Democrats: Tsunami shows why GOP shouldn’t cut NOAA

Democrats in both the House and Senate pointed to the powerful earthquake and resulting tsunami that struck off the coast of Japan on Friday as evidence of the importance of protecting the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s budget from GOP spending cuts.

“Earthquakes and all weather events happen anywhere, anytime putting
everyone at risk. Congress must heed this cruel wakeup call and stop
proposed cuts to essential NOAA prediction programs that would endanger
lives,” Senate Commerce Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) said in a statement. 

“We must push to make the smart investments in our greatest minds and resources at NOAA so that we can better predict severe weather events and be prepared for the worst.”

NOAA is the federal agency responsible for predicting weather and ocean phenomena, as well as earthquake and tsunami predictions and response capabilities. Republicans have targeted the agency’s budget along with the Environmental Protection Agency’s to reduce the national deficit.

At a Thursday hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology to discuss NOAA’s fiscal 2012 budget request, ranking member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas) defended the agency’s funding as crucial to the nation’s preparation for natural disasters.

“At the least we must ask ourselves whether the very negligible effect these cuts will have on the national deficit warrants the devastation it will cause to our core scientific programs, their critical workforce and infrastructure, and their capacity to address natural disasters and protect public health and the environment,” Johnson said.

“Americans want us to be fiscally responsible. But if they can’t breathe clean air and drink clean water, or have services that help communities and industries prepare for harsh weather and natural disaster, what does that mean? “

When asked by Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.) how the proposed cuts would affect the agency, NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco said the result would be “devastating.”

“It is likely to be very devastating to our ability to continue to provide the kind of weather information that Americans depend upon to save lives and save property. There would be significant hits throughout NOAA’s programs,” Lubchenco said.