Comments (add 5) The Government Accountability Office (GAO),  The GAO is a government organization, so it has a different point of view than other organizations may have. Response one –PADM-03 I choose to look into Brookings from the list that was provided in this week’s forum. Each year Brookings puts out an annual report showing the work that was done, this highlights the impact on world. This lets the donors know where monies has gone and shows the commitment they have to the cause they have. According to the site Brookings has just launched David M. Rubenstien Fellowship Program, this to help with diversity and scholarly and working with the next generation of those who are creative for the United States and around the world. The reason why one could trust this company is it is a nonprofit. Some of the things they stand for is diversity, different perspectives, and different experience and this helps with public policy research. They are working with more than 300 scholar and research topic like foreign affairs, economic, governance, metropolitan policy and developments. This company is governed by a board of trustees and these people come from many different backgrounds as well, this stays within their ideals of what they stand for. This company is based out Washington, DC and the mission they want to achieve is to always conduct research that is in-depth and correct and help with solving problems that are issues for society for a local level, state, federal, and global. These are the types of companies that need to be around to help with social issues that are at the forefront of what people are talking about on a daily basis. This is a good company that one can trust. Jason Resources: https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/federal-emergency-management-agency-floods-failures-federalism https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-15-178 https://www.brookings.edu/about-us/ Response two PADM-03 Think tanks are utilized to assist policymakers, as well as citizens, by offering various research, analysis, and point of views about certain policy issues. Once policy makers have a better understanding about the problems at hand, they can create more well-informed solutions. Think tanks also give a large variety of opinions and ideologies about a particular subject, which could help examine an issue from multiple angles (Keavney, 2018). The additional Think Tank I used in my analysis this week is The Heritage Foundation. Here is the link to their discussion on FEMA: https://www.heritage.org/homeland-security/commentary/why-fema-must-be-reformed-disaster-strikes The Heritage Foundation is a fairly conservative think tank influenced by the conservative agenda, as well as political actors in the form of conservative lawmakers, public officials, and legislatures. In fact, President Donald Trump has, and continues, to use The Heritage Foundation as a resource for his policy recommendations (The Heritage Foundation). Inserra’s (2017) recommendations ...

1. Comments (add 5) The Government Accountability Office
(GAO), The GAO is a government organization, so it has a
different point of view than other organizations may have.
Response one –PADM-03
I choose to look into Brookings from the list that was provided
in this week’s forum. Each year Brookings puts out an annual
report showing the work that was done, this highlights the
impact on world. This lets the donors know where monies has
gone and shows the commitment they have to the cause they
have.
According to the site Brookings has just launched David M.
Rubenstien Fellowship Program, this to help with diversity and
scholarly and working with the next generation of those who are
creative for the United States and around the world.
The reason why one could trust this company is it is a nonprofit.
Some of the things they stand for is diversity, different
perspectives, and different experience and this helps with public
policy research. They are working with more than 300 scholar
and research topic like foreign affairs, economic, governance,
metropolitan policy and developments.
This company is governed by a board of trustees and these
people come from many different backgrounds as well, this
stays within their ideals of what they stand for.
This company is based out Washington, DC and the mission
they want to achieve is to always conduct research that is in-
depth and correct and help with solving problems that are issues
for society for a local level, state, federal, and global.
These are the types of companies that need to be around to help
with social issues that are at the forefront of what people are
talking about on a daily basis.
This is a good company that one can trust.
Jason
Resources:

2. https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/federal-
emergency-management-agency-floods-failures-federalism
https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-15-178
https://www.brookings.edu/about-us/
Response two PADM-03
Think tanks are utilized to assist policymakers, as well as
citizens, by offering various research, analysis, and point of
views about certain policy issues. Once policy makers have a
better understanding about the problems at hand, they can create
more well-informed solutions. Think tanks also give a large
variety of opinions and ideologies about a particular subject,
which could help examine an issue from multiple angles
(Keavney, 2018).
The additional Think Tank I used in my analysis this week is
The Heritage Foundation. Here is the link to their discussion on
FEMA: https://www.heritage.org/homeland-
security/commentary/why-fema-must-be-reformed-disaster-
strikes
The Heritage Foundation is a fairly conservative think tank
influenced by the conservative agenda, as well as political
actors in the form of conservative lawmakers, public officials,
and legislatures. In fact, President Donald Trump has, and
continues, to use The Heritage Foundation as a resource for his
policy recommendations (The Heritage Foundation). Inserra’s
(2017) recommendations for FEMA were very similar to those
of Cato’s. They believe that FEMA’s excessive involvement in
small-scale disasters is unnecessary and inefficient. Due to its
conservative framework, I would expect to see somewhat of a
bias from this think tank. Keeping that in mind, Inserra’s (2017)
point of view does show a conservative bias for less government
involvement. Although, in addition to his argument for less
federally funded aid for disaster relief, he incorporated
alternative solutions, such as distributing funding on scale of
disaster severity or raising the minimum-dollar threshold for
disaster declarations (Inserra, 2017).
The Cato think tank’s agenda is influenced by a libertarian

