Order Code RL32581
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Assistance After Hurricanes and Other Disasters:
FY2004 and FY2005 Supplemental Appropriations
Updated October 8, 2004
Keith Bea
Specialist, American National Government
Government and Finance Division
Ralph M. Chite
Specialist, Agricultural Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

Assistance After Hurricanes and Other Disasters:
FY2004 and FY2005 Supplemental Appropriations
Summary
Congress has acted on four Administration requests to appropriate supplemental
relief funds in the aftermath of a series of devastating hurricanes and other disasters.
The first such request, submitted on September 6, 2004, largely in response to the
devastation caused by Hurricanes Charley and Frances in Florida, sought $2 billion
in FY2004 emergency supplemental funding. On September 7, 2004, the House and
Senate approved that funding in H.R. 5005; President Bush signed the bill into law
(P.L. 108-303) the next day.
In addition, the House passed an FY2005 supplemental bill (H.R. 5212) on
October 6 that would appropriate the $11 billion included in the three other requests
as well as funding for drought relief in midwestern states, and it considered
additional FY2005 supplemental disaster relief funding (H.R. 5227). Reports
indicate that the House may incorporate the text of H.R. 5212 into the FY2005
appropriations legislation for the Department of Homeland Security (H.R. 4567).
The Senate-passed version of the FY2005 DHS appropriations bill contains an
estimated $3 billion in agricultural disaster assistance, which would be available to
any producer who meets eligibility requirements.
Issues that have been and might yet be explored by Congress include the
following:
! For decades Congress and Presidents have relied upon supplemental
funding to meet unforeseen and urgent needs that result from
catastrophes. Some critics or observers contend that federal disaster
assistance expenditures have created increased expectations among
constituents and they urge Members to consider options to control
federal costs.

! The scope and magnitude of emergency agricultural disaster
payments is being debated. The Administration has requested $530
million in farm disaster assistance, but only for hurricane losses.
Certain western and midwestern senators support a $3 billion
assistance package primarily to aid drought and freeze victims.
! According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB),
obligations could be made from the DRF “in anticipation of a
supplemental request to the Congress for urgent needs.” Congress
might wish to explore this assertion.
This report will be updated as Congress further considers the President’s request
for supplemental funding or as other events warrant.

---

Contents
Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Issues of Debate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Background on the Disaster Relief Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Unanticipated Events and Apportionment of Spending . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
American Red Cross Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Agricultural Disaster Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Crop and Livestock Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
USDA’s Florida Hurricane Disaster Assistance Program . . . . . . . . . . 21
Pending Agricultural Assistance for Hurricane Losses . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
List of Tables
Table 1. FY2004 Supplemental Appropriations for Assistance After Hurricanes
and Other Disasters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Table 2. FY2005 Supplemental Appropriations, for Assistance After Hurricanes
and Other Disasters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Table 3. Disaster Relief Fund, FY1974-FY2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

---

Assistance After Hurricanes and
Other Disasters: FY2004 and FY2005
Supplemental Appropriations
Recent Developments
By October 5, 2004, the Administration had submitted four supplemental
appropriations requests, totaling almost $13 billion, to Congress after a series of
hurricanes struck Florida and other states in August and September. The first request
for $2 billion for FY2004 was approved when Congress enacted H.R. 5005 on
September 7 and the President signed the legislation into law (P.L. 108-303) the next
day. On October 6 the House approved the other $11 billion requested by the
Administration in three additional requests for disaster relief in H.R. 5212. (The
fourth request submitted by the Administration incorporates the amount requested but
not appropriated previously.) Also on October 6, the Chair of the House
Appropriations Committee introduced another FY2005 supplemental funding bill for
disaster relief (H.R. 5227) on October 7.
Both the FY2005 Homeland Security Appropriations bill (H.R. 4567) as passed
by the Senate and H.R. 5212 as passed by the House contain an estimated $3 billion
in emergency agricultural disaster assistance, primarily to drought- and freeze-
affected regions. The Administration has requested farm disaster aid only for
hurricane-affected regions.
Overview
For the first time this century a single state has endured four major hurricanes
in the span of weeks. From mid-August through mid-September 2004, Hurricanes
Charley, Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne resulted in billions of dollars of insured and
uninsured damages in Florida.1 In addition to the four major disaster declarations
issued by President Bush in Florida for each of the hurricanes, declarations were
issued after the hurricanes and related storms caused severe losses in 11 other states.2
Taken at a glance, calendar year 2004 may perhaps close as the most expensive year
of natural disasters to date.
1 Damage estimates require weeks of effort as damage survey teams assess the extent of
destruction. According to one news report insured losses may exceed $20 billion; see
[http://www.klfy.com/Global/story.asp?S=2325982&nav=7k7cR7af], visited Oct. 6, 2004.
Federal costs have not yet been determined.
2 A “major disaster declaration” may be issued by the President if a governor certifies that
the affected state has suffered damages that require federal assistance. For more information
see page 9 of this report. For a list of states in which major disaster declarations have been
issued, see [http://www.fema.gov/news/disasters.fema?year=2004#diz], visited Oct. 7, 2004.

---

CRS-2
In light of these losses, and those associated with other disasters throughout the
nation, the Bush Administration submitted three supplemental appropriations
requests for FY2004 that totaled approximately $12 billion between September 6 and
September 27, 2004. Congress approved legislation (H.R. 5005) that appropriated
the $2 billion initially requested, and the President signed the legislation in law (P.L.
108-303). The funding from the two requests submitted September 14 and 27 were
incorporated by the House into H.R. 5072, which received no action due to
subsequent disasters. The Senate incorporated emergency agricultural assistance into
the FY2005 appropriations legislation (H.R. 4567) for the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). Table 1 of this report presents summary information on the requests
and congressional action for supplemental disaster relief funding for FY2004.

