be sufficient to provide the solution. >> so we hands of responsibility and pass a temporary to another federal agency to decide what role and was funds are appropriate, is that once you

are advocating? >> yes madam chair, i was safe to approach of the sampling you want stafford act to be all these things the program is to grow and raise judges' that usually will be implemented until disaster. >> to reconsider this, administrator fugate, i suppose an administrator of fema could decide that on his own and say at this point the agriculture department to should be responsible for this or it hud, do you think we need authority within fema so that there would be no doubt or bickering or exchanges about who really should now takeover among agencies? >> madam chair, before i commit to fema would be the most logical place, i think you're correct in looking at in those programs that go beyond it stafford act that go across a variety of federal agencies, should there be vested in coordinating role and would be best to do that. you look at what we have been

charged with fema and a long-term recovery components into in those plans, one of the things i'm trying to drive is not only does that look like in every simplistic definition to make my points re-signed the tax base to what it was our less than within a five-year. the swiss are driving a process that looks at not just try to get summer by throwing the programs and pieces together to define where we are going in there with that local officials understand and can start looking at how we try programs to establish a tax base that we rebuild a fire station where there is no tax base to support the pri and how we change the outcome so it goes by too i cannot get there and i don't have long-term housing solutions which is now what it does and i can get there and haven't been able to rebuild the job base and if we are in a transitional economy with a johnson and navidad jobs in recovering what i have not changed the outcome. it is a perfect example in florida city home said, we spend

millions of dollars in recovery trying to rebuild an economy that julie did not recover until the building boom pushed to the part of the county. that many of the communities or not recovering the jobs in the aerospace and not come back in that economy had not made a significant recovery until the accounting growth caught up with that infrastructure. >> in light of this kind of a futuristic look we are giving, we are seeing stafford act and non stafford act scenarios and, of course, stafford act assumes you something called the disaster has occurred in, what but i give you in this is why the president may need to get into this, this occurred very early in the swine flu in the administration. i don't know for the life of me to bureaucratically should be in

charge but i know this much, they put the cdc up there because nobody wanted to hear from everybody else except someone with expertise in the flu. now, your scenario might well apply, logistics, who does what and so forth. as one of the things we are looking at not only the stafford act where for that matter hamas security act. remember cdc comes it under hhs and timing play if it were a stafford act matter fema has a huge coordinating role, but when you get into subsections of with that matter whole cabinet agencies that is where you get into who should be stepping up to do something. ultimately of course, if you get an up bureaucracy you go to the man in the white house and he will straighten out. we would like to have a someone at stafford act on out depending upon one's your notions of conscience but what is happening

here, who the public will have confidence in then let others come into play there often very critical supportive roles, but somebody needs to step up and what happened in the swine flu episode is somebody stood up because the white house had a good event to say swine flu we have no vaccine. that we have potential panic. several agencies could be involved. two her credit the secretary stood up and restored, it is because she was one of the two cabinet officers who had been appointed, but to show you how sanguine in the administration was as it saw how the matter was developing and realize that

notwithstanding the enormous credibility the secretary had to have somebody up there and call upon because it was early in the administration and getting people through, they had to call upon the bush administration official as i recall from the cdc. he was a professional and therefore he spoke in ways that people could understand it is awfully important and he spoke with the background and expertise and the secretary handed it to him and everything was moving. we expect some sort of situation like that to develop perhaps with some further guidance here and we want to thank you very much. we have put before use some of its ultimate questions facing us. we have been very pleased to hear how deeply you think about these matters and we think it requires very deep and new thinking. i suspect that when it comes to this cause agency coordination we probably ought to have somebody look at its beyond our particular agencies and that's

something we want to give some thought to following this hearing to hear what joe thoughts might be on that notion about the presidential authority to say that the lead agency for example there might be a point where even the stafford act matter, but what happens in katrina. in order to have any betty spates credibly given how few resources were in place, the commander which is of a service invented the rescuing, the coast guard, had to stand up and speak out and did may change at various points. we don't care who is in charge, we just care that everybody understands who was in charge and that there is no bickering about it, no duplication and

that we continue to move toward a, i see that clean thinking from you and i appreciate your testimony in the corn to hearing from you again kim and thank you madam chair. >> we want to call the next panel. jane bullock, former fema chief of staff now with but france's and mccarthy, a congressional research service, federalism and elections said the emergency management section. michele norris, professor of urban policy and planning and nyu. donald dunbar, n.j. in general -- a set of wisconsin who is testifying today and perhaps of the national governors' association. david maxwell, vice president of the national emergency management association. rest in decker, emergency