Bill Overview
Title: Wildfire Response Improvement Act
Description: This bill requires the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to take specified actions to address issues related to wildfire and drought. Specifically, FEMA must issue such regulations as necessary to update the categories of eligibility and timelines for the fire management assistance program under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to be the same as such categories and timelines under the Public Assistance Program; issue such regulations as necessary to update the Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide to include guidance on the wildfire-specific challenges, including debris removal, emergency protective measures, and the resulting toxicity of drinking water resources; and conduct a review of the benefit cost analysis criteria for mitigation projects under the Stafford Act to consider a broader range of factors, including carbon sequestration, improved water quality, and lessening disaster impact on traditionally underserved communities.
Sponsors: Rep. Stanton, Greg [D-AZ-9]
Target Audience
Population: People living in wildfire-prone areas
Estimated Size: 50000000
- Wildfires occur globally, thus populations in wildfire-prone areas worldwide will potentially be impacted.
- The bill improves federal response and preparedness, directly impacting wildfire management practices in the United States primarily.
- Climate change and increased global temperatures have exacerbated wildfires worldwide, thus indirectly affecting a larger global population.
- The focus on drinking water toxicity and debris removal suggests an impact on communities directly affected by wildfires.
- Public assistance program updates may benefit other countries if the US sets a precedent for emergency measures.
Reasoning
- The policy directly affects people living in wildfire-prone areas in the US, where FEMA will enhance its response to wildfires.
- Consideration for expanding assistance categories and inclusion of new criteria like carbon sequestration suggests long-term environmental and community benefits.
- Current FEMA budget limits the policy's initial impact, making it more prominent in high-risk areas first.
- There is a need to include a diverse range of individuals: those directly affected by wildfires, nearby residents, and some who might not directly benefit.
- Long-term benefits such as improved water quality and community recovery efforts are more likely to show gradually over a longer period.
Simulated Interviews
Firefighter (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems promising, especially with updates to the fire management assistance program.
- As a firefighter, having updated guidance specific to wildfires will help tremendously in coordinating efforts.
- The focus on drinking water toxicity is a crucial addition, reflecting challenges faced in recent years.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Winery Owner (Santa Rosa, California)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the policy will improve disaster response times and assist in rebuilding our community quickly.
- The aspect of carbon sequestration could benefit our vineyard in the long run.
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 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Wildfire Researcher (Bend, Oregon)
Age: 32 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act could pave the way for much-needed research and development in wildfire management.
- Including traditionally underserved communities is an important step.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 6 |
Retired teacher (Boulder, Colorado)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm cautiously optimistic. These updates to the program should've happened earlier.
- Quick actions are needed to protect our communities, and I hope this is a step in that direction.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Urban Planner (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy's focus on the toxicity of drinking water stands out as relevant here in Arizona, even though we aren't directly in wildfire zones.
- Our planning might benefit from increased federal coordination and guidance.
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 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Hospital Administrator (Redding, California)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Elements of the policy could reduce the healthcare strain during disasters.
- Guidance on emergency measures tailored to wildfires is crucial for us.
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 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Tech Worker (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though Seattle isn't immediately threatened, the policy addresses secondary effects like air quality.
- Long-term policy aspects could alleviate future risks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Graduate Student (Sun Valley, Idaho)
Age: 25 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy implementation could provide data vital for my research.
- Structural changes in policy open avenues for new engagement strategies with local agencies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Environmental Lawyer (Austin, Texas)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The act could establish important precedents in legal and environmental spheres.
- Carbon sequestration emphasis aligns with ecological preservation interests.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Parks and Recreation Manager (Portland, Oregon)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Guidance for wildfire-specific challenges would greatly assist in park management and safety protocols.
- It's important that we have updated and practical protocols.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $160000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $210000000)
Year 3: $170000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $220000000)
Year 5: $190000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $240000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Sustainable funding mechanisms for FEMA to implement the Act's provisions.
- Integration with state and local agency efforts to ensure cohesive wildfire management strategies.
- Cooperation with environmental agencies to maximize benefits related to carbon sequestration and ecological recovery.
- Consideration of long-term climate change trends affecting wildfire frequency and severity.