---

CRS-3
Table 1. FY2004 Supplemental Appropriations for Assistance
After Hurricanes and Other Disasters
($ in millions)
H.R.
Total
Federal agency/purpose
Req.
SenateA
P.L. 108-
5072
303
enacted
Departments
Dept. of Agriculture / Forest
Service
20
30
Dept. of Agriculture /
Commodity Credit Corp.B
400
see Table 2
Dept. of Commerce / National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Admin. (NOAA) —
Op., Res., Facilities
8
Dept. of Commerce / NOAA
— Procurement, Acq.,
Construction
7
Dept. of Defense /
Corps of Engineers — Civil
Works / Operation and
maintenance, general
134
Dept. of Defense /
Corps of Engineers — Civil
Works /
Flood control and coastal
emergencies
142
88
Dept. of Defense /
Corps of Engineers — Flood
control, specified states
4
Dept. of Defense /
Op.and Maintenance
690
72.5
Dept. of Defense /
Mil. Personnel
12
Dept. of Defense /
Procurement
250
Dept. of Defense /
Family Housing
8
Dept. of Defense / Revolving,
Mngmt. Funds
2
Dept. of Defense /
General Provisions C
Dept. of Health and Human
Services /
Dept. Management / Health
and social services
50
50

---

CRS-4
H.R.
Total
Federal agency/purpose
Req.
SenateA
P.L. 108-
5072
303
enacted
Dept. of Homeland Security /
Emerg. Preparedness and
Response /
Disaster relief fund
8,500 D
2,000
2,000
Dept. of Homeland Security /
Coast Guard
26
8
Dept. of Housing and Urban
Development /
Community planning and
development
150
150
Dept. of the Interior /
Fish and Wildlife Service
23
14
Dept. of the Interior /
U.S. Geological Survey
1
Dept. of the Interior / National
Park Service
42
7
Dept. of Justice /
Fed. Prison System
24
Dept. of Transportation / Fed.
Aviation Admin.
5
Dept. of Transportation / Fed.
Highway Admin.
600
Dept. of Veterans Affairs /
Veterans Health
Administration /
Medical services
7
6
Dept. of Veterans Affairs /
Veterans Health Admin. /
Medical facilities
20
17
Dept. of Veterans Affairs /
Veterans Health Admin. /
Medical admin.
2
2
Dept. of Veterans Affairs /
Dept. Admin.
1
Other Agencies
Agency for International
Develop.
50
National Aeronautics and
Space Admin. /
Space flight capabilities
126
126

---

CRS-5
H.R.
Total
Federal agency/purpose
Req.
SenateA
P.L. 108-
5072
303
enacted
Small Business Admin.E
501
248
Executive Office of the
President /
Unanticipated needs
70
70
Total F
11,875
2,889
2,000
2,000
Sources:
Administration request: U.S. Office of Management and Budget, “Estimate #9, FY2004 Emergency
Supplemental: Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Disaster
Relief Associated with Hurricanes Charley and Frances,” available at [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/
amendments/supplemental_9_6_04.pdf]; “Estimate #11, Emergency Supplemental: Hurricanes Charley and
Frances (Various Agencies), 9/14/04,” available at [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/amendments/
supplemental_9_14_04.pdf]; and “Estimate #13, Emergency Supplemental: Hurricanes Ivan and Jeanne
(Various Agencies), 9/27/04,” at [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/amendments/supplemental_9_27_04.
pdf], all visited Sept. 16, 2004.
Congressional action: P.L. 108-303, H.R. 5072, H.R. 4567.
A Reflects Senate passed version of FY2005 appropriations for DHS (H.R. 4567).
B The request would provide funds for disaster payments and debris removal associated with hurricane damage,
among other activities.
C The Administration’s supplemental request #13 includes general provisions for the Department of Defense,
including the authority to transfer up to $200 million between accounts.
D Total for disaster relief fund reflects requests from Estimates #9, #11, and #14.
E Up to $30 million appropriated in P.L. 108-303 is authorized to be transferred to the SBA for administrative
expenses necessary for the disaster loan program.
In the second half of September Hurricanes Ivan and Jeanne prolonged the destruction
of Charley and Frances. The Administration recognized that additional funds would be
required by the time Hurricane Jeanne had run its course in late September. As a result, the
fourth request for supplemental appropriations was submitted to Congress on October 5,
2004. As introduced in H.R. 5212, the funds associated with the fourth request, along with
the second and third requests, were designated as FY2005 emergency supplemental
appropriations. In addition to passing H.R. 5212, the House began consideration of a third
supplemental funding measure (H.R. 5227) that would appropriate additional disaster relief
money for FY2005 beyond the Administrations requests. Table 2 presents information on
the request and congressional action as of October 7.

---

CRS-6
Table 2. FY2005 Supplemental Appropriations,
for Assistance After Hurricanes and Other Disasters
($ in millions)
H.R.
Federal agency/purpose
Request A
H.R.
SenateB
Total
5212
5227
enacted
Departments
Dept. of Agriculture / Forest
Service/National Forest System
2
2
Dept. of Agriculture/Forest
Service/Capital Improvements and
Maintenance
13 C
33
Dept. of Agriculture / Commodity
Credit Corp.
530 C
320 D
3,000
Dept. of Commerce / National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin.
(NOAA) — Operations, Research,
Facilities
0
8
Dept. of Commerce / NOAA —
Procurement, Acq., Construction
0
7
Dept. of Defense /Corps of
Engineers — Civil Works/
Operation and maintenance, general
94 C
94
Dept. of Defense /
Corps of Engineers — Civil Works
/Flood control and coastal
emergencies
147 C
147
147
Dept. of Defense /
Corps of Engineers — Flood
control, specified states
0
4
Dept. of Defense /Operations and
Maintenance
34
715
Dept. of Defense /Military
Personnel
2
14
Dept. of Defense/Health programs
0
10
Dept. of Defense / Procurement
105
105
Dept. of Defense/Military const.
148
148
Dept. of Defense /
Family Housing
1
9
Dept. of Defense / Revolving,
Management Funds
75
77
Dept. of Defense /
General Provisions
E
E
Dept. of Health and Human
Services /Dept. Management /
Health and social services
0
50

---

CRS-7
H.R.
Federal agency/purpose
Request A
H.R.
SenateB
Total
5212
5227
enacted
Dept. of Homeland Security /
Emerg. Preparedness and Response
/Disaster relief fund
0
6,500
Dept. of Homeland Security / Coast
Guard
0
26
7
Dept. of Housing and Urban
Development /
Community planning and
development
0
150 F
Dept. of the Interior /
Fish and Wildlife Service
27 C
27
Dept. of the Interior /
U.S. Geological Survey
0
1
Dept. of the Interior /National Park
Service
50 C
50
108
Dept. of Justice /
Fed. Prison System
0
24
Dept. of Transportation / Fed.
Aviation Admin. G
25
30
Dept. of Transportation / Fed.
Highway Admin. H
800 C
800
750
Dept. of Veterans Affairs / Veterans
Health Administration /Medical
services
38 C
38
Dept. of Veterans Affairs / Veterans
Health Admin. /Medical facilities
47 C
47
Dept. of Veterans Affairs / Veterans
Health Admin. / Medical admin.
2 C
2
Dept. of Veterans Affairs / Dept.
Admin.
37 C
37
Other Agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
3
3
Agency for International
Development.
100 C
100
National Aeronautics and Space
Admin. /Space flight capabilities
0
126
59
Small Business Administration
0
930

