Senate Floor Speech
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
January 24, 2005 -- Page: S214

MRS. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, over the past decade, Congress has approved over $46 billion in disaster relief and emergency spending. This is an average of $4.6 billion a year. The majority of this funding--$34 billion--has been provided through supplemental bills, not subject to the normal appropriations process.

Supporters of supplemental spending suggest it provides Congress flexibility to respond to emergencies and to priorities that did not receive the proper consideration during the budget cycle. While supplemental bills do offer flexibility, they are not always helpful for fiscal responsibility. Millions of dollars are put in emergency spending bills that should go through the regular budget process, adding more and more to the bottom line.

America is at a critical time--we must be prepared to address domestic emergencies without increasing the deficit or being forced to fund non-emergency projects in order to release necessary funds. Supplemental spending circumvents budgetary enforcement mechanisms and can lead lawmakers to under-fund programs in the regular appropriations process, because they know they ultimately can get what is needed through a supplemental.

Supplemental bills allocate funding for emergencies, and we have all witnessed, firsthand, how a natural disaster can impact a country severely. Merely because something is unforeseen does not mean we should not prepare. Congress needs to plan in a manner that is fiscally responsible and procedurally transparent.

Today, I offer a bill to create an emergency fund under the office of the Secretary of the Treasury, in an interest bearing account, containing 1.2 percent of the annual non-defense domestic spending, or roughly $4.6 billion. This will be America's rainy day fund--a savings account ready for almost any potential unforeseen domestic emergencies.

This account is not designed to eliminate the need for supplemental bills but rather lessen the need for them.

Last year, in supplemental spending alone, Congress spent $2.5 billion on disaster relief in America. Domestic discretionary supplemental bills enacted in response to natural disasters, such as hurricanes and earthquakes, rose steadily through the 1990s. Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, was the second-largest recipient of supplemental spending during the 1990s. Supplemental appropriations for ``non-natural'' disasters such as the Los Angeles riots in 1992 and the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 as well as the September 11 terrorist attack have also demanded quick and efficient funding. History is teaching us a lesson; while we do not know what the emergencies will be, we can feel certain there will be something to which we will need to respond.

Beyond the clear fiscal conservatism we need, I believe this rainy day fund would reduce the time it takes to respond to emergencies by giving Congress a more efficient, less political process. My bill would require the contingency fund to be expended before supplemental spending for domestic disasters can be pursued, with the exclusion of defense spending.

As we seek to be more fiscally responsible, our next step forward should be this account, from which the funds we draw upon are planned for and set aside through the normal appropriations process. Our current system regularly underfunds FEMA and other agencies for emergencies, and this should end.

As we prepare for the future, it is my goal that we save and prepare for the vital needs of our people should there be a domestic emergency. Recent events worldwide demand we be fiscally responsible and procedurally capable of this, our most important duty, the protection and safe-keeping of the American people.