“Future of FEMA: Perspectives from the Emergency Management Community.”

1[House Hearing, 119 Congress]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                      FUTURE OF FEMA: PERSPECTIVES FROM THE5                          EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY67=======================================================================89                                HEARING1011                               BEFORE THE1213                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON14                  EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY1516                                 OF THE1718                     COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY19                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES2021                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2223                             FIRST SESSION2425                               __________2627                             MARCH 4, 20252829                               __________3031                            Serial No. 119-43233                               __________3435       Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security3637[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3839       Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov/4041                               __________4243                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE4460-780 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 20254546-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------4748                     COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY4950                 Mark E. Green, MD, Tennessee, Chairman5152Michael T. McCaul, Texas, Vice       Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi,53    Chair                                Ranking Member54Clay Higgins, Louisiana              Eric Swalwell, California55Michael Guest, Mississippi           J. Luis Correa, California56Carlos A. Gimenez, Florida           Shri Thanedar, Michigan57August Pfluger, Texas                Seth Magaziner, Rhode Island58Andrew R. Garbarino, New York        Daniel S. Goldman, New York59Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia      Delia C. Ramirez, Illinois60Tony Gonzales, Texas                 Timothy M. Kennedy, New York61Morgan Luttrell, Texas               LaMonica McIver, New Jersey62Dale W. Strong, Alabama              Julie Johnson, Texas, Vice Ranking63Josh Brecheen, Oklahoma                  Member64Elijah Crane, Arizona                Pablo Jose Hernandez, Puerto Rico65Andrew Ogles, Tennessee              Nellie Pou, New Jersey66Sheri Biggs, South Carolina          Sylvester Turner, Texas67Gabe Evans, Colorado                 Vacant68Ryan Mackenzie, Pennsylvania         Vacant69Brad Knott, North Carolina70                    Eric Heighberger, Staff Director71                  Hope Goins, Minority Staff Director72                       Sean Corcoran, Chief Clerk73                                 ------7475          SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY7677                   Dale W. Strong, Alabama, Chairman78Josh Brecheen, Oklahoma              Timothy M. Kennedy, New York,79Gabe Evans, Colorado                     Ranking Member80Ryan Mackenzie, Pennsylvania         Julie Johnson, Texas81Mark E. Green, MD, Tennessee (ex     Pablo Jose Hernandez, Puerto Rico82    officio)                         Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi83                                         (ex officio)84               Diana Bergwin, Subcommittee Staff Director85          Lauren McClain, Minority Subcommittee Staff Director8687                           C O N T E N T S8889                              ----------90                                                                   Page9192                               Statements9394The Honorable Dale W. Strong, a Representative in Congress From95  the State of Alabama, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Emergency96  Management and Technology:97  Oral Statement.................................................     198  Prepared Statement.............................................     399The Honorable Timothy M. Kennedy, a Representative in Congress100  From the State of New York, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on101  Emergency Management and Technology:102  Oral Statement.................................................     5103  Prepared Statement.............................................     7104The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress105  From the State of Mississippi, and Ranking Member, Committee on106  Homeland Security:107  Prepared Statement.............................................     9108109                               Witnesses110111Mr. Jeffrey ``Jeff'' E. Smitherman, Director, Alabama Emergency112  Management Agency:113  Oral Statement.................................................    10114  Prepared Statement.............................................    12115Mr. Daniel Kaniewski, Managing Director of the Public Sector,116  Marsh McLennan:117  Oral Statement.................................................    14118  Prepared Statement.............................................    16119Ms. Carrie Speranza, Certified Emergency Manager, President, U.S.120  Council of the International Association of Emergency Managers:121  Oral Statement.................................................    28122  Prepared Statement.............................................    29123Mr. Timothy Manning, Former Deputy Administrator for Protection124  and National Preparedness, Federal Emergency Management Agency:125  Oral Statement.................................................    30126  Prepared Statement.............................................    