Ron Amundson’s Political Blog

Last night, volcano monitoring was portrayed in a negative light as part of the stimulus bill. In some ways, I must admit a good point was made, ie, its a long term investment, and short of preventing brain drain at USGS, it doesn’t immediately stimulate the economy. Same with hurricane monitoring, tornado research, or even rebuilding the levi system in Louisiana.

Ie, one could make the argument not to spend, and let the insurance companies and the free market take care of it on their own. While it might mean that the vast majority of individuals and companies in such areas would be unable to procure affordable insurance, or perhaps not at all, that is their problem, they chose to establish where to set roots. Or perhaps it would mean insurance companies would fail left and right, as investors would freak if policies could not be immediately canceled. What if their was a massive exodus of people and companies from the affected areas? Would that affect the economy over all as a boost or a drain? Is allowing them to stay a stimulus or a moral hazard? From an overall financial pov only, its not such an easy call. From a moral pov, I think the answer is pretty easy, which makes me wonder why Gov Jindahl chose it as a topic, when so many others, which are not related to his state are available.

Now, one could make the argument that such spending, being it is a long term investment doesn’t belong in the stimulus bill, just as with many other programs. The thing is with disasters, they are unpredictable, the experts are few, and brain drain is a valid concern. Lets say it was left out to be dealt with later… with appropriations, who knows, perhaps it could be many months. Then throw in political budget shifting, funding might be available, or might have so many political ramifications added in, the whole program gets watered down. Then add in the potential USGS staff reductions, and its indeed possible, the US would get a lot less bang for the buck than doing it now. Or worst case, the delay results in a gap where a disaster occurs, and much loss of life and property occurs, thus costing a ton more, both financially, as well as politically and morally. In the perfect world, by all means such would be in appropriations, but the world is not perfect, and govt far less so.

I think the right call was made to include such funding. Stimulus needs to be part short term, and part long term. Disaster planning actually does quite well in both sectors.