Timing matters in politics, so what better time than during the recent heat wave to remind southern senators who do not like the North’s annual winter reliance on federal energy-assistance funds that their constituents depend on that same source for cooling? That reminder, however, is only the beginning of what changes must occur to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program to ensure its survival.

Sens. Susan Collins and Jack Reed, a Democrat from Rhode Island, repeatedly have tried to persuade colleagues to provide more money for LIHEAP. They have been successful at times but the feeling in the conservative Senate is clearly against a program that 47,000 Maine households relied on last winter for fuel oil and other heating sources.

The two senators last week pointed out to President Bush that nationally “searing temperatures, combined with record high electricity prices across the country, are putting many low-income families at risk for heat-related illnesses because they cannot afford the cost of electricity to cool their homes.”

They ask him to release LIHEAP’s remaining contingency funds to help with this and other health-related problems caused by the heat.

Six months in politics, however, is a long time, and though the two senators certainly will remind colleagues next winter of the help this summer, it might not mean enough to those ideologically opposed to government helping out in this situation. Ideologies, however, evolve as the distribution of funding changes, and that’s where sen-ators from the Northeast, as well as other strong supporters of LIHEAP, might best direct their attention next.

The funding formula for LIHEAP is broken into three tiers that, for the first $2 billion in funding, is based on the demographics of 1981. Growth in the South and West has greatly exceeded the Northeast since then, but in order for LIHEAP to help those regions equally, it would have to be funded at close to its authorized level of $5.1 billion. Northern senators have had little luck at persuading colleagues to increase funding to that level and yet have been understandably reluctant to allow any of their funding to be shifted to reflect the population changes.

Climate change will alter weather patterns in sometimes unpredictable ways, leaving the poor even less prepared to deal with harsh conditions and more in need of assistance. Communities can anticipate this, and states can help out, as Maine has through its weatherization program. But funding from the federal government also will be crucial.

Rather than clinging to the status quo and hoping the makeup of the Senate doesn’t shift for the worse, northern senators may find they can leverage more funding for their states by reconsidering the current formula and inviting more input from the South. The letter from Sens. Collins and Reed was a good way to begin this conversation.