Content area
Full Text
The United States must not follow through with its plans to scale back its Federal Emergency Management Agency, argues Donald Moynihan.
Superstorm Sandy did more than rock the eastern coast of the United States last year. It also damaged Mitt Romney's chances in the presidential election. Quotes from Republican primaries, where Romney called for responsibility for disaster response to shiftfrom the federal government to state and local authorities, suddenly looked foolish as those local authorities were quickly overwhelmed. Yet, even as the aftermath of Sandy demonstrates the need for federal help, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in New York is losing US$1.3 billion - roughly 5% of its budget - in government cutbacks.
The cut to FEMA is a false economy. If we do not prepare for the growing threats that FEMA deals with, we will pay more when disaster strikes. Worse, there is a political effort under way to delegate its responsibilities to regional and local authorities.
Discussions on FEMA largely fail to acknowledge the agency's crucial functions. Climate change, combined with more human development in vulnerable areas, will lead to more Sandy-like events. The question that many countries face is not whether they need a national agency to manage crises, but how to run such an agency in an era of catastrophic risk.
FEMA provides a classic public good. It offers services that the market will not and...