---

CRS-8
H.R.
Federal agency/purpose
Request A
H.R.
SenateB
Total
5212
5227
enacted
Executive Office of the President /
Unanticipated needs
70
70
Total I
2,350
10,704
1,578
Source: U.S. Office of Management and Budget, “Estimate #14, Emergency Supplemental: Hurricanes Charley,
Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne (Various Agencies), 10/5/04,” available at [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/
amendments/supplemental_10_5_04.pdf], visited Oct. 6, 2004. H.R. 5212, introduced Oct. 6, 2004.
A Request column reflects Administration supplemental request #14. Where indicated by “C” the information
in this column also reflects totals included in requests #11 and #13 as well. Refer to Table 1 of this report, as
some requests included in #11 and #13 (and reflected in Table 1) were not mentioned in request #14.
B Column reflects Senate-passed version of H.R. 4567, the FY2005 homeland security appropriations bill,
which includes $3 billion in agricultural assistance.
C Amount shown reflects supplemental request #14 plus funds previously requested in #11 and #13, cited in
Table 1, above.
D Not included in the House total is an adopted floor amendment that provides an estimated $3 billion in
agricultural assistance primarily in drought-stricken regions. This funding is offset in the bill by a $3 billion
reduction in funding for an agricultural conservation program.
E H.R. 5212 includes general provisions for the Department of Defense, including the authority to transfer up
to $210 million between accounts.
F H.R. 5212 specifies that Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds are to be used “for emergency
expenses resulting from natural disasters in Florida,” except for FEMA or SBA activities. The bill also
specifies that “such funds may be awarded to the State of Florida for affected areas” and imposes requirements
on and grants authority for waivers to Florida in using the funds.
G Up to $25 million of the funds for the FAA to be derived from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.
H Funds for the repair of federal-aid highways are to be derived from the highway Trust Fund.
I Total reflects rounding and does not account for funding specified or described in endnotes.

---

CRS-9
Issues of Debate
Little debate historically occurs in Congress on federal disaster assistance
funding measures. Many constituents, Members of Congress, and analysts generally
agree that the federal government has an important role in the immediate response
to significant catastrophes, as well as in long-term recovery efforts. Debate may
occur, however, on the types of activities to be funded through this request, the
addition of provisions in supplemental appropriations legislation for activities not
always seen to be emergency needs, and activities funded through supplemental
appropriations, among other issues. Some of the issues that might be and have been
raised in the debate over the FY2004 and FY2005 disaster assistance supplemental
requests submitted to Congress are discussed below. Additional information will be
provided as congressional debate proceeds.
Some, but not all, disaster losses are reimbursed through federal assistance
programs. For example, costs incurred in removing debris, rebuilding facilities of
state and local governments and certain nonprofit organizations, and meeting
immediate needs for food and personal assistance will be met through appropriated
funds. Many small businesses and property owners will be eligible for low-cost
loans. In addition, the state of Florida and other states have access to federal grants
intended to stimulate economic recovery and repair or replace private and public
structures.3
As is the case with many disasters, however, federal assistance will not cover
all losses. Those without insurance may be challenged to replace homes, businesses,
or personal goods. To a certain extent, some of those losses may be covered by
programs authorized and administered by the state.4 Other needs may only be met
through voluntary contributions or individual efforts. For example, property owners
with insurance will face higher than expected deductibles from insurance policies as
a result of changes in Florida insurance regulations.5 In essence, federal assistance
meets certain needs to supplement disaster assistance available from other sources.
The following issues explore some of the policy matters that have been raised with
regard to federal disaster assistance.
3 Information on federal assistance programs is presented in CRS Report RL31734, Federal
Disaster Recovery Programs: Brief Summaries, by Ben Canada.
4 For a summary of and citations to Florida statutes, see CRS Report RS21784, Florida
Emergency Management and Homeland Security Statutory Authorities Summarized, by
Keith Bea.
5 For example, see Christopher Oster, Carrick Mollenkamp, and Chad Terhune, “After
Storms, Florida Wakes Up to a New Insurance Reality,” Wall Street Journal, Sept. 7, 2004,
p. A1, A6.

---

CRS-10
Background on the Disaster Relief Fund
P.L. 108-303 appropriated $2 billion to the disaster relief fund (DRF)
administered by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). DHS uses DRF funds
to provide assistance to individuals, families, state and local governments, and certain
nonprofit organizations, as authorized by the Stafford Act.6 Stafford Act aid is
available after the President issues a declaration that federal assistance is needed to
supplement the resources of states and localities that are overwhelmed by particularly
significant catastrophes.7 Federal assistance supported by DRF money is used by
states, localities, and certain non-profit organizations to provide mass care, restore
damaged or destroyed facilities, clear debris, and aid individuals and families with
uninsured needs, among other activities. In calendar year 2003, President Bush
issued 56 major disaster declarations; thus far in calendar year 2004, 61 such
declarations have been issued.8
Five types of declarations may be issued by the President or the Secretary of
DHS, summarized as follows:9
! Major disaster. The President issues a major disaster declaration
after receiving a request from the governor of the affected state.10 A
declaration authorizes DHS to administer various federal disaster
assistance programs for victims of declared disasters. Each major
disaster declaration specifies the type of incident covered, the time
period covered, the types of disaster assistance available, the
counties affected by the declaration, and the Federal Coordinating
Officer.
! Emergency. The declaration process for emergencies is similar to
that used for major disasters; the President may, however, issue an
emergency declaration without a gubernatorial request if primary
6 The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121
et seq.
7 For more information on the Stafford Act and the DRF, see CRS Report RL32242,
Emergency Management Funding for the Department of Homeland Security: Information
and Issues for FY2004, by Keith Bea, Shawn Reese, Wayne Morrissey, Frank Gottron, and
C. Stephen Redhead.
8 For a list of major disaster declarations, see U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency,
“Federally Declared Disasters by Calendar Year,” at [http://www.fema.gov/library/
drcys.shtm], visited Sept. 16, 2004.
9 Summaries adapted from testimony by FEMA in U.S. Congress, Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies, Departments of
Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations for 2001, hearing, 106th Cong., 2nd sess., Feb. 29, 2000 (Washington: GPO,
2000), p. 702.
10 For criteria considered in the declaration of a major disaster, see 44 CFR 206.48.