32127128                             For the Record129130The Honorable Timothy M. Kennedy, a Representative in Congress131  From the State of New York, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on132  Emergency Management and Technology:133  Article, Bloomberg, February 28, 2025..........................    45134  Article, New York Times, February 27, 2025.....................    46135  GAO Report.....................................................    48136137  FUTURE OF FEMA: PERSPECTIVES FROM THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY138139                              ----------140141                         Tuesday, March 4, 2025142143             U.S. House of Representatives,144                    Committee on Homeland Security,145                      Subcommittee on Emergency Management146                                            and Technology,147                                                    Washington, DC.148    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:16 a.m., in149room 310, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Dale W. Strong150[Chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.151    Present: Representatives Strong, Brecheen, Evans, Moylan,152Kennedy, Johnson, Hernandez, and Moskowitz.153    Mr. Strong. The Committee on Homeland Security's154Subcommittee on Emergency Management and Technology will come155to order. Without objection, the Chair may declare the156subcommittee in recess at any point.157    The purpose of this hearing is to assess the current role158of FEMA, including FEMA's expanding mission set, FEMA's159stewardship of taxpayer dollars, and its coordination with the160State and local governments in disaster recovery response.161Without objection, the gentleman from Guam, Mr. Moylan, and the162gentleman from Florida, Mr. Moskowitz, are permitted to sit on163the dais and ask questions to witnesses.164    I now recognize myself for an opening statement.165    Good morning and thank you to everyone for joining today166for this first hearing of the Committee on Homeland Security's167Subcommittee on Emergency Management and Technology in the168119th Congress. With over 4 decades of experience as a first169responder, having served the people of Alabama as both an170emergency medical technician and volunteer firefighter, I am171honored to serve as Chairman of this subcommittee. I am172committed to using this subcommittee to advance the cause of173first responders and emergency managers across the Nation,174making sure that they are prepared and resilient against all175challenges.176    I also wish to congratulate my colleagues across the aisle,177Mr. Kennedy of New York, on his role as Ranking Member. I look178forward to working with you as we strive to ensure our179communities are prepared to prevent, respond to, and recover180from emergencies and disasters.181    I would like to welcome back Mr. Brecheen of Oklahoma.182Finally, I want to welcome the newcomers to the subcommittee183and to Congress: Mr. Evans of Colorado, Mr. Mackenzie of184Pennsylvania, and across the aisle, Ms. Johnson of Texas, and185Mr. Hernandez of Puerto Rico. I look forward to working with186all of you this Congress to do the work securing our homeland.187    In the interest of ensuring our homeland is resilient and188prepared for all types of disasters, it is fitting that the189subcommittee's first hearing is on FEMA, the Nation's primary190disaster relief agency. FEMA oversees national preparedness191grants and Federal disaster assistance, coordinates relief192efforts, and ensures our Nation is able to prepare for, respond193to, and recover from disasters. Recent events have overwhelmed194our State and localities and challenged their ability to195mobilize and help their communities. In 2024 alone, FEMA196responded and administered resources for over 100 major197declarations.198    According to NOAA, natural disasters last year caused 568199fatalities and damages totaled approximately $182.7 billion.200Hurricane Helene and Milton alone devastated the East Coast,201causing 251 deaths and $113.9 billion in damages. Beginning in202January of this year, fires in Los Angeles County and Southern203California caused damage and economic loss that is projected to204be somewhere between $250 billion and $275 billion, which would205make it the costliest single disaster in our Nation's history,206surpassing the record set by Hurricane Katrina.207    Our States and localities deserve all the help they can get208in protecting people's lives and property against deadly209disasters. The aid that FEMA delivers before and after210disasters is greatly appreciated and greatly needed. But as211recent events demonstrate, there is room for improvement. We212must ask what efficiencies can be found? What reforms can be213implemented to create a better emergency management enterprise?214How can FEMA be improved to better support those on the ground215and disaster survivors?216    I applaud President Trump's January 24th Executive Order to217convene a FEMA Review Council composed of individuals with218expertise in disaster response and recovery, who will be tasked219with providing recommendations on reform to FEMA. Even the best220Government agencies are in continual need of reform, and FEMA221is no exception. The purpose of this hearing is to solicit222feedback from stakeholders within the emergency management223community that can help guide President Trump's FEMA Review224Council as it explores what aspects of FEMA deserves the most225reform.226    I thank the witnesses for their perspective and for being227here today. As we begin our conversation, there are a few areas228of potential reform which I would like to highlight.229    FEMA's mission set has expanded greatly in recent years to230include tasks beyond preparing for and responding to231traditional disasters. For example, FEMA assisted the Federal232Government's efforts in providing shelter and supplies to UACs233from the Southwest Border. It also supported the Department of234Homeland Security in the resettling of Afghan refugees by way235of Operation Allies Welcome.236    Since 2019, FEMA has been