Bill Overview
Title: Expediting Disaster Recovery Act
Description: This bill authorizes the President, after the declaration of a major disaster, to direct the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to provide to the state assistance necessary for meeting unmet needs as a result of such disaster. The President may provide financial assistance or direct assistance to individuals or households to construct permanent or semi-permanent housing in insular areas outside the continental United States and in other locations if the President considers it a cost effective alternative to other housing solutions. The Government Accountability Office must conduct a review on the fiscal controls by states that receive funds under provisions pertaining to public assistance grant program eligibility and oversight for debris removal. The President may not impose additional income criteria on a potential grant recipient who has accepted a qualified disaster loan in determining eligibility for duplications of benefit relief.
Sponsors: Rep. Graves, Garret [R-LA-6]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by major disasters globally
Estimated Size: 10000000
- The bill is centered on providing post-disaster assistance, which will impact individuals and households affected by major disasters, particularly natural disasters such as hurricanes, earthquakes, and floods.
- The focused category includes those residing in insular areas outside of the continental US who may require housing assistance, as mentioned in the bill text.
- The bill also impacts individuals and households in the broader US by streamlining processes to meet unmet needs after disasters, implying a faster and potentially more comprehensive response to disasters affecting larger populations across the US.
- The removal of additional income criteria for grant recipients means that more individuals who have taken disaster loans could qualify for additional support, thereby expanding the number of potential beneficiaries.
- Data from the Congressional Research Service and FEMA indicate that millions are affected by major disasters annually, especially with increased frequency of extreme weather events.
- In the US, an average of 17.6 disasters were declared annually during the 2000s, affecting hundreds of thousands to millions of people each year.
Reasoning
- The policy is primarily aimed at providing immediate and efficient disaster recovery assistance, which will likely impact individuals in disaster-prone areas, including those outside the continental US, more than those in less vulnerable regions.
- Given the financial constraints, the policy will prioritize the most severe cases where immediate shelter or housing aid is necessary, such as in hurricanes or floods where homes are destroyed.
- Not everyone affected by disasters may qualify, as the assistance is for unmet needs where other aid has not fully covered the loss. This can shed light on varying levels of impact, with those having major unmet needs seeing considerable improvements in wellbeing.
- People in insular areas outside the continental US will likely see a high impact due to the historically slower recovery times these areas face, benefiting from the policy's direct housing aid provisions.
- Others may see no impact if they have satisfactory resources from regular insurance coverage or pre-existing support structures.
- Considering the budget constraints, assistance will likely be concentrated in a few high-impact areas but could address significant unmet needs there, raising wellbeing distinctly if policy benefits are optimized to quickly restore housing and essential services after a disaster.
Simulated Interviews
Teacher (Miami, Florida)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy sounds promising, especially after experiencing the slow recovery following Hurricane Ian.
- More efficient and direct assistance would make a huge difference next time around.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Construction Worker (San Juan, Puerto Rico)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this means faster help in case of the next hurricane.
- Construction jobs could increase if more permanent housing aid is offered.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired (Houston, Texas)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any improvement to disaster response is better than what we had last time.
- I'm concerned about reaching all those in need, especially the elderly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Small Business Owner (New Orleans, Louisiana)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Very hopeful that quicker recovery means quicker economic recovery as well.
- Still cautious about the overall reach of these policies to small businesses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, California)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- May not affect me directly, but it eases concerns for bigger quakes.
- Glad for any policy that speeds assistance to those who need it most.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Emergency Responder (Tampa, Florida)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything that can speed up recovery is a huge positive.
- Will the policy address coordination issues effectively?
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Student (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Good to know there's a plan for serious natural disasters, especially in high-risk areas.
- I'm optimistic but concerned about long-term sustainability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Nurse (Charlotte, North Carolina)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Speeding up housing recovery would reduce health-related issues post-disaster.
- Unsure about the impact on medical facilities similar to housing aid.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Tourism Manager (Hawaii)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hoping for support that brings tourists back sooner post-disaster.
- Unsure how much the policy will directly benefit the tourism industry.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Fisherman (Alaska)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy's impact seems indirect, focused more on direct housing rather than environmental recovery.
- Wary of long-term commitment to these areas.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3000000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $4000000000)
Year 2: $3100000000 (Low: $2100000000, High: $4100000000)
Year 3: $3150000000 (Low: $2200000000, High: $4200000000)
Year 5: $3200000000 (Low: $2250000000, High: $4300000000)
Year 10: $3500000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $5000000000)
Year 100: $6000000000 (Low: $4000000000, High: $8000000000)
Key Considerations
- The financial impact details heavily depend on the frequency and severity of future disasters, which are unpredictable.
- Funding the program could require reallocating budgetary resources or running a higher deficit, impacting long-term fiscal health.
- The enhanced eligibility for relief without additional income criteria could significantly increase program uptake.