came from the fbi. what are your thoughts about looking at what do we do? should there be drug treatment? what do we do? given much -- this the first i have heard of it. i think an independent look would not hurt. by independents and been byependent objective -- independent i mean independent objective to look a certain aspects of incarceration. there are two big challenges, who and what. who would do it and to what would be the specification so that it is not a wide range of enterprise or initiative without the possibility of

coming back with recommendations that can and should be adopted. smaller with a specifically defined set of goals and parameters, i do not think it could hurt. .> that is my last question it is probably the last time you will testify before this committee. i was called off the floor the other day. i understand that the directors when the search for two more years. what is your position? >> he said it will take a bill. i said i will speak for the bill. i think should talk to mrs. muller first before you presented. >> the law. the hearing is adjourned. >> tomorrow on "washington ," we will talk about

president obama's trip to the middle east. followed by the history and importance of presidential press conferences with bill plante. and then a review of missle defense systems with michael o' hanlon. >> republican senator tom cobur topn to cut spending and the budget, as well as the debate over gun legislation. he has proposed 23 amendments to the current budget bill. on newsmakers, sunday at 10:00 a.m. at 6:00 p.m. eastern. >> monday night on "first

ladies," called a bigamist and rachel jackson dies before taken office. hostess.elson is the ingleton van buren is hostens for her father. now i look at hurricane sandy recovery efforts with testimony from fema administrator of craig craig fugate, house secretary shaun donovan, and jo-ellen darcy. security hearing -- this homeland's security committee meeting is just over two hours.

>> will come to order. thank you all. it is very nice to see you. thank you to our witnesses for joining us today. it is an important hearing. it was october 29 in delaware when hurricane sandy made landfall. theimpact was particular in mitt atlantic. it was devastating and heartbreaking. new jersey, new york, parts of england were hit particularly hard. on staten island have 21 people who were killed. i am told over what hundred homes in hoboken, new jersey were flooded. homes in hoboken,

new jersey were flooded. south, wejust to the did not experience a level of devastation that was inflicted on our neighbors to the north. but our own state was hit hard. widespread flooding caused damage to businesses, roads, todges -- cutting off access hospitals, schools, and to work. the class of the storm was severe. 160 two people were killed as a result of the hurricane. killed as ae were result of the hurricane. it is expected to rank as the second costliest hurricane on record. it will take years to recover from the devastation. it is important to get the recovery right. in the aftermath of hurricane katrina we saw many problems during the recovery phase and

created -- money was not always well spent or coordinated. recovery moves slowly as a result. millions of dollars were spent providing temporary housing for survivors and travel trailers. people stayed in there for far too long because permanent housing solutions were not identified. red tape prevented us from making an impact we could have made with hud. the post, katrina emergency act of 2006 that was shepherded to this committee took steps to try to fix these problems. to be honest of you i have seen a lot of improvement as a result of the act. this is not only improved the federal government possibility to respond to disasters but it also has increased the

capability for state and local governments to rebuild. we also require fumet to coordinate with other federal the markets to write a national recovery strategy. -- with other federal departments to write a national recovery strategy. -- we have notry seen the sort of problems that we did after hurricane katrina. this committee now has a subcommittee with responsibilities before fema. notable to great work. -- no doubt they will do great work. the question we need to ask is if it was an aberration or an omen of things to come. --f of our east coast hurricane sandy is the third major hurricane to threaten or strike our east coast in the last three years. hurricane irene devastated parts

of the coast in 2011. unfortunately the northeast and other vulnerable areas are expected to see more frequent and larger storms in the future. this would suggest that last -- thehe government impact of climate change on the federal government. it was explained among other things that climate change could threaten coastal areas with rising sea levels, agricultural activity, increased the intensity of severe weather events. it was recommended to take a strategic look at that and start to prepare accordingly. i think this is a small recommendation. it is essentially put on our to do list. the cost associated with

responding to and recovering from a hurricane such as sandy, both human and financial costs are so severe that we simply cannot afford to face this devastation over and over and over again. recoveryint up in this have seen states take promising steps towards addressing the issues that we have identified, in particular i am pleased to see that new york and new jersey have begun to make plans to mitigate against future disasters. we all know too well that prevention is worth a pound of cure. my grandmother would be pleased to hear me repeat those words today. a few years ago the national institute of science reported that for every $1 spent on $1 spent on various mitigation efforts we can save four dollars in costs. we must assure that mitigation policies are thoroughly incorporated in this effort. this is especially important if climate change drives the sea

levels to rise and increases the severity of coastal storms. by working to get there we can rebuild and become stronger. by protecting ourselves from pitch for big by protecting ourselves from future storms. we cannot ignore what many experts believe is the under, it is the underlying cause. -- believe is the underlying cause of hurricane sandy. be making a mistake if we did not also think about what we need to do to address the symptoms of climate change but the core problem itself. i look forward to working with all of you in the obama administration on this critical task we have before us. i will turn it over for comments. >> let me apologize. i have to go to the ford to object to the lack of amendments that are being made available on the continuing resolution. i will not be able to hear your testimony. i have looked at and my staff has the early read it.

-- has thoroughly read it. love tommy harper but the tone of climate change and the reality of what we have seen and what the predictions are, there is no connection with that. gostill have a long way to to groove out what has made as fact. hearing about climate change. this is a hearing about response to hurricane sandy. i look forward to coming back and offering questions. i would also say i am proud of fino's response so far. i am thankful for the cooperation you have offered the subcommittee. i ask my statement be placed in the record and i will return.

coburn too.m let me introduce our witnesses. first witness, craig fugate, a management assad -- emergency management agency. it was a really outstanding effort you made from our state and the other states that were affected. he began his career as an emergency manager and a firefighter, emergency paramedic, and a lieutenant with -- county fire rescue. 2001 he became a director of the florida division of the board c management. to see.elighted welcome to this hearing and thank you for your testimony. -- are you a native of

new york? >> in native of new york. >> he is the honorable shaun donovan, secretary to the department of housing and development. he became secretary in january 12 -- january 2009. before his appointment, he served as a deputy assistant secretary for multifamily housing during the clinton administration. he later served as commissioner of the department of housing preservation in new york city. we thank you for joining us. we look forward to your testimony. statesnger to the united senate where she once toiled on the finance committee. great to see her again, secretary jo-ellen darcy. said assistant secretary in august of 2009, i

am pricking a pattern here -- picking up a pattern here -- 2009 was a good year. until 2000 she served as a theessional staff master -- line she then moved out on to the senate finance committee where she served on the senate environmental our advisory. thank you for your work and the great work of the folks you need. we ask you to start your testimony. please keep it close to five minutes. voting aroundtart 11:15. please proceed. >> thank you. hurricane sandy was essentially two disasters in one. it covered a geographical area

that today we know the heaviest impact that it were in. landfall weaver anticipated impacts as far south as keep patterson. as far west as virginia, which was under a blizzard warning, all the way up to the central ohio valley and into the new england states. to prepare for that we are able to utilize the authorities granted if the law when fema was authorized as opposed to the format. that clearly stated that in the anticipation of a major disaster we would not have to wait until the states were over want before they were able to request assistance. we appreciate not only equipment and supplies but we urge each team to link up with the governor's teams to begin a crucial planning on what if the storm did hit and produced the impacts possible throughout that region? as the scale and a pack became more apparent that it was gunned