3. point of view, and bases its work on the American
Revolutionary principles of limited government involvement,
individual liberty, free markets, and peace. Although Cato is a
liberal think tank, they do pride themselves on delivering non-
partisan research and receives a majority of their funding from
individual contributors. This allows them the freedom to report
on issues in a way that is as unbiased as possible (Cato
Institute). However, in this week’s report, they tend to highlight
the failures rather than the successes of FEMA. Edwards (2014)
stated that due to the abundance of paperwork and their
laborious chain of command, government funded disaster relief
is a waste of tax-payer dollars. While there was some truth
behind their argument, I felt that their general bias against
federal government intervention certainly showed in this article.
Edwards (2014) argues that the local and state government
bodies should have sole responsibility over disaster relief and
aid for their surrounding areas.
The U.S Government Accountability Office is also an
independent and nonpartisan agency, but is one that is
influenced by the political actors in Congress. Their mission is
to report on issues at the request of congressional committees,
and to help ensure the transparency and accountability of the
federal government for the betterment of the United States
citizens (U.S. Government Accountability Office). Although the
U.S GAO claims to be a non-partisan agency, there is most
certainly influence coming from congressional representatives.
As Congress is now in the hands of the Republican party, there
is a risk of bias in their reporting. In their report on the
implementation of the Biggert-Waters Act, they claimed that
FEMA faced many challenges including a lack of resources,
legislation that was much too intricate, and financial strain.
This report was much different than the previous two in that it
gave insight about the obstacles that FEMA has had to
overcome prior to, and after, the implementation of the act (U.S
GAO). I thought that it was a fair assessment of the successes
and failures of the agency, and was the most unbiased report of

4. the three.
References
Cato Institute. (1970, January 18). Retrieved January 18, 2018,
from https://www.cato.org/about
Edwards, Chris. (2014, November 18). The Federal Emergency
Management Agency: Floods, Failures, and Federalism.
Retrieved January 18, 2018,
from https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/federal-
emergency-management-agency-floods-failures-federalism
Inserra, David. (2017). Why FEMA Must Be Reformed Before
Disaster Strikes. Retrieved January 18, 2018,
from https://www.heritage.org/homeland-
security/commentary/why-fema-must-be-reformed-disaster-
strikes.
Keavney, Elizabeth. (2018). PADM530 Public Policy. Lesson
Three: Policy Analysis. American Public University System.
January, 18, 2018.
The Heritage Foundation. (n.d.). Retrieved January 18, 2018,
from https://www.heritage.org/
U.S GAO. (2015, February). FLOOD INSURANCE: Status of
FEMA's Implementation of the Biggert-Waters Act, as
Amended. Report to the Ranking Member, Committee on
Financial Services, House of Representatives, Pages 1-61.
Retrieved January 18, 2018.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (n.d.). Retrieved
January 18, 2018, from https://www.gao.gov/
Response Three PADM-03
While reading the three differing policy analyses about FEMA
this week, I noticed that I had an easier time identifying the
biases and viewpoints of each think tank than I did previously
when conducting my own research for policy analysis. I often
pull from multiple sources on a specific topic when doing
research, but I found that reading for bias and the organization’s

5. overall agenda specifically, led me to think about the presented
facts and their context more deeply than I would otherwise.
The first report I read came from the CATO institute and was
written by Chris Edwards. The CATO institute is a libertarian
branded think tank “dedicated to the principles of individual
liberty, limited government, free markets and peace. Its scholars
and analysts conduct independent, nonpartisan research on a
wide range of policy issues” (CATO Institute website, 2018).
Both the information volunteered by Edwards, who runs a
website dedicated to reducing the size of the federal
government, and the emphasis in the article itself, strongly
indicate adherence to Libertarian policy and principles. The
CATO website mission statement quoted above mentions that
members and researchers of CATO conduct nonpartisan
research, yet the mission statement of the institute itself closely
resembles the description of libertarian party policy.
This perception of a libertarian agenda is supported by the
FEMA critiques found in the CATO institute report, The Federal
Emergency Management Agency: Floods, Failures, and
Federalism. The main FEMA critiques identified are concerns
for the increasing role of the federal government in disaster
intervention and an emphasis on the responsibility of state and
private organizations to fund disaster relief by state. The
author cites growing federal intervention as a misuse of the
Stafford Act “the federal role is still supposed to be very
limited under current law. Under the 1988 Stafford Act, the
federal government is supposed to get involved in disasters only
if they are of “such severity and magnitude that effective
response is beyond the capabilities of the state and the affected
local governments” (Edwards, 2014). Edwards also claims that
government intervention in relief efforts was much more limited
prior to the 1950s and that federal involvement often leads to
redundancy, mismanagement of funds, disorganization and the
blocking of other relief efforts from outside agencies. The
recommendations for FEMA in the report consist of the

