By Sean Ruppert
Staff Writer, The Daily Athenaeum
Two West Virginia University professors have been gaining notoriety and media attention for their opposition to the Federal Emergency Management Agency and its response to natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina.
Russell Sobel and Peter Leeson of the College of Business and Economics have collaborated on several articles, the latest entitled "Weathering Corruption," that takes a highly critical look at FEMA's response to Katrina as well as the organization itself.
The pair contends that the federal agency is inefficient in its handling of emergency situations and that the windfall of cash that flows through FEMA to a disaster area increases the likelihood of political corruption.
The pair marked the one-year anniversary of Katrina's landfall in Louisiana Tuesday by speaking in Washington, D.C., about their ideas. Sobel recently spoke on the subject at the National Press Club, which was aired on CSPAN-2.
Several news stories about their findings have also appeared in The New York Times, Washington Post and Christian Science Monitor.
"We are happy that we can bring attention not only to our ideas, but to WVU as a school," Sobel said. "We are going to continue to make waves."
Sobel and Leeson have stated that they believe every dollar per capita of federal relief aid raises corruption l evels 2 1/2 percent in the given area.
To determine this, they looked at states that received large amounts of federal disaster aid such as Florida and Louisiana and the amount of convictions of government employees on corruption charges.
They then compared this to the rate of corruption charges in states not receiving much federal disaster aid such as Utah and Arizona, and found that the amount of corruption in the states receiving aid was much higher.
"The key question becomes, 'Why does government response fail so horribly in these disaster areas?'" Leeson said. "FEMA spending is politically manipulated. Instead of resources going to the areas that need it the most, they go to where a politically important figure wants them to go. They go to a member of the FEMA oversight committee's home state."
The pair believes that the entire FEMA agency should be eliminated and disaster relief left to private originations such as the American Red Cross and others who they feel would be more efficient, economical and effective in aiding victims.
They also believe that the government should instead focus on rebuilding roads and policing the area to keep it safe from the looting and rioting seen in the aftermath of Katrina.
Sobel sighted the George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton partnership to raise money for tsunami relief as an example of how a private entity can provide meaningful aid in a natural disaster situation.
"FEMA has only been around for about 20 years or so. You don't have to go very far back in American history to see how we got along without it," Sobel said. "The federal government has allocated millions of dollars to Louisiana, but the truth is that people are never as careful with other people's money as they are with their own. Local officials are in charge of disbursing federal money, and they just aren't as careful and efficient with it."
Though garnering some attention, Sobel and Leeson's ideas are not popular with everyone. FEMA officials stand by their system and their response to Katrina.
"Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but when you are dealing with tax payer money, you are going to need to have someone act as a steward of those funds," said Wali Armstead, FEMA's deputy press secretary for Gulf Coast recovery. "The system we have in place doesn't release funds until a plan with a dollar amount is seen and approved. We have checks and balances, and we are working to improve our response with every disaster."

sean.ruppert@mail.wvu.edu