---

CRS-11
responsibility rests with the federal government.11 Under an
emergency declaration, the federal government funds and undertakes
emergency response activities, debris removal, and individual
assistance and housing programs. DRF expenditures for an
emergency are limited to $5 million per declaration unless the
President determines that there is a continuing need; Congress must
be notified if the $5 million ceiling is breached.
! Fire suppression. The Secretary of DHS is authorized to provide
fire suppression assistance to supplement the resources of
communities when fires threaten such destruction as would warrant
a major disaster declaration.
! Defense emergency. Upon request from the governor of an affected
state, the President may authorize the Department of Defense (DoD)
to carry out emergency work for a period not to exceed 10 days.
DoD emergency work is limited to work essential for the
preservation of life and property.
! Pre-declaration activities. When a situation threatens human
health and safety, and a disaster is imminent but not yet declared, the
Secretary of DHS may place agency employees on alert. DHS
monitors the status of the situation, communicates with state
emergency officials on potential assistance requirements, and
deploys teams and resources to maximize the speed and
effectiveness of the anticipated federal response and, when
necessary, performs preparedness and preliminary damage
assessment activities.
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296) transferred the authorities
and functions previously carried out by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) to DHS and charged the Secretary of Homeland Security with responsibility
for administering these activities. The Emergency Preparedness and Response
Directorate (EPR) of DHS, which includes FEMA, has primary responsibility for
allocating funds from the DRF for activities authorized by the Stafford Act.
Table 3 of this report lists appropriations made to the DRF since 1974. Prior
to FY1989, supplemental appropriations made to the DRF were approved
infrequently and generally exceeded the amount originally appropriated in each fiscal
11 “The President may exercise any authority vested in him ... of this title with respect to an
emergency when he determines that an emergency exists for which the primary
responsibility for response rests with the United States because the emergency involves a
subject area for which, under the Constitution or laws of the United States, the United States
exercises exclusive or preeminent responsibility and authority. In determining whether or
not such an emergency exists, the President shall consult the Governor of any affected state,
if practicable. The President’s determination may be made without regard to subsection (a)
of this section.” 42 U.S.C. 5191(b).

---

CRS-12
year by roughly $100 to $200 million.12 By comparison, since FY1989,
appropriations have exceeded $1 billion in each fiscal year and supplemental
appropriations have been approved in all but FY1991 and FY2000.
The last two columns of Table 3 show that a similar growth pattern has
developed for outlays from the DRF. Prior to FY1989, outlays from the DRF
averaged $568 million, and on only two occasions (Hurricane Frederic in FY1978
and the eruption of Mt. St. Helens in FY1980) exceeded $1 billion. Since 1989,
however, average annual outlays have exceeded $2 billion, due to significant
hurricanes (Hugo in FY1989, Andrew in FY1992, Floyd in FY1999), earthquakes
(Loma Prieta in FY1990, Northridge in FY1994), floods (Midwest floods of 1993,
Red River floods of 1995), and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
12 An exception occurred in FY1980 after the eruption of Mt. St. Helens.

---

CRS-13
Table 3. Disaster Relief Fund, FY1974-FY2005
(millions of dollars, 2002 constant dollars)
Appropriations (available funds)
Total appropriations
Outlays
FY
AReq.
Orig.
Supp. Nominal
Constant
Nominal
Constant
74
100
200
233
433
1,412
250
816
75
100
150
50
200
591
206
609
76
187
187
0
187
517
362
999
77
100
100
200
300
770
294
754
78
150
115
300
415
997
461
1,108
79
200
200
194
394
876
277
616
80
194
194
870
1,064
2,175
574
1,173
81
375
358
0
358
668
401
746
82
400
302
0
302
526
115
201
83
325
130
0
130
217
202
337
84
0
0
0
0
0
243
391
85
100
100
0
100
156
192
299
86
194
100
250
350
533
335
511
87
100
120
B0
120
178
219
325
88
125
120
0
C120
173
187
269
89
200
100
D1,108
1,208
1,674
140
194
90
270
98
E1,150
1,248
1,668
1,333
1,781
91
270
0
0
0
0
552
711
92
F184
185
4,136
G4,321
5,429
902
1,134
93
292
292
2,000
H2,292
2,816
2,276
2,796
94
I1,154
226
J4,709
4,935
5,935
3,743
4,502
95
320
320
K3,275
3,595
4,235
2,116
2,492
96
320
222
K3,275
K3,497
4,042
2,233
2,581
97
320
L1,320
L3,300
4,620
5,248
2,551
2,898
98
M2,708
320
N1,600
1,920
2,155
1,998
2,242
99
O2,566
P1,214
Q1,130
2,344
2,597
3,746
4,149
00
2,780
R2,780
0
2,780
3,019
2,628
2,853
S,T
01
2,909
300
T5,890
6,249
3,217
3,413
02
U1,369
664
V7,008
V12,160
12,677
3,947
4,114
03
1,843
800
W1,426
W2,199
2,255
8,541
8,761
04
1,956
1,800
X2,275
X2,042
Y2,068
Y3,044
Y3,082
05
2,151
NA
NA
NA
NA
Y3,363
Y3,363
Total
24,240
14,318
40,488
61,557
73,913
50,648
60,224
Sources: U.S. President annual budget documents; appropriations legislation; U.S. Federal
Emergency Management Agency budget justifications. Constant dollar amounts based on CRS
calculations based on GDP (chained) price index in: U.S. President (Bush), Historical Tables, Budget
of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2005 (Washington, 2004), pp. 184-185.