be focused on the land fall, somewhere between new jersey and boston, it allows us to concentrate our resources on those impacts. as it came ashore be dealt with a storm that produced a very significant storm surge, probably greater than many people realize because of the nature of the storm and the fact they had gone through hurricane i mean and they thought it was as bad as it was going to get. the world trade center memorial was being flooded, as well as nine of the hospitals in the lower boroughs, including new york university. that damage was talked to down by the power outages. i think that number estimates -- underestimates him an impact and those are actual connections, not people. when you look at the region

there is an excess of 25 people being impacted by some way or another directly to the power outages. as we responded to this disaster using the tools that we had we were able to focus on the life safety issues, much of it done by the local responders, augment grand dollars to build more capability search and rescue, we then supported the immediate need for shelter and distribution supplies can begin the process of starting that initial recovery. we were dealing with those immediate issues that provide expedient and temporary housing. housing in packs you have to start planning from the very first day with the solutions were. merely putting people up temporarily in hotels were not an answer. that is why we engage very quickly with the long-term

recovery type. are engaged with our partners at hud and others. this was going to be a very significant challenge to house people long term, given the density of the population and the amount of impact that occurred. we implemented a variety of tools that we have been developing over the last couple of years, some very successful, some not as much. we continue to learn how to do that better. the response was geared towards responding -- here towards supporting the state. we are now seeing these communities began to move into the long term permanent work that will be required. we also wanted to assure that when we build back, we are not building back to what was there. we are looking at how we ensure that critical infrastructure is built back in a way that ensures its survivability in future storms?

the president has directed us we are looking at the issue as an adaptation of a hazard to face. we cannot build back to previous standards. storm but is not a star potential that could occur and we only fall back to sandy, the next strong for storm could undo all of our work. -- the next stronger storm could undo all of our work. of hurricane isaac, parts of the community that has mitigated against katrina saw ice storm search greater than what they saw in that storm. because of the mitigation fire stations, schools, emergency operations centers were up and running during the storm and are able to continue to provide essential services, resulting in theme and the federal agencies being able to focus on recovery. we know mitigation work. we also need to make sure we are mitigating against future threats, not past history.

every time we go out it just seems a hundred year term -- it hundred-ms the term " year-storm," is being thrown out there. >> your entire statement will remain part of the record. feel free to summarize. committee,,f the for the opportunity to testify today regarding the ongoing effort to rebuild in the region devastated by sandy. i shared the hurricane sandy recovery task force established by president obama. it had immense impact in new york commuters, connecticut, of rhode island, maryland, and another arm -- and a number of other states. based on lessons learned from previous disasters the president asked secretary napolitano and i to create a new approach from a national perspective. that led to the creation of the national recovery from work,

which we of it -- which we released in 2011. it is important to the coordinated, government-wide approach to this. for the very first time we are fully implementing a long-term recovery strategies that were part of the ndr apps. we have staff on the ground in new york, a new jersey, connecticut, who are working on long-term rebuilding. we know that planning for long- term rebuilding must begin even as response activities are underway. we also know that the unusual scale of the devastation caused by sandy met communities with face greater rebuilding challenges than usual. cut of the staunchest would across state lines. infrastructure would require federal, state, and local government including the private sector across the region. in recognition of this, president obama created the hurricane sandy task force to

-- sure if that the president paz executive order calls for us to look at comprehensive -- the president's executive order calls rest of the comprehensive strategies. the task force will wind down and an implementation will be carried out by the regional support functions that are already in place. one goal of the task force is to identify and share in best practices in the wake of the disasters and to help communities apply those lessons to their own rebuilding efforts. a perfect example of this work is an announcement we made last week to help communities get homedisaster funding into owners and business owners' hands more quickly. local governments can modify and adapt to help prepare their own

homes and small businesses and offer citizens counseling or, where appropriate, byatt's. these model programs means they do not have to reinvent the wheel and design programs from stretch -- from scratch. in addition to identifying opportunities for this type of coordination, supporting local rebuilding efforts with the financial resources that only the federal government can provide is a key part to the federal role. federal agencies in the department has begin making money from the disaster relief appropriations act available to state and local governments. mr. fugate to what mentioned -- totaling $5.4 billion. hud allocated the spotted within eight days of the president signing its supplemental, the fastest that has been done in history. we have announced two billion in emergency transportation.

fema has released $5.9 billion in national flood insurance payments. the task force's role is to help supplement individual agencies to get money where it is needed by sharing lessons learned about how to use it most effectively and efficiently. our role is also to facilitate the monitoring of those programs to ensure accountability and take additional melchers -- additional measures to prevent fraud and abuse. we are working with the relative inspectors general in support of their critical oversight mission. we're working with agencies to coordinate and deliver an enhanced agency control plan. we will monitor and share data about how the dollars are being spent on public website similar to recovery got -- similar to recovery.gov. the task force will also use its funding to mitigate future risks from storms. storms that science tells us will have greater severity in the future.

medication is cost-effective, offering a $4 return on each dollar invested by preventing future damages. well each agency is focused -- the role of the task force is to ensure that prioritization of the project is across the region so can ensure benefits are not being duplicated. we want to think congress and members of this committee, in particular senator entered for your leadership that has cut red tape. we are working to combine cdt and other funds so the opportunity is not an opportunity lost. we know mitigation works, as craig fugate has just described. we saw on the gulf coast and we saw in sandy as well. we continue to work -- we continue to look forward to working with this community to support community rebuilding efforts in a way to make them stronger, more economically sustainable, and better prepared to withstand future storms. thank you for the opportunity to testify today.

i look forward to is ring any questions. >> thank you. has talked about the super storm with 80 mile per hour winds and 13.7 foot storm surge. all of this caused a great deal of devastation. flood damages occur to public infrastructure, causing extensive power outages, affecting mass transit systems, and affecting -- and damaging public houses and private residences. degraded coastal features have resulted in increased risks and vulnerabilities for futures tour events. expected changes in sea level, extreme weather events, and other impacts of climate change are likely to increase those risks. the court has authority under for emergency99 management activities in response to natural disasters,

including natural disaster preparedness, advance measures, emergency operations both before and after a flood, and rehabilitation and repair of damaged projects. the court also responses to disasters at the direction of the matter under the stafford act. under the national response from forrd is the coordinator emergency number 3. fromare funded entirely the disaster refund. during and after the hurricane, we responded to 68 missions assigned by fema and provided more than 1000 trained personnel in the two hundred 49 power battalion. the mission assignments exceed $350 million in york, new jersey, massachusetts, delaware, ohio, pennsylvania, connecticut, and rhode island. of march 2013 -- include

completion of 567 power assessments and installation of 211 generators that at one point for generating 55 million kilowatts of power. pumpslation of 162 identified by state and local authorities, including subway systems, tunnels, and the water treatment plant, resulting in the removal of over four hundred 75 million gallons of water restoration of operation of the hoboken terminal -- we delivered 500 truckloads of drinking water to new york, new jersey, and pennsylvania. we refurbished 115 transitional housing units. and federal damage -- and damage a federal cost of projects in the york and new jersey -- another famer -- another major mission is the removal of debris left by hurricane sandy. i have an update on the supreme

