This article first appeared in the St. Louis Beacon, Sept. 27, 2011 -WASHINGTON - When the U.S. Senate approved a $6.9 billion bill to meet disaster relief needs two weeks ago, both of Missouri's senators backed it, citing the state's tremendous needs in recovering from this year's tornadoes, floods and storms.
But when the disaster-aid issue reached a tipping point on Monday evening, Sens. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., and Roy Blunt, R-Mo., parted ways, disagreeing about whether the Senate-approved compromise stopgap funding bill -- which aims to keep the government running until mid-November as well as temporarily address the disaster-aid demands -- went in the right direction.
McCaskill, who voted for the compromise along with 50 other Democrats and 26 Republicans, said the bill would avert a possible government shutdown Saturday and also replenish FEMA's emergency fund, which had threatened to run out by week's end. The agency had put about $450 million worth of recovery projects on hold, including some in tornado-ravaged Joplin, so that it had money on hand for emergencies.
"With this vote, we ensure the government will deliver on its obligations to the people of Joplin and others in our state who have suffered through such awful disasters this year," McCaskill said in a statement. "Few Americans deserved this compromise today more than those in Joplin who are relying on FEMA to keep their rebuilding effort on track."
But Blunt, one of only a dozen senators (all Republicans) to vote against the compromise, said he did so because it "stripped $1 billion in disaster relief and provides less emergency funding for Missourians in the wake of record flooding and tornadoes." Among the items dropped was an extra $300 million this month for the Army Corps of Engineers to help pay for flood damage to levees and other structures.
Blunt also complained that the compromise and a previous Democratic bill "would delay the process by punting back to the House" -- which is expected to approve the compromise in a voice vote this week (avoiding the possible Saturday shutdown), followed by a roll-call vote after the House returns next week.
"I support the House-passed continuing resolution, which I had hoped the Senate would have sent to the president's desk in order to get this disaster assistance to the people who need it now," Blunt said in a statement. That $3.7 billion House version, which the Senate rejected last week, included $1 billion in supplemental disaster aid but insisted on offsetting that expense by cutting clean energy programs backed by Democrats.
With FEMA's emergency funding account threatening to be drained any day this week, the Democratic-led Senate and the Republican-led House were at an impasse over paying for emergency disaster aid. But then the White House budget office spread the word that its disaster relief fund would stay out of the red until at least Friday (the end of 2011 fiscal year) -- allowing both sides to save face by agreeing to the compromise that avoided the issue of whether extra disaster aid for this fiscal year needed to be offset.
Blunt said he was suspicious about FEMA's change of message. "You wonder about FEMA's credibility on these issues, when they say they're out of money tomorrow and now they're out of money at the end of the fiscal year," he told Politico late Monday. "If you can come up with four more days of disaster funding after you said you'd run out, it will be interesting to see how they came up with that four days of funding."
On Tuesday, a spokeswoman for Blunt told the Beacon that the senator "is very concerned about how this happened and he intends to press the Obama administration for answers." FEMA declined to comment, referring questions to the Office of Management and Budget. Politico quoted a FEMA spokesperson as explaining that the agency "was able to recoup $40 million from ongoing longer-term projects to add to its disaster aid funds," which were at a "historic low."
That issue aside, another question is whether the compromise bill, assuming it is approved by the House, will allow FEMA to restart some of its delayed projects.
Joplin Mayor Mike Woolston told the Associated Press that the debate in Congress was making many people anxious about continued federal support. "We can appreciate the efforts to get our national economy in better order, but we're concerned about how that's going to affect us," Woolston said. "If some sort of budgetary measure is not passed soon, I'm worried about what that will mean for us."
On Tuesday, the White House told members of Congress that the $2.7 billion for FEMA in the compromise would be enough to pay for the agency's needs until at least mid-November. More than $400 million worth of longer-term rebuilding projects that had been put on hold last month can be funded, the letter said.
Will Corps of Engineers Run Short on Flood-damage Funding?
Another question is whether the funding approved for the Army Corps of Engineers will be sufficient to repair all the levees and other flood-control structures damaged during this year's floods along the Missouri and Lower Mississippi rivers -- as well as similar damage in other areas of the country.
The $6.9 billion disaster-aid bill that the Senate approved two weeks ago, included $1.35 billion for the Corps -- $304 million for the fiscal year that ends Friday and $1.05 billion for the next fiscal year.
A staffer for Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. -- the second-ranking Senate Democrat who voted both for the original Senate bill and this week's compromise (Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., voted against the first bill and did not vote on the compromise) -- said the stopgap funding bill that extends through Nov. 18 dropped all "emergency" supplemental funding. Instead, the Army Corps and other federal agencies would get the same amount of money they received last year.
"Sen. Durbin hopes Congress can approve more money for the Army Corps to help rebuild Corps infrastructure as soon as possible," said the spokeswoman.
Earlier this month, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved an Energy and Water appropriations bill for the new fiscal year that includes additional funds for the Corps to cover disaster recovery. Durbin's office said that includes more than $1 billion in disaster relief for repairs to infrastructure damaged by the Mississippi and Missouri river flooding, as well as by Hurricane Irene and Tropical Storm Lee. "The funding would be an additional allocation that would cover damages that the Army Corps can quantify now, with room to make adjustments as lawmakers monitor the situation."
A Blunt spokeswoman, Amber Marchand, told the Beacon Tuesday that "through the appropriations process and future spending bills, Sen. Blunt is committed to ensuring that the Corps has the funding it needs to protect the people and property that were impacted by floods in Missouri this year."
McCaskill has said she is also committed to such funding for levee rebuilding, especially the restoration of the Birds Point-New Madrid levee in the Missouri Bootheel that had been intentionally breached by the Corps during the severe spring flooding on the Lower Mississippi.
Both McCaskill and Blunt have meet with Corps officials in recent weeks to discuss how much extra funding is needed to repair damaged levees and other flood-control structures in Missouri. One staffer said that -- given the demands for similar repairs in other flood-ravaged states, from Montana south of Louisiana -- it was unclear how much of the money in the original Senate bill would have been spent on projects in Missouri.
Between now and when the stopgap spending bill expires in November, staffers said, appropriations panels will try to work out emergency spending for the Corps, FEMA and other agencies involved in disaster aid. However, the funding levels will likely be held down by this summer's deficit-reduction agreement and the recommendations of the congressional "super committee" charged with finding ways to achieve long-term savings.