WVU professor's study gets attention

Politics' influence on federal emergency management decisions being recognized

By Nicole Kimble - For the Times West Virginian

MORGANTOWN -- A little-known study by a West Virginia University professor on whether politics influences federal emergency management decisions is getting new attention across the country.

Dr. Russell Sobel first published his paper, "The Political Economy of FEMA Disaster Payments," in Economic Inquiry, a prominent economic journal, in July 2003, but only now, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and widespread criticism of FEMA, is his work earning him national attention.

His study, undertaken with the assistance of graduate student Tom Garrett, examined two questions: Do politically connected states receive more disaster relief money in times of crisis? Does the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) have political strings attached?

The answers now shed light on the nature of the federal emergency relief response that has received widespread criticism for slowness and inadequacy.

Sobel, a 37-year-old native of Charleston, S.C., has always been interested in how economics and politics intertwine in the world today.

"The power economics has is to give us insights into the way things really work," he said.

Sobel came to WVU in 1994, and teaches micro- and macroeconomics at the College of Business and Economics. He also oversees many doctoral dissertations at the college, which is how he met the graduate student who worked with him to research and publish his study on FEMA.

"This was a project that Tom Garrett, who graduated in 1998, and I began to work on after he completed his

dissertation," Sobel recalled. "I think we started working on it right as he was leaving."

FEMA was an independent agency that was joined with the Department of Homeland Security in 2003. Its primary purpose is to plan for disasters like Hurricane Katrina. The organization also provides relief -- such as money for shelters, food and supplies -- for the people in these areas.

Like all other governmental organizations, FEMA is governed by a committee in Congress that is responsible for its budgeting processes. This piqued Sobel's interest: If a state has a representative on this committee, will it receive a larger portion of the budget?

Turns out, it does.

"The agency's budget is critically dependent on pleasing these senators. We found that there was some favoritism on the states that were represented," Sobel said.

Sobel focused his study on two main aspects of FEMA: the process of actually declaring something a "disaster" and the allocation of FEMA funds. After a year of hard work and careful research, they discovered that politics can influence anything - even something as public as giving money to people who really need it.

One thing that the pair learned was that more disasters were declared during presidential election years. Only the president of the United States can officially declare an event a disaster, and then FEMA begins its process of allocating money for relief. A study of disaster declarations during the 1990s showed that the number of "disasters" doubled during the years when George Bush and Bill Clinton were running for reelection.

"You could say those were bad years for the weather," Sobel said with a laugh.

They also found out that presidents were more inclined to affirm a disaster in those states they lobbied the hardest during the election.

"It's a way for the president to deliver some support to states that are battleground states during an election," Sobel said.

While conducting his study, Sobel also looked at private relief organizations, such as the American Red Cross, and private insurance company claims, comparing their payouts to the amount FEMA gave to areas of need.

Sobel's study was mentioned in a New York Times story, but besides that, nobody paid much attention to the paper written by a West Virginia professor and a graduate student.

That is, until Hurricane Katrina struck. The backlash that occurred because of a lack of proper relief for the victims of Katrina hit FEMA and the government hard.

"The current situation with FEMA is no surprise to me at all," Garrett said.

"With Katrina, we saw the Red Cross and the Salvation Army ready to go, while FEMA still appeared to be several steps behind."

Their study was suddenly in the headlines.

It began with a column in the New York Times by Allen Krueger and quickly took off from there. On Sept. 15, Sobel and Garrett were featured on CNBC's "Closing Bell," and Sobel was also featured in a radio show in St. Louis, Mo.

"It was a bit scary (being on CNBC), but the nice thing about it is, as a researcher, you publish a lot of articles, but it's very rare that you do research that makes the headlines," Sobel said.

So what's next for him?

"I'm working right now with another faculty member to write an update," he said. "I want to see if we can use some of our economic tools and models to see why FEMA failed so badly in this case (Hurricane Katrina) and what we can do to reform it."

He believes that privatizing relief organizations likely will result in money going to the neediest areas.

"I'm absolutely thrilled," Sobel said. "It's really nice to be able to take your research and lend something to the public debate about what's going on. It's wonderful to get that level of recognition for myself and for the university."