Millions of dollars in federal relief have poured into the Maui disaster, and millions more will be needed.
U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz and Hawaiʻi's congressional delegation have been lobbying for continued federal support during this recovery phase.
Schatz joined The Conversation on Wednesday to discuss Maui's recovery, the latest Israel-Palestinian war, the search for the next U.S. House speaker, and the Red Hill fuel storage facility.
Interview highlights
On federal funding for the recovery efforts on Maui
The federal funding is going to be there. I think the most important thing is that the Disaster Relief Fund is the way that FEMA accesses resources to respond to any disaster, and it was running really low. It had between $2 billion and $3 billion when it needed something between $15 billion and $20 billion in order to deal with not just Maui, but all of the disasters across the country that have already occurred. Plus we're not through with hurricane season on the mainland. So we're anticipating additional expenses. So we got $16 billion in the last bill enacted into law and that means that the DRF has enough money for basically FEMA to do everything that it needs to do. So that's debris removal, that is the replacement of any public facility. So Lāhainā Harbor, King Kamehameha III Elementary School, and a bunch of other public facilities can be rebuilt, and that's already funded.
The only thing remaining for Congress to do is to get something called Community Development Block Grants for Disaster Recovery. That happens a little later because what happens is, essentially the state, the county, and FEMA and others try to figure out of all the money coming in, and of all the needs on Maui, what are the remaining unmet needs. So that's just a big formula that HUD (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) does. And then once they spit out that number, then that becomes the amount of money that I have to go and chase in the appropriations process. That's really four to six months from now. But that'll be money that goes to both the state and the county to meet any unmet needs.
But in the short run, we've got what we need for FEMA to be operating. That doesn't mean that people have what they need because it was a terrible catastrophe, and there are going to be inefficiencies and inequities and glitches. There are people from the freely associated states who may not be eligible for FEMA assistance. There may be undocumented people. There may be people who have difficulty navigating the process. But right now, whatever challenges we have, at least in the short run, are not going to be for lack of federal funding.
On residents' initial suspicions about FEMA and federal relief
Part of the problem is that, of course, you don't want anyone to walk up and be able to say, "Please cut me a check, I'm a victim." You need to establish some proof of that. The problem is most people's personal possessions were incinerated. And so there are alternative means of proving that you're a victim, and people did avail themselves of it. But if you can imagine walking in after losing everything and potentially losing loved ones, and then a civil servant from the continental United States says, "Where's your ID?" And it just didn't sit right with people, but I think we've gotten through that period of time. And now, the work that FEMA is doing on the ground is sort of the proof in the pudding. Lots of people, including stuff on the internet that caused a little bit of paranoia, were suspicious of FEMA, but the work they do, the resources they provide — I think they've done an excellent job.
On defueling the military's Red Hill fuel storage facility, starting Oct. 16
I kind of don't want to be triumphant about it because they still have to execute on this. And I think we have learned through tough, lived experience that we ought not to trust the Navy to execute well, and we ought to be vigilant — I think both at the community level and in my role as an appropriator and someone who has oversight responsibilities over the Department of Defense. But this is good news. Monday, they're going to actually do it, they're going to defuel Red Hill. It'll take a couple of months. And of course, there will be residual fuel in some of the tanks, in some of the pipes, in something they call "sumps." But the bottom line is, they're doing the thing that was demanded of them and they are doing it in concert with the EPA and the DOH, and they're gonna be well supervised and transparent about it. So again, I don't want to be triumphant because something tragic already happened in order for us to get to this point. But this is a good news moment, where we're finally doing the thing that, in a lot of ways, people viewed the DoD as never, ever willing to do in the end. But it's happening.
This is still dangerous work. It's highly technical, and so we want them to succeed 100%.
We have to make sure that they understand that they are not off the hook until all the fuel is gone, including residual fuel, because this first batch which may be well north of 95% of the fuel is sort of the easy part. The hard part is going to be the stubborn portions of fuel that didn't come out through the (gravity) draining. So they got to do that. And then I want to make sure that they continuously monitor and stay responsible for the quality of the groundwater in adjacent areas. That doesn't mean if there's ever a groundwater quality problem, that it's the Navy's responsibility. But to the extent that there's petroleum product, it is their responsibility. And so we don't want them to kind of wash their hands of this problem and say, "Hey, congratulations to us, we drained it, and now we're done." This could be an ongoing pollution threat, and it has to be monitored as such.
On the Israeli-Palestinian war
I'm devastated at what's happening in Israel. I'm disgusted. I'm appalled. I'm sad. I'm anxious. We've got many Americans dead. We don't know the number of United States hostages. And so our prayers are with the families and our efforts ought to be in total focus on freeing those hostages. Israel obviously has a right to defend itself and I know will. But these were brutal attacks. And I think the one thing that I'd like to convey to everybody, whether you consider yourself a pro-Palestinian activist, or an Israel hawk, or anywhere else in between, there is never, ever any justification for slaughtering innocent people. There is never, ever any justification for murdering people who are at a music festival. And so Hamas is against peace, and they are against Palestinian rights. And so I think we need to make a distinction between this terrorist organization and the people who live in Gaza and the West Bank. But I am, you know, I'm an American Jew. I was bar mitzvahed at the Temple Emanu-El and this one, this one is personal for me. I've been a critic of the Netanyahu government over the many, many years. But that does not cause me to waver in my conviction that what happened was abhorrent and that this country, the State of Israel, has every right, has a perfect right as we would to defend itself.
On the GOP's search for a new House speaker
It's chaos. I mean, right now, my understanding is Steve Scalise has the majority support within the Republican conference, but he doesn't quite have everybody. And so we're kind of stuck where we were with the (Kevin) McCarthy situation. I do think Scalise is, you know, a more skillful legislator than the other people who are being contemplated. He's a hardcore conservative, but he is a pragmatist. And so, you know, I'm hoping that if there is a new speaker that we can kind of navigate through this. We're going to need to do a supplemental appropriations bill, likely for Ukraine and Israel. And we're gonna need to do so on a bipartisan basis. Look, there's no way to pass any spending bill, any funding bill, or to even keep the government open without bipartisan support because the House is run by Republicans, the Senate is run by Democrats, and the presidency is controlled by the Democrats. And so you just need a bipartisan deal. And I think the difficulty with Kevin McCarthy is that he sort of promised that he wouldn't do that. And that's an impossible promise to keep because in the end, whatever you do on a partisan basis is going to be rejected by a Democratic Senate. So at some point, you have to sit down and tell your base, "Look, I'm gonna negotiate as hard as I can but the nature of politics is that it requires compromise."
This interview aired on The Conversation on Oct. 11, 2023. The Conversation airs weekdays at 11 a.m. on HPR-1. Sophia McCullough adapted this interview for the web.
