It passed the house, despite being opposed by a majority of the Republican members (who are a majority of the house and could have prevented it from getting to the floor).
The Hill writes about the vote and discussed the division it revealed within the party. Some members of the leadership voted for it, some against. Those voting against were hoping to use the vote to force offsetting spending cuts elsewhere. Proposed across the board 1.63% cuts in all discretionary programs were voted down.
Votes on disaster relief tend to be non-partisan however, because no one knows whose district will need relief in the future. Some not-so-subtle threats were offered:
"Florida, good luck with no more hurricanes," Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.) shouted to any member who might oppose the bill. "California, congratulations, did you get rid of the Andreas Fault? The Mississippi's in a drought. Do you think you're not going to have a flood again?Conservatives mostly argued that the bill contained pork projects that were not directly related to storm damage. I can't right now find a comprehensive list though. A few posts below I linked to arguments that pork projects have traditionally been a way for bills to get sufficient support for passage.
"Who are you going to come to when you have these things? We need this, we need it now. Do the right thing, as we have always done for you."
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) issued a similar warning to members who oppose the bill.
"I hope that we can have an overwhelming bipartisan vote," she said. "I think that ideally… that would be the right thing to do.
"But as a practical matter, you just never know what mother nature may have in store for you in your region, and you would certainly want the embrace of the entire nation around you and your area, for your constituents, for your communities, for our country."