---

CRS-14
A Data in the request column generally represent the first budget request submitted by the
Administration each year and do not include amended or supplemental requests. Note, however,
additional detail in this column.
B In February 1987, a total of $57.5 million was rescinded and transferred from the DRF to the
Emergency Food and Shelter Program account (P.L. 100-6). That amount was returned to the fund
the same year in supplemental appropriations legislation enacted in July 1987 (P.L. 100-71).
C P.L. 100-202, the Continuing Appropriations Act for FY1988, appropriated $120 million for disaster
relief. According to FEMA, the original appropriation for that fiscal year was $125 million, but $5
million was transferred to the Department of Labor for “low income agriculture workers.”
D Supplemental funds were included in P.L. 101-100, continuing appropriations legislation enacted
after Hurricane Hugo struck in September 1989. According to FEMA, this amount was “referred to
as a supplemental but was an increase in the original appropriation during a continuing resolution.”
E P.L. 101-130, enacted after the Loma Prieta earthquake, appropriated $1.1 billion in supplemental
funding for FY1990. In addition, $50 million was appropriated in P.L. 101-302, dire emergency
supplemental appropriations legislation. Table 2 does not reflect a $2.5 million transfer from the
President’s unanticipated needs fund.
F FY1992 request does not include the budget amendment of $90 million submitted by the
Administration.
G Appropriations for FY1992 included a $943 million dire emergency supplemental in P.L. 102-229,
enacted in the fall of 1991 after Hurricane Bob; $300 million after the Los Angeles riots and flooding
in Chicago (spring of 1992) in P.L. 102-302; and $2.893 billion in P.L. 102-368 after Hurricanes
Andrew and Iniki, Typhoon Omar, and other disasters.
H Total for FY1993 includes the $2 billion supplemental approved after the Midwest floods of 1993
(P.L. 103-75).
I The original FY1994 budget request was $292 million. On July 29, 1993, a supplemental request
of $862 million was sent by President Clinton to Congress.
J Supplemental appropriations for FY1994 enacted after the Northridge earthquake struck Los
Angeles (P.L. 103-211).
K Additional supplemental appropriation approved for Northridge earthquake costs (P.L. 104-19) for
FY1995, with the same amount ($3.275 billion) reserved for a contingency fund for FY1996.
However, $1 billion of the contingency fund was rescinded in FY1996 omnibus appropriations, P.L.
104-134. In the same legislation, another $7 million was also appropriated to other FEMA accounts
for costs associated with the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City.
L The FY1998 budget appendix (p. 1047) noted a transfer of $104 million from the disaster relief fund
in FY1996. In the FY1997 appropriations act (P.L. 104-204), $1 billion that had been rescinded in
FY1996 (P.L. 104-134) was restored, and $320 million in new funds were appropriated. Supplemental
appropriations of $3.3 billion were approved in P.L. 105-18 after flooding in the Dakotas and
Minnesota, and after storms in other states were declared major disasters. The legislation specified,
however, that of the total, $2.3 billion was to be available in FY1998 only when FEMA submitted a
cost control report to Congress. This requirement was met, and the funding was made available in
FY1998.
M The FY1998 request consisted of a $320 million base amount plus $2.388 billion “to address actual
and projected requirements from 1997 and prior year declarations.” (Budget Appendix FY1998, p.
1047). Does not include $50 million requested for the DRF for mitigation activities.
N Supplemental appropriations legislation (P.L. 105-174) for FY1998 approved for flooding associated
with El Niño and other disasters.

---

CRS-15
O The FY1999 request consisted of $307.8 million for the DRF and an additional $2.258 billion in
contingency funding to be available when designated as an emergency requirement under the Balanced
Budget Act of 1985, as amended.
P The FY1999 omnibus appropriations act (P.L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681-579) included $906 million
for costs associated with Hurricane Georges, flooding associated with El Niño, and other disasters.
Q Emergency supplemental appropriations for FY1999 (P.L. 106-31) included $900 million for
tornado damages as well as $230 million for unmet needs, subject to allocation directions in the
conference report (H.Rept. 106-143).
R FY2000 appropriations act (P.L. 106-74, 113 Stat. 1085) included disaster relief funding as follows:
$300 million in regular appropriations and $2.480 billion designated as emergency spending for costs
associated with Hurricane Floyd and other disasters. In addition, the Consolidated Appropriations Act
(P.L. 106-113) authorized the Director of FEMA to use up to $215 million in disaster relief funds
appropriated in P.L. 106-74 for the purchase of residences flooded by Hurricane Floyd, under
specified conditions.
S Supplemental appropriations legislation (P.L. 106-246) authorized that $77 million from the DRF
to be used for buyout and relocation assistance for victims of Hurricane Floyd. The act also
appropriated $500 million in a separate account for claim compensation and administrative costs
associated with the Cerro Grande fire that destroyed much of Los Alamos, New Mexico.
T P.L. 107-38 appropriated $40 billion in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Pursuant to the statute, these funds for FY2001 were allocated by the Office of Management Budget
from the Emergency Response Fund (ERF). Of the total appropriated in P.L. 107-38 after the
September 11 attacks, $4.4 billion were allocated for FY2001 through P.L. 107-117 (115 Stat. 2338).
The total available for obligation for FY2001 ($5.9 billion) taken from FEMA Justification of
Estimates, FY2003, p. DR-2.
U Request for FY2002 did not include funding for the Disaster Relief Contingency Fund.
V Congress appropriated a total of $7.008 billion for FY2002 in P.L. 107-117 and 107-206 to meet
additional needs associated with the terrorist attacks. Total funds available ($12.16 billion) include
a transfer from the Transportation Security Administration, $1 billion released from the Emergency
Contingency Fund, and other sources. See Department of Homeland Security, Emergency
Preparedness and Response Directorate, Justification of Estimates, FY2004, p. DR-2.
W Includes $442 million in P.L. 108-69 and $938 million in P.L. 108-83 to meet needs associated with
tornadoes, winter storms, the recovery of wreckage of the Space Shuttle Columbia and other disasters.
Also, funds appropriated in these measures and in the FY2004 appropriations act for DHS (P.L. 108-
90) have been used for costs associated with Hurricane Isabel. Total of $2.199 billion available taken
from: Department of Homeland Security, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate,
Justification of Estimates, FY2005, p. FEMA-18.
X P.L. 108-106 which primarily addressed reconstruction costs in Iraq and Afghanistan also contained
an appropriation of $500 million for needs arising from disasters in the fall of 2003, including
Hurricane Isabel and the California fires. Section 4002 of the act designates the funds an emergency
requirement pursuant to the budget resolution adopted by Congress (H.Con.Res. 95), but the
Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2004 (Sec. 102(a), Division H, P.L. 108-199) rescinded $225
million of the $500 million appropriated in P.L. 108-106. Total of $2.043 billion taken from:
Department of Homeland Security, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Justification
of Estimates, FY2005, p. FEMA-18. P.L. 108-303, enacted after Hurricanes Charley and Frances
struck Florida, appropriated $2 billion to the DRF and gave discretion to DHS to transfer $300 million
to the Small Business Administration for disaster loans.
Y Outlay data and constant dollar calculations based on estimates.

