Bill Overview
Title: Small State and Rural Rescue Act
Description: This bill addresses requests for, and other matters pertaining to, disaster assistance provided through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), with a focus on small states and rural communities. The bill expands the duties of FEMA's Small State and Rural Advocate to include assistance for states in the collection and presentation of material in the disaster or emergency declaration request relevant to demonstrate severe localized impacts within the state for a specific incident. Additionally, the Government Accountability Office must review FEMA's implementation of its final rule regarding factors considered when evaluating a governor's request for a major disaster declaration. In particular, the review must focus on requests for a major disaster declaration authorizing individual assistance.
Sponsors: Rep. Katko, John [R-NY-24]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals living in small states and rural communities
Estimated Size: 70000000
- The bill focuses on disaster assistance through FEMA, which is a national agency, meaning it would potentially affect citizens across the United States.
- It is specifically targeted toward small states and rural communities, suggesting a specific focus on less populated areas that may not have the same resources as larger urban areas.
- The bill mentions changes that would assist in the process of gathering and presenting the necessary documentation for disaster or emergency declaration requests, implying an impact on local governments or authorities in these areas.
- The global estimate considers similar rural or small state populations globally that may benefit indirectly through shared knowledge or similar policy implementations.
Reasoning
- The Small State and Rural Rescue Act is designed to assist communities that may not typically receive large amounts of federal disaster aid due to their smaller size or rural nature. This means that the direct impact of this policy could vary widely among different population groups, with rural and smaller state residents more likely to benefit.
- Given the budget constraints and the wide dispersion of potentially affected individuals, the policy's impact might initially appear marginal on a per-capita basis, but could be significant in specific incidents requiring disaster relief.
- Community leaders, local government officials, and the residents of small states and rural areas are most likely to perceive the greatest benefit because the procedural improvements aim to streamline aid requests, making it easier to secure federal assistance during disasters.
- It's important to include voices of both those likely and unlikely to be impacted by the policy to understand its full range of effects.
Simulated Interviews
Community Organizer (Vermont)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy is a step in the right direction. Our community often struggles to get attention when disasters strike.
- There's always red tape, and anything that helps streamline aid is welcome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Farmer (Texas)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will help us get the support we need faster when floods hit.
- It should make a big difference, especially in the way we can now present our case for aid.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Tech Worker (California)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Doesn't really impact me, as my area is pretty well-resourced for disasters.
- I can see this being beneficial for smaller communities though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired Miner (West Virginia)
Age: 61 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Living in a rural area, we've often needed help but struggle to get it as fast as we should.
- This policy could help get aid quicker, benefiting our small community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Hotel Owner (Montana)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will likely help us recover faster after disasters, ensuring businesses like mine can bounce back.
- It means less hassle dealing with red tape.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Teacher (Kentucky)
Age: 72 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having seen the devastation tornadoes can cause, any policy that speeds up aid can save lives.
- This will be particularly beneficial for our small community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Finance Analyst (New York City)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy doesn't have much effect on me, as we have strong disaster response infrastructure.
- Seems like it would help smaller, less prepared communities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Local Government Employee (North Dakota)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is going to allow us to present stronger cases quicker, securing aid when harsh winters cause issues.
- The policy will lighten the load on our small office, ultimately benefiting residents.
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 | 5 |
Tour Operator (Alaska)
Age: 47 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Quicker disaster relief means down times post-disaster might reduce, helping my business recover faster.
- The improvements in efficiency are critical for small businesses like mine.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Agricultural Consultant (Kansas)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is crucial for ensuring that we can maintain agriculture and business continuity during times of crisis.
- This should help farmers get back on their feet more swiftly after storms.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $62000000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $44000000, High: $64000000)
Year 5: $58000000 (Low: $48000000, High: $68000000)
Year 10: $64000000 (Low: $54000000, High: $74000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $110000000)
Key Considerations
- The impact of the bill is predominantly administrative within FEMA, focusing on procedural and operational improvements rather than direct aid distribution.
- There are anticipated increased costs associated with scaling FEMA's operations to meet new legislative requirements.
- Limited projected savings as improved efficiencies are challenging to quantify and only demonstrable post-implementation.