verbal information that was included in my complete statement -- on the debris removal information that was included in my complete statement. more than 730 four thousand cubic yards of debris has been removed from public sites by the corps of engineers. removal assessments that were assigned to the core and the numbers that have been completed has risen. the new total of assessments that are assigned to the corps, is 1814. the success of these efforts was due to a dedicated and determined team that included the core, and 80 -- the corps, the navy, the coast guard, and many more. reported from -- has improved product

information reports. engineering and design has begun on each of the project. there were damages outside of our north atlantic division, for which we are continuing to do project reports that are also being prepared. appropriation act provided 5.3 $5 billion for civil works program. 3.4 $6 billion of construction funding in which more then 80% was to prevent future flood risks that would affect the coastal system and reduce the economic costs and risks associated with large flood events. that all projects is in the development of

implementation plan. this addresses resiliency, economics, environmental compliance and long-term sustainability. partnershipr into .greements that will be amended take a broad long-term approach to reducing future vulnerability that is sustainable over time for the natural ecosystem. >> thank you for your testimony is. includes border security. down along thes border.

it tears the home and security committee. one of the things we wrestled with is how do we measure success? folks we number of think we areex i making great progress. we still wrestle a bill with how to measure success. how do we measure success? that?e we doing that >> critical forst lifesaving. nation, i do we have enough resources szigeti people quickly to do rescues?

do you have and of law enforcement security to make it safe? provide the most essential basic need to a community in that short time frame? it cannot be done with the federal agencies. we look through the whole community and what we do with our other partners. the measures we look at specifically are can be physically get back into the area? can we make safe to operate in? injured,t sued the have an opportunity to change the outcome? do have the capabilities to make the most immediately -- immediate needs? we can begin the process for setting the next stage. at our last are achieving that

some but not uniformly through have the impact areas. the challenge is the dense population. it is something we have to continue to look at. you have to look at where the people are and make sure you have the resources. we are now going back in catalan our investments in homeland's security. what does this response look like? the urban search and rescue teams that we sponsored had never been funded to do any type theyter rescue even though have this from numerous hurricanes. we began equipping them through this. >> how do we measure success? how are we doing? we are very focused on how we

measure success. obvious a set of more measures. how quickly our homeowners getting back into their homes? how quickly our small businesses getting up and running backs will be sure be open for business this summer -- and getting back up and running? the up andore running for business this summer? the is the timeline for investments. one of the roles is to go through and tried to set a consistent policy on how we will

implement those time lines. but we're also working with the agencies to get data sharing agreements. pipesmes setting of the so we can track it. it is up to you to know whether we are making speedier progress than we did in katrina in helping businesses and homeowners get back. last at? the analysis that showed that we save $4 for every $4 investment. that is what we will be gathering the data to track go forward to make sure we have paid where those

for a more they haven't. how to measure success in? >> in two ways. one is how we are able to respond to the missions that were giving us. i think the success is shown in to fact that we were able call on the resources we have not only in the army but within the defense department to help with that mission. to measure success is to be able to look at 40 projects we have a look at. the storm risk reduction. if you flew the coast after sandy the kids see where there had been a sore -- where there had been engineers.

but think for us not only do we learn from that an order to measure success we have to learn why did not work. we're working with the task is part ofke sure it any project we build. >> i just want to telegraph my next pitch. when they have had a chance to ask questions, what do you think our state, local, and federal governments have the authority and the resources that are necessary to make the recovery is successful? for your any other toolboxes? >> thank you for coming in and testifying.

i have not seen the devastation. i like to ask some basic questions about that. how much damage was with in the proximity to the shoreline? can you give me some indication damages fellof the within the flood plain area. in some cases it was almost half a mile depending where you are at. you have inlets and then you have rivers that flooded upstream. most of the damage occurs within the first half mile of where you saw the damage. because you saw this, some of the water was going into place that may have a bypass further ground. there was flooding well away from the shore area. that would be safe to say occurredhe damage it cure

within the floodplain? >> we did identify there's flooding outside of new jersey. this was part of the updated map showing us better resolution. it is important to know this only shows risk as 1%. in many areas the flooding was buried. the hundred year flood plain would not identify all of the risk. that is one thing we are working on with the corps of engineers, good decisions and what the potential storm impact may be. some realuld give credit. one of the most important steps update have taken is to those flood maps with new advisory maps. it just to be clear, there are

places where the hundred year have gone up by more than 10 feet. when you describe the hundred year flood plain, it is with in that new were version of it compared to the old maps. it was substantially outside. thingsthe most important is to accelerate the process of getting those do flood maps out so as they are rebuilding they are using her more accurate measures of what this is. >> give me your of that. tell me what it does in terms of cost.

>> where we have the updated maps, and the requirements to participate is to adopt the maps as ordinances and then they have to drive all their construction based on those maps. common one for residential areas is the requirement to build above the elevation. we saw numerous homes where i was at in connecticut that had that hadduring irene been elevated. are still standing. sometimes it is between been trying to rapidly recover versus losing everything including the committee's tax base. while it does not factor in the worst possible scenarios but

could still be damages across the gulf coast and northeast or the standards have been applied. ice storms showed that the elevation requirement reserves housing in homes for people to return to after the storm. there are not built to that level. that applies to the building codes. what about the insurance market's? >> is provided by the flood insurance program. if you are not elevated beyond the national flood insurance program, go into this will be a very expensive proposition to people. they will get a discounted rate .howing the reduce risks

this will price many people to these decisions. >> do you have any estimates so far of how much the cost of the disaster is going to be borne by private insurance versus state governments versus that no government? they have not chosen for homeowners. it is preposterous of the cost. it was borne by the tax payer. would be the numbers that would be done by the private sector. >> one of the critical things craig has said is we do not have a coordinated response where real using the

same standards. you have the official flood maps -- where you are using the same standards. you have the official flood maps that would govern the investments we would make post- disaster. we are trying to use these new maps to ensure it not just fema is using the latest information but across the government we are doing that. and our first block grant noticed we required that any time you are rebuilding more than 50% and you have to use these new maps even if they're not going to be official. we are looking at insurance. on provides insurance lending. we have this new information. we're not rebuilding to a old

standard that will cost us more. >> this is how we incentivize people to build in areas that are going to get wiped out. >> thank you for being here. i apologize for being absent during the testimony. i want to make a few comments. we have had investigators up there. it has been bipartisan in terms of what we look at. the initial response has been very positive. was whenhe criticisms he changed the people there is not a good chance for handoff of what was done.

m answersto be too to questions that cannot be answered. is most of them are having to hire consultants to access funds. .e made it did the kristin's are impacted. it is real and justifiable. they areove -- impacted. if israel and justifiable. why did not give answers to the questions? historically, whenever have the luxury of being able to report people for a long time. we use a lot of our permanent

work force to do the initial stat. as you're able to bring in our reservists we were able to bring its. this has never been a good changeup. we continue to work on that. oure is the complexity of programs. they have reached the point where part of what we were looking forward to in the same the recovery and prevent that was better flexibility to get more consistent answers quicker. our goal was to get the right answer the first time so local officials know what to do. part of this will come back to look at how we stack disasters. we have brought this on. we have been updating the changes.

we are going to put emphasis on a non-person work force. that we'rereas looking at. and it is to public assistance it has been an issue that had been a local official. it will have this exposure. >> does the taxpayer ends up paying for the consultant in?

