[By Jiao Haiyang/China.org.cn]

On the first day of 2013, Republicans delayed a House vote for Sandy aid, Congressional funding earmarked for reconstruction efforts to offset damages caused by the super storm that made landfall on the eastern U.S. coastline. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie was furious with House Republicans for postponing the relief bill.

The Senate approved a US$60.4 billion aid package to help the states of New York and New Jersey rebuild after the devastating aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, while the House Appropriations Committee approved a mere US$27 billion. Christie said he could not accept an aid package of such low value. He expressed his discontent by saying, "They did so with callous indifference to the suffering of the people of my state…" "Shame on you. Shame on Congress" (Huffington Post).

Every time a natural disaster strikes the U.S., a partisan battle erupts over how to provide aid to victims. The ongoing dispute over how to supervise the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) highlights long-felt animosity between Republicans and Democrats.

FEMA has experienced patchwork support since being founded by U.S. President Jimmy Carter in 1979. It got expanded during Bill Clinton's term in office. But Republican President George W. Bush later made cutbacks to the program, and transferred control over to the Department of Homeland Security. Although current U.S. President Barack Obama, a Democrat, has signaled support for the relief program, Congressional Republicans have reduced FEMA funding by 43 percent over the past two years, according to recent New York Times estimation.

Democrats argue that FEMA helps locate funding for disaster relief, and point to Hurricane Katrina as an example of Republican short-sightedness. GOP leaders are concerned that Federal intervention into disaster relief will create a too-big-to-fail approach to funding, leading to big government, the long-time nemeses of conservatism.

Democrats herald big government as the custodian of American liberty. Another New York Times editorial claims, "A big storm requires a big government." Democrats believe that a large and involved government protects the American people from predatory companies seeking to profit from disaster. They also claim big government is defter at coordinating disaster relief than the private sector.

Republican senators denounce big government as sinful, and contend that power should be localized at the state level and in the private sector. Budget proposals by senior Republican leader Paul Ryan also overlook expenditures that would be committed to aiding disaster-stricken areas, claiming the federal coffers were not deep enough to give such promises.

In truth, we do need to discuss the role federal government plays in modern-era disaster relief. U.S. political power derives from a system of checks and balances between federal, judicial, and executive branches of government. This power structure is then balanced against national and local governments, then once more between market and government regulatory authorities.

The current division between Democrats and Republicans originates in the founding principal of American jurisprudence. America was built on the notion that power should lie in community autonomy, not in federal authority. Any problems that arise should be dealt with at a local level.

However, this pastoral system of community and localized government is no longer effective in modern America. As a large nation, the U.S. is required to think on a national level to deal with complicated federal problems. The FEMA debate is simply a manifestation of the age old dilemma between federal vs. localized government.

The author is now a visiting scholar at the University of Southern California. He is an assistant researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

Related

• New US Congress convenes with old challenges
• US House approves $9.7 bln Sandy relief

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)