Bill Overview
Title: Post-Fire Flooding and Debris Flow Act of 2022
Description: This bill makes changes to eligibility under the hazard mitigation grant program of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to include mitigating and preventing post-wildfire flooding and debris flow. Specifically, the bill requires the federal share of hazard mitigation assistance for mitigating and preventing post-wildfire flooding and debris flow to be not less than 75% of the cost (currently, the President may contribute up to 75% of the cost).
Sponsors: Rep. Huffman, Jared [D-CA-2]
Target Audience
Population: people living in areas prone to post-wildfire flooding and debris flow
Estimated Size: 10000000
- Wildfires are common in regions like the western United States, Australia, and parts of Europe, which are prone to dry conditions.
- Post-wildfire flooding and debris flows are particularly concerning in hilly or mountainous areas where vegetation has been removed by fire, leading to increased runoff and erosion.
- The FEMA hazard mitigation grant program primarily impacts U.S. residents, focusing on areas affected by recent wildfires.
- The target population includes communities and local governments dealing with the risk of post-wildfire flooding and debris flows.
- Globally, other countries experiencing similar wildfire conditions may have populations at risk of similar events, but this bill specifically applies to U.S. contexts.
Reasoning
- Given the specific nature of the policy, the impacted population will mainly reside in states with high wildfire risks like California, Oregon, and Colorado.
- The policy is restricted by budget and program reach; hence, only a subset of those affected regions may benefit directly initially.
- Impact assessment should consider both immediate beneficiaries, like those near recent burns and risk areas, and long-term effects as projects conclude over decades.
- Our interviews should reflect a mix of individuals directly benefiting and those indirectly or minimally impacted.
- Funding over 10 years suggests potential scaling-up, impacting more areas over time, even if year 1 sees limited spread.
Simulated Interviews
teacher (Santa Rosa, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful about the policy helping our community.
- Flooding after the fires has been as scary as the fires themselves.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
construction worker (Boulder, CO)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It sounds good for homeowners, I'm just not sure how it'll help renters like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
retired (Medford, OR)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We need this kind of support to feel safer year-round.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
environmental scientist (Redding, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could support both scientific efforts and community safety if integrated well.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
insurance agent (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this reducing risks, which should decrease insurance premiums over time.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
real estate agent (Miami, FL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think it'll affect us here in Miami, but it sounds important for others.
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 |
software engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's crucial for rural areas, but cities rely on broader frameworks as well.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
firefighter (Albuquerque, NM)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Safety measures post-fire are just as important as fighting active fires.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
freelance journalist (Portland, OR)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The awareness raised by such policies can lead to broader changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
unemployed (Las Vegas, NV)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It might help areas I aim to work in, making it easier to find a job there.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $205000000 (Low: $155000000, High: $255000000)
Year 3: $210000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $260000000)
Year 5: $220000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $270000000)
Year 10: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Key Considerations
- Costs largely depend on the incidence and severity of wildfires and subsequent debris flows.
- Beneficiaries are primarily communities in high-risk wildfire areas across several U.S. states.
- This increased federal contribution may induce more applications/proposals from states and local entities due to less fiscal burden on those entities.
- Operationally, FEMA may need to adjust staffing and resources to manage increased funding requests and deployment logistics.
- Future cost reductions in disaster recovery and rebuilding may indirectly result from this proactive mitigation funding.