|
4:10 p.m., March 4, 2003--As the definition of “disaster’’ stretches from nature’s worst to man-made terror, Richard T. Sylves’ research is attracting media attention.
 |
| Richard T. Sylves, professor of political science and international relations: “Unfortunately, the basket of federal disaster relief program support is far less full and complete than most people think.” |
The UD professor of political science and international relations published three books before 9/11 and was a regular speaker on the emergency management circuit, but he worked without fanfare. Then terrorists devastated the World Trade Center.
Sylves was on regional television before the second tower fell. The New York Times called, along with newspapers from Philadelphia, Minneapolis and Toronto. Enrollment in his “Politics and Disaster” course doubled.
Sylves studies the politics and policy of presidential disaster declarations—how presidents respond when governors petition for federal assistance following disasters. He knows the 50-year history of declarations by heart, from Ike to George W.
- Requests for flood relief and hurricanes usually rate yes answers. Mudslides, droughts, and several other types of calamities rarely do.
- Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan were presidents least likely to approve a request for disaster assistance.
- There is no partisan bias among presidents when they decide disaster-relief requests, but presidents since 1988 are more likely to approve declaration requests than presidents from 1953-88.
- George W. Bush’s first disaster declaration approval came on the day after he was inaugurated. He granted a request for crop damage from the governor of Florida, his brother Jeb.
- California, the state with the largest population and most electoral votes, is also the state with the most federal disaster declarations. It has received a disproportionately large share of federal disaster relief spending, almost half of all dispensed.
On Thursday, Feb. 20, Sylves moderated the opening panel at the National Academy of Sciences’ Natural Disasters Roundtable, focusing on how the 25-year-old earthquake hazard reduction program fits into the new national emphasis on homeland security. Earthquakes pose a significant risk in 39 states. He continues as an appointed member of the Roundtable.
Until now, about 87 percent of disaster-related declarations have been weather-related, but threats from terrorists and new types of disasters may change that. Sylves also said the future could bring petitions from governors seeking cyberterrorism relief because cyberlosses can cost more than physical damage.
Sylves said the presidential disaster declarations granted to New York and Virginia and the emergency declaration granted to New Jersey after Sept. 11 and the anthrax lncidents have raised declaration concerns. Now, he speculates that every event apparently orchestrated by foreign terrorists operating within the U.S. may earn presidential declarations. He says governors will be impelled to seek declarations if a declaration mobilizes the maximum federal program assistance to the people affected.
Sylves said a presidential declaration is not akin to the cavalry arriving, though. “People, especially media people, tend to think that once a presidential declaration of major disaster or emergency is issued, disaster victims and governments will get all that they need to overcome their losses,’’ he said. “Unfortunately, the basket of federal disaster relief program support is far less full and complete than most people think. There is a “myth” that a presidential declaration will bring federal relief sufficient to fully return one to his or her pre-disaster condition.”
Governors’ petitions for disaster relief routinely arrive on the president’s desk attached to a list of the Congressional districts affected by the disaster and the names of the congressmen and senators who represent those districts, Sylves said.
President Kennedy, more than any president from 1953-2002, favored declaration requests from his old home state, Massachusetts, Sylves says. President Eisenhower approved a weather-related declaration for Alaska to soften legislators up for statehood. President Carter issued a declaration for the Muriel Boatlift invasion of Cuban aliens.
In addition, the “CNN syndrome,” the tendency for a particular incident to get lots of national coverage very quickly, affects approvals.
“People in the White House tend to watch the coverage, and they assume that people at home are saying, ‘Well, what’s the president going to do about it?’” Sylves said.
President Carter was photographed issuing a declaration while flying over an erupting Mt. St. Helens volcano in Air Force One, and President Reagan was once pictured shoveling sand into gunnysacks on the flooding banks of the Mississippi. President George H. W. Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle personally inspected the damage from the Bay area’s World Series earthquake in 1989 and Hurricane Andrew in 1992. President Clinton toured homes damaged in the Northridge earthquake.
Sylves said presidents turn down on average about a third of all governor’s declaration requests. Many governors routinely apply to gain public assistance money to help their governments cover infrastructure and emergency response costs and to aid put individuals and families in their jurisdictions.
“There are very few governors who go through a whole term and don’t ask for a presidential disaster declaration,’’ Sylves said. “Many states have suffered significant reductions in federal-to-state aid for public works, and so disaster relief for infrastructure is a way of making up for the losses.”
Sylves has written three books, two focusing specifically on disaster policy and on emergency management. His fourth book, “Declaring Disaster: The Politics and Policies of Presidential Disaster Declarations,’’ will be published by SUNY Press next year.
Article by Kathy Canavan
|
