I, for one, had concerns when we created the Department of Homeland Security and put FEMA in it that it would mean that what was a very efficient, small, responsive governmental agency would get lost in the maze of the new Department. And in some ways, and especially as it relates to funding, I think that has happened. FEMA's funding had been allowed to dip to a very low level, down to $44 million, before the administration insisted to Congress that they should have some supplemental funding. This is not good for the program or for the country, to have such low balance. The gentleman from Virginia's (Mr. Moran) motion to recommit would put the disaster relief program back on sound financial footing. So I would urge Members to vote for the Moran motion and do good things for the country and do good things for FEMA.
Martin Sabo: “I, for one, had concerns when we created the Department of Homeland Security and put FEMA in it that it would mean that…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the need for increased funding for FEMA during a debate on a motion to recommit.
Share
More from Martin Sabo
I will continue to reserve my point of order, and I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have the gentleman explain the amendment to me. What is it that somebody at the Federal level has to do?
I have no idea what the full impact of this amendment will be. We voted on it, I think, in the last 2 or 3 years. I think generally it has lost by a significant number of votes. What its impact on local governments is, I think is…
Then I heard the Speaker call for a vote. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.
would the gentleman tell me, does the Department have the authority, not the authority but is the Department doing what the gentleman suggests today?





