Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8300

Bill Overview

Title: Empowering Resilient Local Communities Act

Description: This bill addresses issues involving extreme temperature and resilience, as well as impacts on underserved communities. Specifically, the bill directs the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to issue guidance related to extreme temperature events and resilience goals. It requires hazard mitigation plans to address resilience and disparate impacts on underserved communities. The Government Accountability Office must evaluate and issue to Congress and FEMA a report regarding the impacts of wildfire smoke and poor indoor air quality, the challenges posed to FEMA in addressing wildfire smoke and indoor air quality, and recommendations for FEMA to better provide assistance to communities and individuals in dealing with wildfire smoke and indoor air quality. FEMA must submit to Congress a report regarding the challenges posed by its requirements for declaring an incident or determining the cost effectiveness of mitigation activities and specifically how such requirements may disproportionately burden small impoverished communities, or specific vulnerable populations within communities.

Sponsors: Rep. Blumenauer, Earl [D-OR-3]

Target Audience

Population: people affected by extreme temperature events, underserved communities, and populations at risk from wildfires and poor air quality

Estimated Size: 150000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Elementary School Teacher (Phoenix, Arizona)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I worry about my kids and students during the summer months when the temperature rises.
  • Better air conditioning in schools and community centers during heatwaves would really help.

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 7 4
Year 10 6 4
Year 20 5 3

Volunteer Firefighter (Redding, California)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Our area sees a lot of wildfires. It's tough on the lungs and health of everyone around here.
  • We need better resources to deal with the smoke and clean air initiatives.

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 4
Year 10 7 4
Year 20 6 3

Nurse (Miami, Florida)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The heat is unbearable at times and leads to a lot of emergency cases.
  • Any policy that helps manage heat effects would help us greatly in healthcare.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 6 4
Year 20 5 4

Retired (Santa Fe, New Mexico)

Age: 60 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I live on a limited income, and air quality here can get really bad during wildfires.
  • The policy could help vulnerable people like me dealing with smoke without much financial means.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 4
Year 5 6 3
Year 10 6 3
Year 20 5 2

Warehouse Worker (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Working conditions can get tough during heatwaves.
  • Policy can help bring about better workplace guidelines for extreme temperatures.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 5 4
Year 20 4 3

Environmental Scientist (Houston, Texas)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Houston faces serious flooding issues, so extreme weather planning is crucial.
  • The policy could help better integrate local knowledge into FEMA's plans.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 5

College Student (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 22 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's hard to breathe during wildfire season, with poor air quality everywhere.
  • FEMA’s support in addressing air quality issues would be a huge help.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 6 4
Year 20 6 3

Community Organizer (New York, New York)

Age: 56 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could really address the housing and community issues we face, especially during heatwaves.
  • We need more robust plans and advocacy for these vulnerable populations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 9 4
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 7 3

Factory Worker (Detroit, Michigan)

Age: 41 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We work in conditions that can get extreme, pushing limits.
  • Policy could improve workplace safety during extreme weather, benefitting my workers and me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 4
Year 5 5 4
Year 10 5 3
Year 20 4 2

Retired Teacher (Boulder, Colorado)

Age: 65 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Wildfires create a lot of stress due to smoke and fear.
  • FEMA's improved support would be life-changing for me and my neighbors.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 3
Year 5 7 2
Year 10 6 2
Year 20 5 2

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)

Year 2: $160000000 (Low: $125000000, High: $190000000)

Year 3: $170000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $200000000)

Year 5: $190000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $230000000)

Year 10: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Year 100: $300000000 (Low: $240000000, High: $350000000)

Key Considerations