Opinion: Politics Muddies Disaster Aid For Storm-Struck Panhandle

Modified from a Lakeland Ledger editorial

The Democratic-led U.S. House this week passed a $19 billion disaster-aid package that will bring critically needed relief to areas walloped by natural disasters, including Puerto Rico, still reeling after being devastated by Hurricane Maria in 2017, and the Florida Panhandle, ravaged by Hurricane Michael a year ago.

The House's 354-58 vote came about two weeks after the Senate endorsed the bill by an 85-8 tally, and capped months of negotiations and bickering, partly driven by $4.5 billion sought by GOP lawmakers to deal with the humanitarian crisis on the southern border. President Donald Trump, despite not obtaining the money for his border initiatives, enacted the measure on Thursday.

This is good news because the stricken areas sorely need this aid. Besides the Panhandle, whose residents saw in Michael's fury a phenomenon wholly unfamiliar to them, and residents of Puerto Rico, recipients include flooded farmers in the Midwest and military families in Florida and Nebraska. And many Florida residents, including thousands in Volusia and Flagler counties, rely on a byproduct of the bill: a temporary renewal of the National Flood Insurance Program.

It is unfortunate Congress took this long to get this done, especially since the House voted for the first version back in January. But the delay since the Senate's action, which drew ire from lawmakers of both parties, deserves some context.

After the Senate vote, three House Republicans -- Reps. Chip Roy of Texas, Thomas Massie of Kentucky and John Rose of Tennessee -- blocked the House from taking action. They did so because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insisted on adopting it by a process called unanimous consent.

As Ian Thompson of the ACLU explains, "Unanimous consent allows for a fast-tracking of the tedious and time-consuming aspects of the legislative process. The key to unanimous consent is that it can only be used when all members agree. If even one member objects, that's it. Deal off!"

This measure was necessary and time sensitive. Pelosi should have put it up for a roll call vote immediately after the Senate approved it. Yet she allowed House members to take a 10-day recess for the week of Memorial Day, apparently working off the assumption that those left behind would unanimously approve.

The GOP trio got hammered, even by their colleagues. Republican Rep. Austin Scott of Georgia called them "clowns." Another Republican, Florida Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis, called them "shameful." But, as it turned out, the "consent" wasn't exactly unanimous. Among the 58 Republicans who voted against it was Rep. Greg Steube of Sarasota, whose district includes the southern half of Polk County. Stuebe told the Tampa Bay Times he "could not in good conscience" vote for the bill because it included "outrageous spending and no plan to pay for it."

Steube raises a good point, although we disagree with him. Disaster aid should not be this divisive because, at some juncture, every part of the country will taste Mother Nature's wrath. That said, however, Pelosi's handling of the bill reiterated the troubling nonchalance almost all congressional lawmakers exhibit about the public purse. The government will spend $4.5 trillion this year, and so the pittance at issue here is equivalent to what the feds consume in just three weeks.

It's too much money to be casual about. But it was too badly needed to have waited this long; while Congress busied itself with partisan back-and-forth, many in the Panhandle are still eking out miserable days and mosquito-filled nights, huddling in tents or living in shelters. Next time -- and there will be a next time -- politics should not be allowed to swamp compassion.

___

(c)2019 The News-Journal, Daytona Beach, Fla.

Visit The News-Journal, Daytona Beach, Fla. at www.news-journalonline.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.