---

CRS-16
Members might elect to consider issues associated with appropriations to the
DRF during the debate on the pending supplemental appropriations legislation.
These include, among others, actions taken, or not taken, by the executive branch to
anticipate disaster expenses and thereby forcing congressional action on
supplemental appropriations, and funding the American Red Cross.
Unanticipated Events and Apportionment of Spending. One issue
concerns the anticipation of catastrophes, notably hurricanes, and the rate at which
funds are depleted from the DRF. Hurricanes Charley and Frances struck during the
congressional recess. By mid-August the DRF, which is used for all disaster and
emergency declarations issued by the President, contained insufficient funds to meet
even the immediate response needs.13 Accordingly, the schedule DHS had
established for obligating funds, pursuant to statutory apportionment requirements,
had to be revised.14 In a letter to the chairman of the House Appropriations
Committee, an OMB official reported that in light of the immediate needs, “it will
be necessary to obligate funds at a rate that will exhaust amounts currently
appropriated to fund immediate disaster response efforts involving the safety of
human life and the protection of property.”15 Expediting the obligation rate, OMB
noted, required expeditious passage of supplemental appropriations “[b]ecause of the
unanticipated magnitude of the destruction caused and anticipated to be caused by
this season’s hurricanes.”
The notification OMB gave to Congress on September 3 makes reference to
an exception to the statutory apportionment requirements.16 In essence, DHS cannot
obligate funds from the DRF in excess of the amount appropriated and must obligate
funds from the DRF effectively and economically. DHS (and other departments and
agencies) may, however, expedite the rate of obligation for reasons specified in the
statute. Due to the immediate needs that resulted from the two hurricanes, OMB
contended that the exception was appropriately invoked. As noted in the OMB
notice, this change in the obligation rate (apportionment) necessitated supplemental
appropriations to provide funds for the response to the hurricanes and other disasters.
While Congress theoretically could have refused to appropriate the requested
supplemental funds, it is not unreasonable to have expected positive action. Some
13 Telephone conversation between the author and congressional staff, September 7, 2004.
14 “An appropriation for an indefinite period and authority to make obligations by contract
before appropriations shall be apportioned to achieve the most effective and economical
use.” 31 U.S.C. 1512.
15 Letter from Joshua B. Bolten, Director, Office of Management and Budget, to the
President, September 6, 2004.
16 “Except as provided ..., an official may make, and the head of an executive agency may
request, an apportionment under section 1512 of this title that would indicate a necessity for
a deficiency or supplemental appropriation only when the official or agency head decides
that the action is required because of ... (B) an emergency involving the safety of human
life, the protection of property, or the immediate welfare of individuals when an
appropriation that would allow the United States Government to pay, or contribute to,
amounts required to be paid to individuals in specific amounts fixed by law or under
formulas prescribed by law, is insufficient.” 31 U.S.C. 1515(b)(1).

---

CRS-17
may argue, however, that congressional power over the purse is compromised by
having DHS and OMB decide that supplemental appropriations are necessary. That
decision arguably rests with Congress.
While the situation that led to enactment of P.L. 108-303 was resolved
expeditiously, one may conceive that future catastrophic disasters (including terrorist
attacks more devastating than those of September 11, 2001) could occur in the future
while Congress is in recess, or in adjournment. The revision of the apportionment
rate from the DRF, and the resulting press to enact supplemental appropriations,
might be alleviated in the future if Congress were to address the issue. Options for
congressional action include:
! Congress could extend to the Secretary of DHS the authority
currently held by the Secretary of Defense (and the Secretary of
Transportation for the Coast Guard) to obligate funds from the DRF
on a deficiency basis under specified circumstances.17 As the Coast
Guard has been transferred from the Department of Transportation
to DHS, it may be argued that the Secretary of DHS has this
authority when the Coast Guard operates as a service to the Navy.
! In light of advances made in hurricane prediction and projections of
storm intensity, it may be argued that hurricanes may be foreseen
and anticipated, at least to a degree adequate enough for Congress to
consider supplemental appropriations in late spring or early summer
of each year, prior to the August district work period.18
! Congress could appropriate reserve funds that would be released to
DRF for obligation if specified conditions exist. For example, over
$2 billion appropriated for the DRF in FY1998 was only made
available “until the Director of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency submits to the Congress a legislative proposal to control
disaster relief expenditures including the elimination of funding for
certain revenue producing facilities.”19
American Red Cross Funding. The American Red Cross (ARC) is one
of many voluntary and service organizations in the United States that provides
17 “No contract or purchase on behalf of the United States shall be made, unless the same
is authorized by law or is under an appropriation adequate to its fulfillment, except in the
Department of Defense and in the Department of Transportation with respect to the Coast
Guard when it is not operating as a service in the Navy, for clothing, subsistence, forage,
fuel, quarters, transportation, or medical and hospital supplies, which, however, shall not
exceed the necessities of the current year.” 41 U.S.C. 11.
18 Perhaps the most prominent forecasting models used by a team of researchers at Colorado
State University, headed by Dr. William Gray. See [http://hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu/
forecasts/], visited Sept. 9, 2004.
19 P.L. 105-18, 111 Stat. 200.

