Former FEMA Director Presses for More Pre-Disaster Mitigation Efforts

Former FEMA Director, David Paulison, urges more of Sandy money be spent on pre-disaster mitigation: Let’s use these unspent federal dollars to prepare for disasters.

It seems to me that we have heard these arguments before –they preceded the successful Project Impact under the Witt Administration at FEMA when Clinton was president. But President GW Bush killed the program soon after his election.

It’s deja vue all over again! Please see the comments from some experienced hands in this line of work.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Former FEMA Director Presses for More Pre-Disaster Mitigation Efforts

  1. Arnold says:

    While I’ve always respected what I knew of Paulison, does anyone know much about the organization he is consulting for/mentions? On a brief glance they seem heavy on the insurance and builders side. Which isn’t automatically a bad thing, and while I’m all for mitigation as a concept, he wants priorities funded that support those groups at the expense of groups not described or argued into irrelevance (the eventual (?) target of the unspent HUD and DOT money).

    Not wanting to get political, but one can read a former Republican appointee calling for others funding to be diverted (though, say, not one F-35), but no dedicated funding streams or an increase into other preparedness and mitigation areas that don’t involve insurance for buildings. Like health care for instance. How about some of that unspent money get diverted to PHEP or HPP? People before bricks?

    • recoverydiva says:

      Sorry but I do not know what PHEP or HPP refer to.

      • Arnold says:

        Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Hospital Preparedness Program. Money for local public health from the CDC and hospitals from HHS/ASPR. I mentioned these because I find it interesting, in a non-judgmental way, that Paulison has been calling for not just greater focus on mitigation in general across the board, but for a very specific program with money diverted from other recovery efforts out of HUD and DOT. This Post op-ed is his third (that I’ve found) on this exact message.

    • recoverydiva says:

      I agree – 3 mentions suggest a specific motive and perhaps commercial connection to the recommendation.

  2. Just to remind your readers…The day that Project Impact was killed, was the day the Seattle Metro Area experienced the Nisqually Earthquake. I remember being handed a fax with the news and not believing what I was reading. Seattle, King and PIerce Counties were strong Project Impact communities.

    Whatever happens in the 2016 Presidential Election, we are sure to have new terminology, new programs, or at a minimum, changed programs with new leadership at FEMA, when they get around to appointing someone.

  3. recoverydiva says:

    Thanks to Ann and the efforts of the Natural Hazard Mitigation Association too!

  4. Ann Patton says:

    Glad to see the article encouraging hazard mitigation. The more voices speaking on behalf of common-sense disaster reduction, the better! Insanity is doing things the same old way and expecting better results. Thank you, dear Diva, for your tireless great work.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s