Ranking Members Larsen and Titus Statements from Hearing on FEMA’s Resilience Programs
Washington, D.C.—The following are opening remarks from Ranking Member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Rick Larsen (D-WA) and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management Dina Titus (D-NV) during today’s hearing titled, “Disaster Mitigation: Reviewing the Effectiveness and Costs of FEMA’s Resilience Programs.”
Video of Larsen’s and Titus’ opening statements are here and here.
More information on the hearing can be found here.
Ranking Member Larsen:
Thank you, Subcommittee Chairman Perry and Subcommittee Ranking Member Titus, for calling today’s hearing.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss the impact and performance of FEMA’s hazard mitigation programs, especially as one of the counties in my district is still recovering and rebuilding from the November 21 floods.
Disasters cost taxpayers billions of dollars each year. Last year, climate and weather-related disasters caused over $92.9 billion in impacts nationwide. This figure is not an anomaly. In the past five years, the average annual cost of disasters in the United States was $119 billion.
FEMA can help states and disaster survivors cover some recovery costs, but many disasters go undeclared, which means that homeowners, farmers, business owners, and state and local governments are paying the majority of disaster damage bills.
This slows economic growth and recovery, and is unsustainable for those who live in the path of increasingly frequent and severe disasters.
Hazard mitigation offers a solution.
According to the National Institute of Building Sciences, every $1 invested in hazard mitigation results in $13 saved.
FEMA projects that the nationwide adoption of modern building codes would save $600 billion in disaster impacts by 2060.
In order to reduce the costs of future disasters, Congress and FEMA have dramatically expanded the mitigation grant programs the agency offers.
Before 2018, almost all of the mitigation funding FEMA provided was only available to states after a disaster.
The creation of BRIC and the Safeguarding Tomorrow Loan Fund have changed that.
Since 2020, FEMA has been able to award over $5 billion for mitigation projects before disaster strikes.
This proactive approach is needed to protect communities, and I strongly support the additional investments the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law made in these programs.
State and local demand for pre-disaster mitigation funding is very clear. FEMA’s competitive pre-disaster mitigation program, the BRIC program, is consistently oversubscribed more than four times over.
That is why I support increasing the set-aside for the BRIC program, from 6 to 15 percent of annual Disaster Relief Fund spending. More money spent on resilience before disasters means less money spent on repairs after.
Making federal funding available for mitigation projects is one piece of a much larger puzzle.
Money needs to get out the door to eligible states and local governments in a timely manner and the funds need to be accessible to the most disadvantaged communities.
All new grant programs face some implementation challenges. The pre-disaster mitigation programs have not been an exception.
According to information from FEMA, 77 award winners for the Fiscal Year 2020 BRIC funding cycle and 112 applicants for the Fiscal Year 2021 funding cycle have not yet received full funding. FEMA needs to make sure these funds are getting out the door promptly.
However, I am pleased with other efforts FEMA has made to improve the BRIC application process by simplifying the benefit cost analysis requirements and offering extra technical assistance to disadvantaged communities.
The positive impact of these changes is already noticeable as the Resilience Office has reported receiving a greater number of applications from new applicants.
I look forward to discussing solutions to continue improving program efficiency and getting mitigation funding out the door faster and into the hands of communities.
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is improving our nation’s resilience by providing $5 billion to help communities proactively prepare for disasters, but there is still a long way to go.
I applaud the Administration’s prioritization of resilience to keep communities safe and reduce disaster recovery costs.
Ms. Salinas, I look forward to discussing how we can work together to make FEMA’s mitigation programs even more effective in the future.
Thank you all for being here, I look forward to your testimony.
Ranking Member Titus:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank our witness for joining us today to discuss FEMA’s mitigation programs.
Climate change and the related severe weather events have changed the disaster landscape and are devastating communities nationwide. Responding to these disasters is not enough—proactive mitigation strategies are necessary to build resilience before disasters, so communities have a chance to bounce back. Therefore, I’m proud of this Committee’s bipartisan history of supporting mitigation efforts with demonstrable returns on investment.
In the past 5 years, FEMA’s mitigation program suite has grown substantially at Congress’ direction to address disaster impact trends and ensure public safety. In 2020, FEMA awarded the first round of BRIC grants making unprecedented funding available to states before disasters to implement large and innovative projects.
Last year, FEMA awarded the first capitalization grants for the Safeguarding Tomorrow Revolving Loan Fund Program, which was finally funded thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Before these pre-disaster programs, FEMA’s mitigation investments came almost entirely post-disaster though the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. This program remains critically important and still accounts for the largest percentage of FEMA’s hazard mitigation spending, but the Safeguarding Tomorrow Revolving Loan Fund and BRIC program are finally providing communities the proactive tools they need.
Since its authorization, FEMA has invested $4.5 billion in pre-disaster mitigation through the BRIC program, and state and local governments are demonstrating considerable demand, with the most recent funding opportunity being five times oversubscribed.
Additional actions at the state and local level also indicate a growing interest in mitigation efforts to protect homes and infrastructure. States and cities from Mobile, Alabama to Minneapolis, Minnesota and to Clark County, Nevada are establishing hazard mitigation offices, Resiliency Centers, and Chief Resilience Officer positions to strategically identify local mitigation opportunities.
This is not surprising as investments in mitigation are proven to save money. Every one dollar invested in mitigation results in up to $13 saved post-disaster.
We must also continue to prioritize the equitable distribution of these investments to disadvantaged communities that may be hit hardest by disasters and take the longest to recover. I’ve heard from these communities that they are often unable to successfully apply for federal mitigation grant funding due to a lack of capacity and resources. That’s why I support President Biden’s Justice 40 initiative to allocate 40 percent of BRIC and Flood Mitigation Assistance grants to disadvantaged communities and the Community Disaster Resilience Zone Act, led by Rep. Davids in the House, to identify census tracts that are most in need and most at-risk to natural disasters.
Finally, access to mitigation funding cannot stop at the local level. I believe homeowners should have the chance to access mitigation funds to protect their families and financial security. Unfortunately, homeowners often cannot retrofit their homes with recommended mitigation measures because they are too expensive. Last year, I filed a successful amendment to H.R. 5473 that will create a pilot program for making individual homes more resilient to all hazards, and it is my hope for it to be enacted before the end of the year, so we have an opportunity to measure its effectiveness.
Ms. Salinas, I thank you and your colleagues for your hard work to implement FEMA’s growing suite of mitigation programs. I look forward to our conversation to learn more about this essential work that saves taxpayer dollars and improves public safety.
Next Article Previous Article