>> de liggitt management costs. some of this comes out of -- passage with the management costs. some of this comes out of costs. there is confusion homeowners have around the conflicting requirements for efforts of different servicers with different types of loans. for example, a certain servicers may have a policy that your proceeds will only be released under this condition. another would release them under another condition. one of the efforts, fha is part of hud. areie mae and freddie overseen. we brought together the private servicers to try to reach consistent standards on how long forbearance will be.

consistent information. onmade a lot of progress this. the more somebody who is on the field can say here is the role. asapplies across the board opposed to what side of the street your honor are what lender you have. this is not just a -- or what sort of lender you have. eligibility requirements have changed. the eligibility requirements for the same. why is it so hard to get an answer? >> i would like to talk about what those issues are.

they have hire contractors because of the workload issue. they are not staffed for this. they have consultants. they have to hire consultants because the complexity of the program. there's also eligibility. it comes back to the communities that have gone through previous disasters. what are the specifics that are requiring them to issue these on program eligibility? is a because the program has become so complex it requires that? is a blend of that.

it is complex. i want to follow up on one thing. are in the disaster area and you're not going to find out until july this year what the flood plain map is, what are you supposed to do for your home? cases,pt in a couple of most of the maps are being published. there been updated. in biggest change will be some of the areas where it reduces the vulnerability zone which would change this. these are not significantly changing. higher? see these go know. at best what they will show is this. it would mitigate future storm damage. >> could a home owner and one of

these flood prone areas take away from this hearing that based on the maps we have today they are going to have their premium not adjust upward because they did not follow a new path? as long as it is the area with the most current advisory? >> to all these people know this? >> how do we get it going faster and based on this real limitation and not knowing what the requirements are? >> one of they have been doing is exactly what you are describing. it is one of the real successes of this. accelerates able to the process of these new maps being processed. the are available all over new jersey. gov. christie has adopted those

new maps. there are meetings going on across the state with the task to inform citizens what the new standards are. -- is it perfect?e no. this is a vast improvement to what we have had before were these new maps are out very quickly. >> it is highly unlikely that they are going to ask you to raise it. they are going to ask you to lower its if they think you have gotten it wrong. or newbody in new jersey not get dinged?

>> cannot say that for every household. >> that creates a slowdown in and response to sandy. he said if you are doing it a somewhat is out there now we're not going to come back and ding you. give them some certainty as to what the rules are. i think there are a lot of people waiting to do things based on the flood plain maps. not believe that is what is holding people up. the most significant issues have been in making sure that

payment are getting the family is in being able to get supplemental funding once it was passed by congress. we're moving very quickly to get that out. i've not heard uncertainty about the flood maps is the issue holding folks back. >> we have heard that over and over again. maybe we need to direct those people to use a you can hear its. we have heard it over and over again. we follow up sure and do that. sure we follow up and do that. a subcommittee for response. former mayorthe from anchorage and the senator from alaska to chair the subcommittee. delighted you're willing

to take this on. this'll be done largely at the subcommittee level. >> thank you very much. i do look forward to the opportunity to continue to work on these issues unpreparedness. my experience gives me some on the grounds experience dealing with prepared this and other issues. .hank you very much one provision that was in the sandy a preparation package allows federally recognized native american types to direct a request from the emergency disaster. we think this is a huge plus and we are hearing the news about this gives them some opportunity to not wait for a state bureaucracy. a couple of disasters have taken

the state too long to get an answer. people were feeling the pain. thank you for having that in the package. what is your timetable to get this and play? about to hit our disaster time. it is going to be a disaster in now and october is where we will see these things existing. what is your time line for giving some consultation to know how this will work? >> thank you for providing that provision. we'll ari implemented is based upon the statutory change. we are using provisions for states. declarations already issued.

right now we're inching to a consultation process to begin to roll developments. we do not want to deny them the opportunity to make the request. many governments would not have the resources to manage that. we recognize self-determination. they may request directly from the president. disasterl receive assistance. it is not predetermined by itself determines. -- but itself determined. we recognized and not want to do the programs wear we have, and agreed to where we have home in security assistance in this -- we do not want to have programs that would assist us in

this. we did an agreement with companies like home depot and sam's and others were they were the stock house. we have an agreement where for certaint 72 hours are not- skews determined by the public. people come in and buy everything in resale at a high price. we created a system that the type of emergency products we need it would be locked out for purchase for 72 hours until we gave an ok to move it. we think it has been very successful. ondo not have to put a fee it or anything. or how do incorporate you see? to me this is a total waste.

a lot of money. do this from a warehouse that has better logistics than any federal agency will ever have. >> this was something i experienced in florida. we found ourselves competing with the private sector. compete with the private sector. we will look at how there are gaps. we have major corporations. part of what we track is where stores are open. we know these are areas that may need some tailored equipment. distribution would be counter productive. the industries on what supply issues are going to occur. there are some things that makes

sense to store certain durable goods that are the hardest things to get into an area. we recognize that the fact -- private sector needs to have a seat at the table. much of the planning has always been government center. further we can have a discussion later. i would like to get some additional information on those relationships and how they are doing. district,age school homeve three sams, four, depo depots. we had to get a grant from somebody. let me jump in because of time limitations. thank you very much for being

here. it is always good to see you. you are doing the task force on sandy. will you derive ideas that will say here is the list of structural changes we need in fema or what ever other agency? is that part of the goal of that task force other than making sure it all works well? >> absolutely. we are required to deliver a byort to the president august 2. it could provide recommendations. this might include structural changes to the federal government. it also will likely include other recommendations. the inability to get gasoline

was a major problem after the storm. are there things we could do at the federal level? are there model programs that they could adopt to deal with situations like that that that would be an example internal to the federal government we would be looking at. one of the issues is how long it takes from one. injury for individual on how they can get their resources delivered to them. we going to look at these issues? >> absolutely. business administration has the authority after a storm to provide loans to small businesses. what we typically found in is notippi this this

work for them because of the loss of income. totypically provide grants local governments that they then set up help to small businesses. one of the things we have done is take all of the data we get this is that applied but were not eligible for loans. we provided that to the state and local so they do not have to go back out and find these businesses or underwrite the paper work they have done the first time. that is a benefit to small businesses and agencies. it to get money to those faster. about the leadd dollars replacing the current location.