---

CRS-18
disaster assistance.20 ARC is unique, however, in at least two respects. First, it
operates under a congressional charter to provide disaster assistance.21 Second, it is
the only nonfederal signatory agency to the Federal Response Plan, the framework
adopted by FEMA to ensure coordination in the response to major disasters.22
The Senate voted to appropriate $70 million for the ARC in the Homeland
Security Appropriations bill for FY2005 due to a deficiency of funds.23 On at least
one previous occasion, Congress appropriated funds for the ARC.24 The $30 million
appropriated to the President’s Unanticipated Needs account was specifically to be
used “only for a grant to the American Red Cross for reimbursement of disaster
relief, recovery expenditures, and emergency services ....” The precedent of
appropriating funds on two occasions for the ARC, the nexus established between the
federal government and the ARC, and the ongoing financial distress facing the
organization, raise issues that might be explored by the Congress, including the
following.
! The costs incurred by the ARC in any presidentially declared
disaster, as set forth in the Response Plan, are provided through the
DRF when DHS makes a mission assignment to the organization.
Funds appropriated directly to the ARC by Congress would likely be
used to meet costs other than those assigned to the organization
under the Plan. Congress might elect to consider making future
appropriations through the DRF for ARC needs not directly
attributable to mission assignments made by DHS. Also, Congress
might elect to continue to appropriate funds through the President’s
Unanticipated Needs account.
! While it may be argued that the ARC has a unique relationship to the
federal government through its charters and its responsibility under
20 For information on all voluntary organizations see the website for National Voluntary
Organizations Active in Disaster (NVOAD), at [http://www.nvoad.org/], visited Sept.9,
2004. Information on the American Red Cross disaster service is available at [http://www.
redcross.org/services/disaster/0,1082,0_319_,00.html], visited Sept. 9, 2004.
21 The charter adopted in 1900 authorized the organization “to continue and carry on a
system of national and international relief in time of peace and apply the same in mitigating
the sufferings caused by pestilence, famine, fire, floods, and other great national
calamaties.” Chap. 784, 56th Cong., 31 Stat. 279. A second charter adopted in 1905 retained
the mandate adopted in 1900 and added, at the end, “and to devise and carry on measures
for preventing the same.” Chap. 23, 58th Cong., 33 Stat. 600.
22 The Federal Response Plan is to be replaced by the National Response Plan pursuant to
the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296, Sec. 502(6), 6 U.S.C. 312(6)). For
background see CRS Report RS21697, Overview of Components of the National Response
Plan and Selected Issues, coordinated by Keith Bea.
23 For a floor statement on the appropriation, see Sen. Bill Nelson, remarks in the Senate,
“Homeland Security Appropriations,” Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 150, Sept.
9, 2004, p. S9006-9008. The vote on the amendment is recorded at Congressional Record,
daily edition, vol. 150, Sept. 14, 2004, p. S9208.
24 P.L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681-576.

---

CRS-19
the Response Plan, one might also contend that other voluntary and
charitable organizations provide similar services to victims of
disasters. Congress might elect to consider whether grants made
expressly to the ARC should also be extended to other voluntary
organizations facing financial difficulties.
! While the contributions of the ARC to disaster relief efforts in the
nation are well known and long-standing, it may be argued that the
responsibility to administer these services should, at this point, fall
to DHS or another federal agency. In this manner the funding
problems facing the ARC would not hinder federal efforts to ensure
a robust disaster response.
Agricultural Disaster Assistance25
Background. The late summer 2004 hurricanes damaged or destroyed
significant portions of Florida’s agricultural production, particularly citrus trees,
vegetables, and nursery products. Various other parts of the nation also have suffered
farm production losses over the past year caused by prolonged drought, floods,
freezes, and other weather-related disasters. Generally, farm production losses are not
eligible for FEMA assistance, but instead are covered under an assortment of ongoing
programs administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). These
include disaster loans, the federal crop insurance program, and the noninsured crop
disaster assistance program.26
When major disasters affect widespread portions of the nation, Congress
traditionally has supplemented these ongoing USDA programs with emergency crop
loss payments, livestock feed assistance and other ad-hoc programs. Between fiscal
years 1988 and 2003, Congress approved nearly $17 billion in emergency crop loss
payments, and approximately $2.6 billion in livestock and other emergency farm
disaster assistance.27
Most recently, the FY2003 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 108-7)
contained authority to reimburse farmers for either 2001 or 2002 farm commodity
losses, including an estimated $2 billion in crop loss payments and approximately
$350 million in livestock feed assistance. Major disasters, such as hurricanes, often
serve as a catalyst for Congress to authorize emergency farm assistance. Once
authorized, however, the assistance generally is not limited to a specific region, but
in most cases is made available to any farmer nationwide who meets a certain
minimum crop loss requirement (usually about 35%).
25 This section prepared by Ralph Chite, Resources, Science, and Industry Division, CRS.
26 For more information on these and other USDA assistance programs, see CRS Report
RS21212, Agricultural Disaster Assistance, by Ralph Chite.
27 For more details on this spending, see CRS Report RL31095, Emergency Funding for
Agriculture: A Brief History of Supplemental Appropriations, by Ralph Chite.

---

CRS-20
To assist farmers with more recent production losses, congressional and
administrative action is taking place on a number of fronts: (1) both the Senate-
passed FY2005 Homeland Security Appropriations bill (H.R. 4567/S. 2537) and the
House-passed FY2005 emergency supplemental appropriations bill (H.R. 5212)
would provide an estimated $3 billion in farm disaster assistance, primarily for 2003
or 2004 crop and livestock feed losses; (2) Administration requests for an estimated
$530 million in additional assistance, exclusively for agricultural losses caused by
the 2004 hurricanes, are pending before Congress; H.R. 5212, as passed by the
House, provides a portion of this request ($320 million), primarily for debris clean-up
and specialty crop assistance; and (3) the Administration announced a new program
using existing funds to make an estimated $500 million in crop loss payments for
victims of Hurricanes Charley and Frances.
Crop and Livestock Assistance. On September 14, 2004, the full
Senate adopted the Baucus amendment to the FY2005 Homeland Security bill (H.R.
4567/S. 2537) that would provide an estimated $3 billion in emergency supplemental
farm disaster assistance in response to various natural disasters. On October 6, 2004,
the House adopted a Neugebauer floor amendment to an FY2005 emergency
supplemental appropriations bill (H.R. 5212) that would provide assistance in a
similar manner as the adopted Baucus amendment. However, the projected $3 billion
cost of the assistance in the House bill is offset by capping 10-year expenditures for
the mandatory Conservation Security Program at a level that is $3 billion below its
current estimated 10-year cost.
The Administration has not requested any assistance for agricultural disasters
other than the 2004 hurricanes. Fiscal conservatives have insisted that the cost of any
agricultural assistance for disasters other than the 2004 hurricanes should be offset
with reductions in other USDA programs. Supporters of farm and conservation
programs are opposed to reducing spending for any farm bill programs to pay for
disaster assistance, and contend that all natural disasters should be treated equally.
The House-passed FY2005 supplemental bill and the House- and Senate-passed
versions of the Homeland Security appropriations are expected to be resolved
together in conference.
Much of this $3 billion in assistance is expected to benefit western states that
have experienced multiple years of drought, and other regions that were affected by
a later summer frost and other disasters. Although crop losses were significant in
Florida following the summer hurricanes, a program feature that prohibits payments
to producers with gross income greater than $2.5 million likely would exclude
Florida citrus growers and nursery operations from receiving benefits. Hence, the
Florida delegation has sought additional assistance for their producers. (See sections
below for details on hurricane agricultural assistance.)
Within the $3 billion in estimated assistance in the two are “such sums as
necessary” from USDA’s Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) to fully fund
payment formulas for three disaster programs — crop loss assistance, livestock
assistance, and tree assistance. CBO estimates the cost of these three programs at
$2.5 billion for crop losses, $475 million for livestock assistance, and $20 million for
tree replantings. If these estimates fall short of program needs, CCC funds would be
available for any shortfall.