6. defunding of FEMA by cutting federal aid programs, allowing
national flood insurance management to be privatized, and
empowering states to form coordinate their own disaster relief
efforts (Edwards, 2014).
In comparison to the CATO institute FEMA report, the policy
analysis conducted by the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) focuses on the implementation of the Biggert-Waters
act. GAO functions as an independent, government auditing
agency who derives its duties and authority from the Budget and
Accounting Act. Information from the GAO website lists its
mission statement as supporting Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the
performance and accountability of the federal government for
the benefit of the American people by providing Congress with
timely information that is objective, fact-based, non-partisan,
non-ideological, fair, and balanced (GAO Mission statement,
2018). Both GAO and CATO use the terms non-partisan and
fact-based in the descriptions of their policy analysis efforts,
however the CATO report reads as having a clear agenda to
reduce the size of government, starting with FEMA. The GAO
report identifies both positive and negative actions of FEMA in
a far more balanced manner. In reference to the discussion of
the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP): “FEMA has
taken some action on an affordability study that the two laws
require, but data challenges have delayed progress. The study is
required to analyze the impact of eliminating all discounted
NFIP premiums, but FEMA cannot identify all properties that
are receiving the discounts” (GAO, 2015). The GAO report
does state that FEMA is considered to be “high risk” by the
agency, but it provides clear reasoning for the decision. GAO
cites the circumstances under with FEMA operates, such as
ongoing financial and management challenges, the 2005 and
2012 hurricanes which required FEMA to borrow funds from the
Department of the Treasury, and its ongoing debt exposure as
reasons for its inability to fully implement the Biggert-Waters

7. Act (GAO, 2015). GAO cites realistic agency structural
problems, but does not attack the fact that FEMA itself exists as
the CATO report does. GAO also distinguishes itself from
CATO by providing their auditing and research methods, the
CATO report reads more like an Op Ed. The GAO
recommendations made to Congress for FEMA implementation
are focused on maintaining greater oversight of contractor run
programs, reforming processes for determining full-risk flood
insurance rates and collecting accurate property data, and
completion of an affordability study, versus the CATO
recommendation to defund FEMA.
Looking at a third perspective, the Center for Progressive
Reform (CPR), a liberal think tank, released a report in 2005
following Hurricane Katrina that critiqued federal emergency
management systems and the role they played in prolonging the
devastation. Like the CATO report, CPR uses more emotionally
charged language in its report. It also appeals to more
progressive values like government responsibility to citizens
and emphasizing that poorer and more disenfranchised
populations are often more vulnerable to natural disasters and
require government assistance to recover. CPR’s report,
Unnatural Disaster, also identifies bureaucratic issues affecting
FEMA. Namely, that FEMA became incorporated into the
Department of Homeland Security, resulting in a shift in
priorities away from planning for natural disasters and toward
counterterrorism measures (CPR, 2005). The CPR report also
decries the application of decentralization and privatization to
FEMA relief planning, claiming that the responsibilities of
providing food and water should fall to faith based charities.
This is a stark contrast to both other reports. The CATO report
characterizes FEMA as a wasteful and redundant program that
should be defunded, the GAO evaluated FEMA as an agency
taking steps in the right direction but still in need of
management, fiscal, and policy reforms, and the CPR portrays
FEMA as being at the mercy of the limited funding and

8. authority. All three perspectives differ wildly and two of the
three also offer a clearly political viewpoint of government
involvement and responsibilities.
References:
Office, U. G. (2015, February 19). Flood Insurance: Status of
FEMA's Implementation of the Biggert-Waters Act, as
Amended. Retrieved January 16, 2018,
from https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-15-178
Chris Edwards. (2014, November 18). The Federal Emergency
Management Agency: Floods, Failures, and Federalism.
Retrieved January 16, 2018,
from https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/federal-
emergency-management-agency-floods-failures-federalism
Center for Progressive Reform (2005, September) An Unnatural
Disaster: The Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Retrieved
January 16, 2018, from
http://www.progressivereform.org/articles/Unnatural_Disaster_5
12.pdf
About the Agency. (n.d.). Retrieved January 16, 2018,
from https://www.fema.gov/about-agency