fema dollarsed the replacing the current location. they might say if you keep rebuilding you're going to have the same problem. fina has limitations. goal is disaster relief. systematically or structurally. would you look at that broader picture? it is the most frustrating thing to hear. crazy in thes longer term rebuilding. many take an example of what you are talking about. one of the things they did was give fema more authority to say do not rebuild exactly what was there. have will notey

pay for more than the cost to just rebuild. what we're going to see is that those otherpplement funding sources for local governments are making a choice. is going to cost a little more money. it will pay for itself through mitigation. we're going to have to blend those sources in ways that have been a real problem. you give us authority not require eight duplicates environment. we are not implementing that. those models will be useful for future disasters. we have a template for the way to bring those together in a seamless way. to answer thehave

question. that is not bad. i will be anxious as we move forward in as you finish your the subcommittee will have some further discussions about what is the net step to make sure it is more seamless and less complicated. >> thank you. the staff has done some good investigative work in the areas north of where i live. >> thank you very much. let me welcome to our witnesses. sandy did damage not

only where it was the most visible on the east coast but in the great lakes as well. the forces were so huge that they caused damage to breakwaters and created a problem in harbor is in the great lakes. we have already seen massive damage on the great lakes. we are any disaster situation because of the drought and low water situation. lows,et new record hitting more than 2 feet below their average. this was a drought problem. lake superior is a foot below the long-term average. the army corps is predicting that all of the water levels are going to remain below average.

this is a huge problem. boat are and able to sell. -- the boats are and able to sell. to sail. is relativef sandy to us. this seems small. do commerceying to and our harbors and it cannot function, it is a big deal for you. we have an e-mail this morning saying that of the 18 million estimated damage at 5 million will be directed to the great lake projects. did i read that correctly? today we would be providing

$90 million. >> that is very good news. we thank you for that. go to thequestions not the of whether or support act allows for where the drought is the cause of the problem. the drought in itself would not necessarily a warrant a declaration. you have to look at the consequences. since most of economic, it did not address economic losses.

when we have looked at this it really comes that suit is there an emergency to this that may require emergency supplement for drinking water or is this causing physical damage or other losses that are damaged due to the drought that would warrant the declaration based upon the impacts?hals when you look at the drought impact itself, we look at this last year. we provide elements of the framework to support drought recovery. this does not address what is the underlying issue, and the economic impacts of drought versus physical damages that may require additional support.

the jurisdiction would be based upon the agriculture. there are other programs that have supports in supporting that from the corps of engineers. using that recovery framework, states were having to weed through the federal government. when it came back to the stafford act unless we have physical losses that are uninsured we think it may be an emergency declaration. the economic losses are not addressed. >> i would ask a couple of questions for the whole panel. a little bit about whether there are sufficient resources -- i want to talk

about whether there are sufficient resources to make it successful. what are the tools you need in your tool box it could be regulatory relief. what do you need to enable us to get closer? i think we have a pretty good tool box. beentimes there needs to some additional flexibility. we do often have certain plannedns where we have for a recovery response and we can do things a little quicker than we would ordinarily. recovery, one of the things that we are finding and in response to this is through

the work of the task force. the more that we can coordinate for a community where there is a damage product, the mechanisms are developing through this task force. it would be a tool that would help us recover more quickly. i want to recognize that we're still very much in the middle of this. we'ree first time ever fully implementing the framework. i want to make sure we come back to you when we are issuing the report with a fuller answer to that. there are other costs we do not know. i think one of the most important things that congress did is to make improvements in

the community development block grant program. belling beyond that to create a for aent program disaster block grant would make sense. there are still issues with using disaster by disaster supplementals that and not have enough to go off with disasters. you'd be happy to talk about what those are. a number were included this time. i think there are others that we continue to work on to improve the program. just respond?d >> is a microphone on?

i want to look at what you recommended about can we provide the flood map available? i am not sure i can do that with the reauthorization. biggest gold but i'm wrestling with this back to the issue of threshold directions. do we have the right balance? is that transferred to the taxpayer disproportional to what they should be responsible for? we want to make sure new growth in construction is not subsidized. we have treated a second situation where there is no affordability built into that. mayear is that the backlash

thwart our efforts to build an unsubsidized risk beyond what didn't fit. we need to make sure we do not transfer this for future development given the enormous amount of qualms that exist. we're on to see a lot of pressure. better to build incentives that this is a shared responsibility. there's not much for them to build this. ejected us in the improvement at to review the reports on this. we have undertaken it appeared we have looked at some it things that would not require this but

may increase what their threshold and responsibilities will be versus the current system which we're seeing a lot of disasters declared. i want to make sure in the complication process that we're moving that such state understand better what their responsibilities are and what is appropriate to support these. is fitting that we do not continue to transfer risk to the taxpayer without reducing the rest to mitigation. flood insurance, land use management are probably the biggest holes. only one of those do you have direct control over. this is often the local decision to have greater influence on the resiliency of our communities. >> let me just follow up.

hear that theo panel is doing the same thing. did this is an antidote. i went to a high school basketball tournament. us talking to a basketball coach. to are the best players? basketballlking to a coach. to are the best players? is the the best player one and if anyone else on the team better. at then we be doing federal level to make the rest of this team including insurance? what should we be doing to make everyone else better? to want to go to? you may not.

>> having the support from the to recoverom us of whatin the support ever we need to do long term. everything back exactly the way it was today. support to be able to take a long-term view on what it is we should be doing. make a sport expenditure. being able to have your support and looking long term at how we can be better at recovery and have less disaster response necessary. it is a great question.

i do think currently authorizing programs that are more flexible than do this balance rights between private responsibility in public responsibilities is important. other thing i would say is that planning matters. we spend an enormous amount of recuperatingrt from these disasters where andler investment up front getting localities and states ready for these kinds of an event. i've been planning for this kind of disaster when i was housing commissioner.

a lot of the mitigation has made a difference. i think we could do more to help localities and states prepare for these kind of disasters. this.e dread hearing wil it is part of the help the debate that forces us to do the things that may not be easy. it pushes us to make those. we're going to focus a lot on oversight. it is interesting how often that is welcome. the careful what you ask for. -- be careful what you ask for. >> i hope you think we have been

kind and gentle on me. theuld like to go back to pricing risk. do we have the final figures on katrina in terms of how much was the total cost of that disaster? >> we would provide that. it is the completehese story. we can look at what other federal agencies provided. the hard number to get is what the private sector went through. it is not always easy to get what that number is. that i'mknow comfortable with what the private sector had. >> forget the uninsured.

we will submit it. this is heavily tested and still being litigated between flood and wind damage. to what extent has this been ?nderfunded year after year borrowingadditional authority of $9 million to cover losses to provide a cap going into the rest of this year. still owns a little under $18 billion. generally the program provides enough revenue to pay those out. >> is that premiums or federal funding?

>> premiums. has undervalued the risk. we were subsidizing risk below the actual cost. far greater than the typical year to year impact. allied air such as katrina and having tolted in us provide additional funds. >> if it was a private insurance program, to what extent do you think it is underfunded? what you think they would have in terms of reserves? cannot capitalize the risk. any feel for what that amount would be?