---

CRS-21
As mandated by both bills, the crop loss payments would be implemented in
the same fashion as the 2000 crop disaster program. A crop producer would be
eligible for assistance if crop losses due to any natural disaster were in excess of 35%
in either 2003 or 2004 (but cannot receive assistance for both years). For losses in
excess of the 35% threshold, an eligible producer would receive a payment of up to
65% of the relevant price for the commodity. Payments would be made to all eligible
producers regardless of whether a farmer was in a declared disaster area. Recipients
would be subject to an $80,000 per person payment limit.
Also included in the total is necessary funding for a Livestock Assistance
Program (LAP), which would provide direct payments to eligible livestock producers
who suffered grazing losses due to a natural disaster. The bills require the program
to be modeled after the LAP implemented in 2000. Under this proposed program, a
livestock producer would be eligible for LAP benefits when a natural disaster caused
the producer in an approved county to suffer a 40 percent or greater loss of grazing
for three or more consecutive months during either 2003 or 2004. Like the crop loss
program, the livestock producer would be eligible for payments for either year, but
not both.
Finally, necessary funds are provided to fully fund the Tree Assistance
Program (TAP), which was authorized by the 2002 farm bill (P.L. 107-171) but did
not receive any regular appropriations for FY2004. TAP provides financial
assistance to orchard growers to help them replant eligible trees, bushes, and vines
that are damaged or destroyed by a natural disaster. A grower who loses more than
15% of eligible trees to a natural disaster can be reimbursed for 75% of the cost of
replanting eligible losses. Payments are limited to 500 acres and no more than
$75,000 per person.
USDA’s Florida Hurricane Disaster Assistance Program. On
September 24, 2004, the Administration announced a new agricultural disaster
program designed to assist any Florida county that was declared a disaster area as a
result of either Hurricane Charley or Hurricane Frances. The new Florida Hurricane
Disaster Assistance Program will use existing USDA Section 32 funds28 (estimated
by USDA at more than $500 million) to provide direct disaster payments to
producers of citrus, vegetables, and nursery crops based on estimated losses. Sign-up
for the program is expected in early October. Recipients are subject to an $80,000
payment limit and are exempt from a $2.5 million gross income limitation if 75% of
income is derived from farming or forestry. This 75% provision allows large
agricultural operations to be eligible for disaster assistance, as long as most of their
income is from farming. For more on this program, see the USDA press release at
[http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?contentidonly=true&c
ontentid=2004/09/0414.xml].
28 “Section 32” is a permanent appropriation that since 1935 has earmarked the equivalent
of 30% of annual customs receipts to support the farm sector through a variety of activities.
Perhaps the best-known use of Section 32 funds is USDA’s direct purchases of meats,
poultry, fruits, vegetables, and fish, which are diverted mainly to school lunch and other
domestic food programs.

---

CRS-22
Pending Agricultural Assistance for Hurricane Losses. The
Administration has requested an estimated $530 million in assistance exclusively for
agricultural losses caused by the 2004 hurricanes. (This request would primarily
assist crop growers with losses associated with Hurricanes Ivan and Jeanne in all
affected states, while the Administration’s initiative described above is designed to
help only Florida victims of Hurricanes Charley and Frances.) Included in this
amount is $230 million in debris clean-up assistance through various USDA
conservation programs, an estimated $210 million in farm disaster payments, and a
$90 million transfer to Section 32 from USDA’s Commodity Credit Corporation to
further fund the Administration’s Florida hurricane assistance. The requested disaster
payments would cover an eligible producer with hurricane crop losses in excess of
35%, and would make a payment of up to 50% of the relevant price of the
commodity for losses in excess of the 35% threshold. The same payment limit as in
the Administration’s initiative would apply to recipients, so that the sum of disaster
aid from either source could not exceed $80,000. A gross income limitation of $2.5
million would apply only if less than 75% of income is derived from farming.
The House-passed FY2005 supplemental appropriations bill (H.R. 5212)
contains the requested $230 million exclusively for hurricane debris cleanup and land
restoration, as well as the $90 million transfer to Section 32 for the Administration’s
citrus, vegetable, and nursery assistance program. H.R. 5212 also provides an
additional $50 million for debris cleanup and land restoration for any region of the
country suffering a disaster, which was not requested by the Administration. The bill
did not provide any funding for the hurricane-related crop disaster payments
requested by the Administration. No comparable provisions are in any Senate bill.
Conclusion
Hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne, the continuing drought, and
other catastrophes serve as reminders that natural disasters, not just terrorist attacks,
devastate communities and have short-term (if not long-term) adverse economic
impacts. These hurricanes continue a decades-long trend that has required billions
of dollars in federal expenditures. The immediate shortfall in the DRF in early
September 2004 was resolved with the passage of H.R. 5005, P.L. 108-303. With
three other supplemental requests the Administration indicated to Congress that the
needs of stricken communities and victims required more aid. During the debate on
the supplemental request Members of Congress have considered issues such as the
funding of disasters and the American Red Cross.
Although farm disaster assistance has been enacted to cover farm production
losses in virtually every crop year between 1988 and 2002, some policymakers are
concerned that the continued availability of ad-hoc disaster payments might
discourage producers from purchasing a crop insurance policy. Several billion
dollars in additional premium subsidy were pumped into the federal crop insurance
program beginning in 2000, to enhance farmer participation and preclude the need
for ad-hoc disaster assistance. Participation in the crop insurance program has
increased significantly since 2000. However, when widespread disasters strike, the
political pressure continues to further compensate farmers for disaster losses.

---