Bill Overview
Title: Disaster Resiliency Planning Act
Description: This act requires the Office of Management and Budget to establish guidance that requires federal agencies to incorporate natural disaster resilience into real property asset management and investment decisions. Specifically, the guidance must direct each agency to incorporate assessments of natural disaster risk information conducted by the agency, such as vulnerability and other risk assessments, into real property asset management and investment decisions.
Sponsors: Sen. Peters, Gary C. [D-MI]
Target Audience
Population: People living in areas at risk of natural disasters globally
Estimated Size: 130000000
- The bill is focused on enhancing the resiliency of federal agencies' asset management in the face of natural disasters.
- Natural disasters can impact a wide range of people depending on geography, involving millions who live in areas prone to events such as hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, and wildfires.
- By improving federal agency preparedness and asset management, the bill can indirectly benefit populations by reducing the potential impact of a disaster on federal services and infrastructure.
Reasoning
- The policy impacts primarily those in disaster-prone areas which include a significant portion of the US population.
- There's a diversified impact expected given various geographies affected: coastal, midwest tornado zones, earthquake-prone areas in California, and fire-prone areas like California and the west.
- While the policy directly addresses federal asset management, its effect is indirect to individuals. Improvements would mitigate service and infrastructure disruption during disasters, potentially improving wellbeing in the face of a natural disaster.
- The policy's budget constraints limit extensive direct intervention to broader populations, so its effect might primarily register in indirectly reduced stress about disaster management.
Simulated Interviews
Real estate agent (Miami, Florida)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems to focus on something we really need here - preparation.
- I am hopeful that it will prevent severe infrastructure damage during hurricanes.
- My experience selling property shows people worry about federal readiness in disasters.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Firefighter (Sacramento, California)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope it means less chaos when dealing with the aftermath of wildfires.
- Improving federal asset management in disasters sounds like a sensible approach.
- This could reduce our stress during fire seasons.
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 |
Public transport operator (St. Louis, Missouri)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As someone reliant on functioning public infrastructure, this is good news.
- Ensuring federal agencies are resilient in their assets will help us maintain transport services during tornadoes.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Teacher (New Orleans, Louisiana)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any policy aimed at improving federal disaster response is necessary.
- Personal experience from Katrina has taught me that preparation saves lives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Retired (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel more secure knowing that the federal government is preparing for earthquakes.
- In our area, infrastructure resilience is crucial due to seismic activities.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
College student (Houston, Texas)
Age: 19 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think improving federal infrastructure resilience will reduce our flooding issues.
- It's comforting to know my university could be better protected during emergencies.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Electrician (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy should help in securing our infrastructure against earthquakes.
- As an electrician, any disruptions in infrastructure can directly affect my work and income.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Hospital administrator (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though we aren’t constantly affected by major disasters, it's reassuring to know communities will have better federal support during emergencies.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Software developer (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good that the government is making disaster preparedness a priority, though it has less immediate concern for me.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Consultant (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’ve seen how unprepared federal responses can be in big nor’easter storms.
- Incorporating greater resilience into federal operations seems essential.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $80000000)
Year 2: $45000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $70000000)
Year 3: $45000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $70000000)
Year 5: $40000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $60000000)
Year 10: $35000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $50000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)
Key Considerations
- The upfront costs of implementing the guidance and conducting risk assessments can be substantial but are projected to decrease over time.
- Potential long-term savings due to reduced disaster impact on federal properties could outweigh initial costs.
- Improvements in federal asset management resilience lessen the economic shock from natural disasters, fostering stability and predictable services.