>> you are probably talking levels that are in excess of half a billion dollars or greater depending on the exposure. this comes back to if they're able to write policies and less risky areas they may be getting to that point where there may be opportunities for there may be sense to offer commercial insurance. borrowingt leverage authority and apply this nationally on a state-by-state basis. elements andize create the incentive they would write to you and not have bifurcated policies tha?

those conversations have not resulted in an industry seeing this. as i tell people, is to be a sign when they cannot figure out how to manage this risk and make money. there were probably undervaluing the risk. part of the act is to start moving toward this. the true test will be when people realize they can write to flood insurance and realize they can make money. the start writing policies, how do you grandfather the neighbor next door? how these are moving that we did how are these moving in that direction -- how are they moving in that

direction? for the other policies that are not secondary, it will take , it will go into effect by if we were able to look at afford ability, we would want to limit those to home owners and not new construction and look at a means test and giving sbeer communities a preferred rate. we want to make sure it's means tested so we don't subsidize risk except for afford ability. you don't want to if you build something new or sell my home give it to the next buyer. >> when you bring in the concept of afford ability, you are basically subsidizing the

risk and incentivizing people to build where truthfully if they can't do it they shouldn't be building and you are putting the american tax taxpayer on the hook again. >> i think it's a distinction between existing home owners versus new construction. this is where flood insurance is a critical lever. i think these maps are a huge step forward. the problem is if they are not adopted, not just for flood insurance we won't make as much progress. one of the things we're trying to do in the c.d.b.c., any time have you a substantial enough level of damage, we should be requiring that they move to those new maps including where we're issuing a new mortgage in those areas. so those are all in addition to the flood insurance program,

other lever that is we have in the sandy rebuilding process that can go to the exact same goal that you are talking about. >> just one quick question, as you are trying to make that distinction between new and recovered construction, are we doing that across the board, all coastal areas, all flood plains or strictly in the sandy area? >> there is no afford ability, so as we go through rurals what will happen over the next several years as we adjust the rules to reflect ack wear based for all, we did it for the secondary hopes. for the other policies we're going to look at a three year face in. after three years you're going to be paying the full cost of that insurance no matter where you are. there is going to be tremendous push back on low income people in flood plains that are going to be faced with tremendous bills that could force them out

of their homes. knowing there will be push back how do we mitigate that if it's even possible. more importantly, how do we ensure whatever we do for that does not translate into subsidizing future risk when the traction takes place or somebody builds new. there will be tremendous pressure to reduce costs. and unfortunately historically we have done that in a way that did not keep future growth in a sound way. >> as the lead federal official dealing with the governors and marries the pressure is building on this affordability question and there is some political risk that it gets reversed or that localities wouldn't adopt the map. there are other things that could happen that would set us back. unlike flood insurance, we don't have federal standards at

this point that would take the same things we're trying to do for sandy and apply them nationally. that's one of the things in our report to the president, we will be making recommendations about. i see this as a testing ground outside of the flood insurance program for how we can put these measures in place nationally that will avoid this kind of insent they've you've talked about to build in the wrong places. >> i hope you'll send us a caller: of those recommendations. >> absolutely. in fact, we'd love to come talk to you about them before we finalize them. >> absolutely. >> has any of the cdbg money been grant snd we've allocated $5.4 -- >> has any been granted? >> the states have not submitted plans yet. we expect in the next few weeks to start seeing allocations.

>> there is about $50 million from the supplement that will that's been dispersed already. >> has the new york housing authority likely to receive significant cdbg funding? >> we expect in the plan we'll get from new york they will propose funding for mitigation measures in the housing authority there. >> according to the new york city controller, the new york city housing authority operation is like an onion, the more you peel back the more you want to cry. i also heard they are sitting on a billion dollars right now. i would hope you would take that into consideration. that billion dollars as well as some of the other problems with the new york city housing authority, that billion dollars should be applied first to these issues before we give more money for the disaster up

there. are you at all concerned with how they will spend the money? i'm talking new york city housing authority given their track record. >> we've been looking at this issue of the billion dollars that you are talking about. the vast majority of that is committed to particular project that is are under way. so just to be clear, it's not that there is a billion dollars that is not slated to go to particular projects. i would say, however, we do have some concerns about the speed of that spending and the effectiveness and we will be looking very carefully at how they are spending this money. >> they should take note we are going to watch this with our eye on it. >> the $16 billion for the grants, they are not just for the sandy area, right? they can be used in any of the disaster areas. do you have any idea what

proportion will be spent in other areas, port areas, on the great lakes and some of the other areas of disaster we've noted? >> so we have authority to use it for 2011 and 201 and any remaining disasters in 2013. we will not fully allocate that yet. i expect this week we will spend the appropriations committees allocations for non-sandy storms and next week we will be announcing those. i will tell you that the vast majority of the 16 billion will go to the sandy affected areas but there will be a substantial allocation i would expect less than a billion dollars towards those other places. >> if imple correctly, and you can -- if i remember correctly, and you can correct me. i think there is $4 trillion

from -- 4 billion from katrina that hasn't been spent. >> senator there are project that is have not been completed. we've been working with the state to try to get all remaining projects finalized. where there is dispute there is an arbitration process. we're trying to get those finished. i can get back to you on that. >> i would appreciate that. >> i want to thank you for the cooperation. we got a load of information last night and this morning so i'm going to submit multiple questions for the record which we see two different ways to handle debris clean up, one going on in new jersey and one going non-new york and there are a lot of questions about that. the reason i'm so interested in this is i saw the wasted money in katrina on debris clean up. it was atroshese.

the crore contracted at about $70 a cubic yard but the guys doing it and halling it to the mp were making about $6 to $9. the people doing the work were getting 25% of what was allocated. and subcontract tors took that money and didn't do anything except organize. we are going to be interested in following that. i hope you'll take in good faith. it's not to be critical of the corp but we think wise spending of that money. so i have a lot of questions. why do we have a dump site for new york 300 miles away from the facility and what are the rules that make us go 300 miles when there are other areas it could be transferred to. there are a lot of cost based on rules. we want to figure that out for

the next time so we are not spending. i think we are averaging $62 a cubic yard and six or 7 years later on the clean up. and the contracts and the requirement to use local contractors and whether or not that's efficient for the taxpayer because we are paying for it, the federal government is paying for the debrill clean up. and also the controls on it because we are going to pay what they submit. i hope you'll take our queps in that light and we're going to be good stewards with the taxpayer money asking these questions. >> i look forward to the questions. i want to go back to you, director, state and local capacity is overwhelm sd when they should get involved. there is no question in sandy

that happened. do you believe the per capita damage is a good measure to determine whether or not state and local capacity is overwhelmed? >> it is a factor that has been accepted but i don't think it is the best tool. >> i want to pin you down. is that -- is this per capita amage ipped kate or the a good measure to determine state and local capacity to handle --? >> no, it only looks at on a new mer i can basis the population of the state and damage. it doesn't look at taxing authority, it doesn't look at impacts of that disaster. it is clear staffered act does not require that because of per capita threshold. there have been recent decorations denied even though they made a numb cal mark it because he ability

only economic impacts. >> i understand but we've got to figure out a way to have a better assessment. the original per capita dicator is 137 today, yet it hadn't been changed. there is no inflation basis to it. there is nothing to it. we have to work together with secretary don van and you to figure out how do we know when to apply, when is our state overwhelmed? >> the whole purpose of disaster aid -- and in oklahoma we're the highest state in the country as far as disasters in the last year but some of those didn't overwhelm oklahoma's capability. so we need to figure out together how we do this more effectively to really help states when they are overwhelmed versus not helping when they are not, especially

