PPA 503 – The Public Policy-Making Process Lecture 6b – Policy Formulation and Emergency Management

Problem Definition and Agenda-Setting Problem stream dominated by focusing events. Policy stream: comprehensive emergency management versus homeland security focus. Politics stream: window generated by focusing event. Mitigation, preparedness, and response for Hurricane Katrina, August-September 2005. A predictable surprise arises when leaders unquestionably had all the data and insight they needed to recognize the potential for, even the inevitability of, a crisis, but failed to respond with effective preventative action.

Problem Definition and Agenda-Setting Knowing the problem existed. U.S. GAO, 1976, 1982. New Orleans Times Picayune June 23-27,2002. Civil Engineering Magazine, 2003. National Geographic October 2004. FEMA, Allbaugh, three most likely disasters (New Orleans, California, New York), 2001. FEMA, Hurricane Pam simulation, 2004. Problem getting worse over time. Numerous articles on the destruction of Louisiana wetlands.

Problem Definition and Agenda-Setting High current costs, delayed benefits. $2 billion to complete, $1 billion to upgrade to Category 4 or 5, 30 years. Certain costs, uncertain larger rewards. Emergency management traditionally suffers from discounting future events.

Problem Definition and Agenda-Setting Maintain status quo. Incremental changes in New Orleans levee system brought on by individual disasters. Subversion by vocal minority. Dominance of homeland security over emergency preparedness. Corruption in Louisiana. Mississippi casinos and anti-gambling lobbying.

Policy Formulation Presidential and congressional commissions often drive the development of alternatives in emergency management and homeland security.

Policy Formulation Homeland security. Commissions. Think tanks. Hart-Rudman Commission. Gilmore Commission. Think tanks. RAND Corporation. Brookings Institution. Council on Foreign Relations. ANSER Institute for Homeland Security. Entrepreneurs. Pre 9/11 – James Lee Witt, FEMA Director; Commissions; President Clinton. Post 9/11 – President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Attorney General Ashcroft.

Policy Formulation Emergency management—Post-Katrina. Bush, George W. February 2006. The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned. White House: Washington, DC. 24 February 2006 <www.whitehouse.gov/reports/katrina-lessons-learned/>. Governor's Commission on Recovery, Rebuilding, and Renewal. 31 December 2005. After Katrina: Building Back Better Than Ever. Governor's Commission on Recovery, Rebuilding, and Renewal: Jackson, MS. 17 May 2007 <http://hsgac.senate.gov/_files/Katrina/BBBTE.pdf>.

Policy Formulation Emergency management—Post-Katrina. U.S. Government Accountability Office. 2006. Catastrophic disasters: Enhanced leadership, capabilities, and accountability controls will improve the effectiveness of the nation's preparedness, response, and recovery system (GAO-06-618). Washington, DC: USGAO. U.S. House. Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina. February 15 2006. A Failure of Initiative: The Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina. Washington, DC: USGPO. 11 April 2006 <http://katrina.house.gov/full_katrina_report.htm>.

Policy Formulation Emergency management—Post-Katrina. U.S. Senate. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 2006. Hurricane Katrina: A Nation Still Unprepared (S. Rept. 109-322). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 22 June 2006 <hsgac.senate.gov/_files/Katrina/ExecSum.pdf>.

White House Recommendations Hurricane Katrina Critical Challenges 1. National Preparedness 2. Integrated Use of Military Capabilities 3. Communications 4. Logistics and Evacuations 5. Search and Rescue 6. Public Safety and Security 7. Public Health and Medical Support 8. Human Services 9. Mass Care and Housing

White House Recommendations Hurricane Katrina Critical Challenges 10. Public Communications 11. Critical Infrastructure and Impact Assessment 12. Environmental Hazards and Debris Removal 13. Foreign Assistance 14. Non-Governmental Aid 15. Training, Exercises, and Lessons Learned 16. Homeland Security Professional Development and Education 17. Citizen and Community Preparedness

Governor’s Commission Recommendations Infrastructure Goals: Embrace comprehensive planning principles that define how we want to grow. Think regionally. Issue Areas: Land use. Transportation. Public services. Housing.

Governor’s Commission Recommendations Economic Development Goals: Develop tax incentives to encourage investment. Develop business loan incentives. Accelerate workforce training. Provide affordable housing. Issue Areas: Tourism. Small business. Agriculture, forestry, and marine resources. Defense and government contracting.

Governor’s Commission Recommendations Human Services Goals: Replace crucial infrastructure. Seek value in collaborations and connections. Issue Areas: Education. Health and human services. Non-governmental organizations.

Governor’s Commission Recommendations Special Reports Goals: Connect the needs in each of the hurricane-affected communities with resources available from federal and state government agencies and from the nonprofit and private sectors. Commit to rebuilding approaches that acknowledge the realities of living in a hurricane zone. Issue Areas: Finance Policy Recommendation Roadmap to Accountability

GAO Recommendations Key issues: 1. The actions of government agencies during Hurricane Katrina that made positive contributions to the response and recovery and those that were less positive; 2. Catastrophic disaster leadership roles and responsibilities; 3. Capabilities to prepare for, respond to, and recover from catastrophic disasters; 4. Recognizing the tension between the need for timely action and the need for appropriate controls and accountability mechanisms; and 5. Selected longer-term recovery issues, including the rebuilding effort along the Gulf Coast.

GAO Recommendations Key capabilities: Situational assessment and awareness; Emergency communications; Evacuations; Search and rescue; Logistics; and Mass care and sheltering.

GAO Recommendations Key recommendations: Restructure leadership functions to fix coordination problems; Develop detailed implementation plans for the National Response Plan (NRP) and its Catastrophic Incident Annex; Provide guidance and direction for federal, state, and local planning, training, and exercises; Monitor federal agencies’ efforts to meet their responsibilities under the NRP and the interim National Preparedness Goal; Use risk management to assign finite resources for a catastrophic disaster; and Provide guidance on advanced procurement practices and procedures for those federal agencies with roles and responsibilities under the NRP.

U.S. Senate Recommendations Core Recommendation #1 – Create a new, comprehensive emergency-management organization within DHS to prepare for and respond to all disasters and catastrophes. Core Recommendation #2 – From the federal level down, take a comprehensive all-hazards-plus approach to emergency management. Core Recommendation #3 – Establish regional strike teams and enhance regional operations to provide better coordination between federal agencies and the states.

U.S. Senate Recommendations Core Recommendation #4 – Build a true, government-wide operations center to provide enhanced situational awareness and manage interagency coordination in a disaster. Core Recommendation #5 – Renew and sustain commitments at all levels of government to the nation’s emergency management system. Core Recommendation #6 – Strengthen the plans and systems for the nation’s response to disasters and catastrophes. Core Recommendation #7 – Improve the nation’s capacity to respond to catastrophic events.

Conclusion Controversy boiled down to competing problem definitions: homeland security versus comprehensive emergency management. 9/11 made homeland security ascendant. Katrina reinvigorated comprehensive emergency management as a problem definition and policy formulation model.