when states have surpluses. like oklahoma has a surplus. we put $600 million in the bank last year. >> we go through in the sandy recovery improvement act. you've asked to us look at this. we do fine with the general accounting. we look at what is the outcome we're trying to achieve. if it's less disasters being claimed. we a disaster occurs, somebody is paying for it whether it's a local, state or federal taxpayer. i think that should be a shared responsibility. it need to build more capability at state and local level and use that to drive that process. as you point out, the minute you talk about raising the threshold, states are going to be concerned about how that adversely impacts them but i

don't think it's a reason not to look at it. but we're going to have to look at the end game of how do we build capacity understanding what the expectations are for state and local response and when it becomes a federal. >> if i can add, i would love to be part of that conversation because cdbg by definition is only authorized when there is a major disaster. we've tried to focus on a formula because you give me flexibility to determine the formula that is not just a per capita form louisiana we use only severe damage which we use concentration measures and a range of other things that could be useful in this. >> you only get cdbg funds based on disasters? we allocate fund every year. >> they are not available in

every disaster. they typically only come when you have something that overwhelms state and local capacity by definition. > we authorized $9.7 billion into the nfip. according to my staff, 85% of the claims have been closed to date, is that correct? >> yesterday erp at 90, 91% of all claims. >> so we're at $6.2 billion? >> yes, sir. >> we overshot a couple of billion dollars, right? does it look like that to you? >> it gave us the borrowing authority going into the rest of the year. these were borrowed dollars, not an appropriation. we were getting close to our borrowing authority. with sandy we would have exceeded it and not been able to service claims.

we will pay out part of that loan. that will leave us $3 billion. that's borrowing authority. >> it's not borrowed. >> the way it's structured it has to be serviced by the claims and that is a second issue. but it is that potential that it raised the borrowing authority. >> i want to thank you all. this is the way to do over sight. we learned a lot today from all of you. i would love promptness in response to these questions we have. my questions to you may take a little longer because you gave us a lot of information. we are going through it right now. but a prompt response to the questions for the record would be appreciated so we can don't work on this. >> thank you. am going to ask one more

question. >> it was eluded to how much money was spent on debris removal and whether or not that money was spent effectively and most of us agree it was not. sometimes people ask me why do you talk so much about waste fraud and abuse and it's because there is a lot of that. one of the reasons we do oversight is to reduce that where we can. the sandy supplement required the board created to over see stimulus spending to develop oversight mechanism that is can detect waste and fraud and abuse with regard to sandy funds. i wonder if each of you would explain how you are working with the oversight board to ensure that your program funds

which are limit redirect examination well spent? >> the funding that we're receiving under the supplemental is that what you're referring to? >> yes. >> we will give -- we do give monthly expenture reports to an appropriations committee to keep you informed as to how those funds are being spent. we also have -- we were very involved in katrina and had so many lessons learned from there and have been using that in our engineering and our contracting abilities in some of that. i think in each disaster we learn something new. in this one i think we are going to find how we can be more efficient in our contracting abilities in response to disasters and looking at any other improvements we can make through contracting and relock at some of the design cite i

can't we use for some of our projects. >> the task force has a primary role in working with the recovery and account ability and transparency board and the ig's of the individual agencies. first, we are creating a centralized data system to collect all the information on spending, locations and other things for the projects to provide that to they call me transparency board and also we are working with them on the internal control plans. they have designated in advance this is potential high risk spending. every agency is required by march 31 to create an enhanced internal control plan. we are coordinating with all the agencies on producing those plans by the end of the month

and we'll be helping to implement those. we are also having a regular ongoing meeting with each of the i.g.'s and the recovery transparency board to make sure there is ongoing communication. >> same question, how are you working with the oversight board to make sure your program fund are well spent? >> we're doing it through the sandy recovery task force. we had an additional requirement for us to post our transitions within 24 hours of the website that. is being done already. but we're also working with secretary donovan and other members of the task force. many of our programs are touching similar project ppings. we wanted to make sure all of the projects and funding is visible and we're going to use this process to seam it, bring it together which we wanted to make sure we had the data feed

to support that. each agencies receiving dollars can show where those dollars are being spent and we can use this tool to display it to you and the public. want to of all, i do say -- agree with senator col burn. i appreciate your testimony here it's been instructive. and i truly appreciate the fact you are looking at the flood insurance program and working through those very difficult issues of how do we design that program so we're not incentivizing uneconomic behavior. going back to one of the points in terms of claims processing and answering questions. coming from the private sector, i'm big in benchmarking, taking a look at best practices. i'm not sure it's always true but you hear in the private

insurance market, disaster strikes and that claim check is issued that next day. are you looking at the private insurance mod snl are there things we can do legislatively to make -- bottom line i think e solution is reduce the complexity. i don't doubt you are dealing with a great deal of complexity. is there a benchmark approach, obviously private insurance companies are concerned about the efficiency, the lack of fraud in terms of making the payments, in terms of reimbursements. are you looking at that type of mod snl >> yes, sir, that probably explains some of the delays. we use write your own companies. we use companies that write it, they service it, they adjust it. they want to do their due diligence because they know if they made excessive payments or fraud or waste we will not reimburse them. they do work as adjust tors as

work comes in to make the payouts. the flood insurance program is not what you would find as a commercial mod in that it is not designed to do replacement cost. it is designed to make sure that the mortgage is protected and provide limited consumer benefits. where it's easy for an adjustor o come in and say your home is destroyed. we look at contents and value. the flood insurance program was not designed to be consumer friendly. it was to be a tool to provide insurance that nobody else would provide providing what was essential to protect the mortgage, the lender and provide some limited benefits to content and household for those people that own their homes out right. unlike a traditional party. we use depreciated value.

use have to adjust as they depreetyated values. so the process is using the insurance model. however the tool itself is really focused on first priorityty pay which is generally the lender, depreciated value, not full replacement value and that is part of what is making it affordable while making sure the taxpayer is not excessive. >> i did host my second lender round table in the region with the four largest lenders in the region. we are working with them, as i said earlier, to streamline the policies around disbersments of those fund. how much do you hold back with the concern that the money may get used? all of those policies we are working with them to get the

best practices from the private sector to make them consistent. >> i am not encouraging you to change it to replace in value. i appreciate the fact this is insurance of last resort and that's the way it should be handled. i enchurege courage you to work on the pricing model. >> the pool of adjusters which are not standard adjusters, they have to be trained to do flood insurance. we were able to expand that to private insurance. one of the bottlenecks was to get the adjust tors out there. we are working with the private sector to see how do we maintain a larger pool of adjusters for flood insurance. >> thank you for your testimony. >> saving the best for last.

>> thank you, mr. chairman and i thank the witnesses for being here today. i wanted to ask assistant secretary, you in your testimony had said that the corp will under take a broad and son september you'll approach in reducing vulnerability over time. i think it's important we take a long view. understand my view the budgetting for mitigation and disaster preparedness, we often do ourselves a disservice by lumping them together and not looking at a longer term. we end up in this concept when there is an emergency of putting it all together in the immediate aftermath of that disaster. i'd like to see us plan ahead. as part of planning ahead is coordination and new hampshire

management efficients have said that they are working to identify and prioritize mitigation projects. in developing that, how much coordination will there be between the corp and local and state officials? senator, we through the appropriations bill we received okay to do a study. it's due to the congress two years after the initial appropriations act was funded. and we are beginning to scope that out with local and state officials swils other federal agencies -- as well as other federal agencies because we are looking at sustain ability for our coastline from our entire atlantic division. we are going to be coordinating that and looking for input from state and local officials for that. >> the study will be two years from the passage of the appropriations bill?

>> yes. >> have we done anything like this in the past? >> we have done comprehensive studies but not to the degree this is directed at a specific area of the country. it is a result of sandy and looking at what it is we have done and what we need to look to in the future especially in planning for project that is are focused on reducing flood risk. >> i would add, there is going to be a significant amount of investment in mitigation beyond the army corpse investment from from fema. gram and one of the jobs of the task force is going to be coordinating a mitigation strategy for the region more directly affected by sandy. so we will have in our report to the president a strategy to coordinate and effectively pick

the most cost effective strategies across the various programs and types of infrastructure and other investments. >> when we look at this report that we'll be receiving, will it contain,for example, we find ourselves providing emergency disaster funding but if we look at a more long term plan there are probably financial investments we could make along the way that would save us in the event of a disaster taxpayer dollars. when you said it will take a long term view, will that be part of the analysis? i think that's the goal, we want to make sure people are prepared for emergency. but then when we're in an emergency situation if there are things we could have done to save lives, property and taxpayer dollars, we want to look ahead. like we do a lot around here moving from crisis to crisis. is that part of what we're

hoping to get from this? >> it will be part of the study. >> i appreciate that. i think that's important. i also want to appreciate that there is going to be coordination with the state and local officials. they are the front lines and they are directly dealing with these issues. and they have a lot of terrific advice to offer all of the federal agencies interacting with them not only on how we can best address disasters and emergencies but on the mitigation piece and how we can more effectively do that n. my prior position i had a chance to work with many of these officials and i was impressed with their depth of knowledge so i'm glad there is going to be -- and hope to continue to press there will be maximum coordination. >> we queened the task force

last friday. it includes almost 50 state and local officials from across the five states that were most directly impacted. what i'd like to do is get the contract information from the folks you are thinking of to make sure that the advisory group can reach out to them and get their unput. >> thank you that. would be terrific. thank you all for being here. >> thank you for making the time to be here. >> this is an important hearing. thank you for holding it. >> we have a minute or two and i'm going to do this. we appreciate your coming and the preparation that goes into your testimony. we appreciate all the hard work for the last couple of months that back it up. we appreciate your willing tons respond to our questions here and before i forget, let me note the hearing record will remain open until april 4 for

sprigs of statements. we appreciate your willingness to respond to those questions. all of those questions you are getting. >> what i would like to you give a closing statement. take just a minute. over in the house they give one minute statements. give a good take away. give us a good one minute close, please. >> i think i want to come back to flood insurance, the way it's designed and operates, the public believe it's one tool and we think it's another. we haven't communicated what it can and can't do. i think it's good to reduce risk to people for a loss from flood. it cannot continue in a away that subsidizes risk below

which a nation can afford. are we building and investing not just to the disaster we are responding to but will this reduce your as a result nerbles and drive down cost. we make decisions about the immediate and not always plan for the future as well. this is one reason why with this task force structure bringing all the federal agencies, we want to avoid what we saw in katrina knowing we have to get better because we cannot afford disaster after disaster after disaster and see the same things occurring over again. the lessons have to be learned. >> first of all, thank you for hosting this hearing in the spirit that you and your colleagues have. in my four years in this role, there is no moment where a family or a community

recognizes the need for federal help more than in a disaster like this. and there is also no moment when we have more risk of disappointing the citizens if we do not respond effectively. here is no democratic i can or republican way to respond there is only speed and excellence. i want to commend you on the way you have carried on your duties, you and your colleagues in this hearing. this is in the spirit of how we get better. there is much more we can continue to do. the only other thing i would say is one of the consistent themes we heard today is how do we make the investments that will lower the loss of lives, the devastation to communities and cost to the taxpayer going forward. if we can learn out of sandy and i see this as a major goal.

the president asked to us make it a major goal. how do you do a better job in investing wlrks it's building back better and stronger. we have to invest in those important measures and this is a testing ground in my mind for doing that. >> that was very helpful. thank you. >> when you hear the word disaster, you don't think of the word opportunity. but i think as a result of this disaster we have an opportunity to look long term at the way we are going to not only plan for future disasters but rebuild as a result of what has happened. craig mentioned earlier that one of the things that we can't control is land use planning and zoning and all of that happens at the local level. i think it's an opportunity for us not only to help but also educate those people in the local flood plains who are living in flood plains about

what risk is there. we build storm risk reduction projects but we call them reduction not protection projects because you are not totally protected. it's an opportunity for us to educate people as to what it is we should be looking to the future. we are looking to our planning process within the army corp of engineers. and looking at future projects because that's a reality and we need to be able to adapt now to what it is we can anticipate in the future. i think in your planning in doing that is a way for us to be able to anticipate and also hopefully be able to have some risk reduction in future disasters. >> thank you very much for that. i'm going to give a very short closing statement of my own looking back on the last couple of hours and what we've heard and said here. something you said ten or 15 minutes ago, in each disaster

we learn something new. and i used to say to my sons there is nothing wrong with making mistakes. we all make mistakes. i am the only democrat around that quotes richard nixon. he used to say the only people who don't make mistakes are the people who don't do anything. in each disaster we learn something new. the key here is when we respond to the decasteshesgers. the scientists say we are going to see more of these along our east coast. how do we learn from each one. it's clear we've learned a whole lot since katrina and we continue to learn each week that's passed since the sandy struck the east coast. among the take aways for me today was the emphasis on shared responsibility. this is not just about the

federal government. this is not just about state or local governments or the private sector. we are in this together and we need to be able to work together. part of our responsibility is the best players want to make sure everybody else plays to their capability. in order to do that we hold these oversight hearings. for the most part they are welcomed by the agencies that come before us. the nature of our oversight. we don't do got i can't hearings. we try to be constructive which we try to put a spotlight on good behavior and when there is not we try to shame people sometimes, other times make it clear we expect better and they know that. but one of the things that i take away from here is again when there's been a disaster, let's respond to it swiftly, let's respond oh to it cost

effect hivly so when the next -- effectively, so when the next one comes we can do it better. i didn't count the number of times mitigation was said today. it's been said a lot. we have the shared responsibility. we know the need to respond swiftly and effectively when there has been a disaster. we know the need to mitigate against future exposure and loss of life and harm to people. all my adult life i've been taught and reinforced to focus not just on symptoms of problems but on underlying causes. today we're talking at the symptoms which how do we treat the symptoms. how do we do that in a cost effective way, smart way. how do we mitigate against those sitch thomas in the future.