administering funds to local237governments and nonprofit groups to offset the cost of238humanitarian relief efforts of caring for migrants, at first239through the Emergency Food and Shelter Program--Humanitarian,240and since 2023, the Shelter and Service Program. As the border241crisis ballooned during the Biden administration, I wonder how242much time was wasted administering this program when the FEMA243work force was already stretched thin. As we contemplate how244best to reconfigure or establish efficiencies within FEMA to245support its operations, we must ask whether FEMA's expanding246mission set has slowly exhausted the agency's resources and247work force, preventing it from completing its core mission to248the highest level of sufficiency.249    In addition to FEMA's mission creep, there are concerns250that FEMA has also enabled a certain degree of waste. A GAO251report found that FEMA mishandled the administration of funds252for its COVID-19 Funeral Assistance program, with at least $4.8253million being approved for duplicate or ineligible applicants.254I look forward to our witnesses' thoughts on how to make FEMA255as efficient as possible while still allowing it to carry out256the fullness of its duties.257    It is also of great importance that FEMA avoid any258appearances of partisanship. Following Hurricane Milton last259year, a FEMA employee improperly and illegally instructed260canvassers not to go to houses displaying signs of then-261Presidential candidate Trump, disregarding FEMA's mission of262supporting every disaster survivor. As I am sure we can all263agree, FEMA must be impartial in its performance of all duties.264    The FEMA Review Council will also consider various265structural changes to FEMA as indicated in President Trump's266Executive Order. Some have suggested FEMA should be removed267from the Department of Homeland Security, once again making it268an independent agency with direct access to the President of269the United States. I look forward to hearing our witnesses'270perspectives on this matter and whether they think this move271would have a positive effect on FEMA's efficiency and ability272to operate, as well as potential changes that could be created.273    Finally, it is evident that State and local governments274have become increasingly reliant on FEMA to meet critical275disaster response needs. I invite our witnesses to offer276suggestions on a more appropriate structure of burden sharing277between Federal Government and State and local government to278best position them to respond to disasters. Again, I thank each279of you for being here today and I look forward to hearing your280testimony on these and other issues to inform the work of the281FEMA Review Council as they seek to reform FEMA to better serve282the American people.283    [The statement of Chairman Strong follows:]284                  Statement of Chairman Dale W. Strong285    Good morning and thank you to everyone for joining us today for286this first hearing of the Committee on Homeland Security's Subcommittee287on Emergency Management and Technology in the 119th Congress.288    With over 4 decades of experience as a first responder, having289served the people of Alabama as both an EMT and volunteer firefighter,290I am honored to serve as Chairman of this subcommittee.291    I am committed to using this subcommittee to advance the cause of292first responders and emergency managers across the Nation, making sure293they are prepared and resilient against all challenges.294    I also wish to congratulate my colleague across the aisle, Mr.295Kennedy of New York, on his role as Ranking Member.296    I look forward to working with you as we strive to ensure our297communities are prepared to prevent, respond to, and recover from298emergencies and disasters.299    I'd like to welcome back Mr. Brecheen of Oklahoma.300    And finally, I want to welcome the newcomers to the subcommittee301and to Congress--Mr. Evans of Colorado, Mr. Mackenzie of Pennsylvania,302and across the aisle, Ms. Johnson of Texas, and Mr. Hernandez of Puerto303Rico.304    I look forward to working with all of you this Congress to do the305work of securing our homeland.306    In the interests of ensuring our homeland is resilient and prepared307for all types of disasters, it is fitting that this subcommittee's308first hearing is on FEMA--the Nation's primary disaster relief agency.309    FEMA oversees national preparedness grants and Federal disaster310assistance, coordinates relief efforts, and ensures our Nation is able311to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters.312    Recent events have overwhelmed our States and localities and313challenged their ability to mobilize and help their communities.314    In 2024 alone, FEMA responded to and administered resources for 100315Major Disaster Declarations.316    According to NOAA, natural disasters last year caused 568317fatalities and damages totaling approximately $182.7 billion dollars.318    Hurricanes Helene and Milton alone devastated the East Coast,319causing 251 deaths and $113.9 billion dollars in damages.320    Beginning in January of this year, fires in Los Angeles County and321southern California caused damage and economic loss that is projected322to be between $250 billion and $275 billion dollars, which would make323it the costliest single disaster in our Nation's history, surpassing324the record set by Hurricane Katrina.325    Our States and localities deserve all the help they can get in326protecting people's lives and property against deadly disasters.327    The aid that FEMA delivers before and after disasters is greatly328appreciated and greatly needed. But as recent events demonstrate, there329is room for improvement . . .330    We must ask: what efficiencies can be found and what reforms should331be implemented to create a better emergency management enterprise?332    And how can FEMA be improved to better support those on the ground333and disaster survivors?334    I applaud President Trump's January 24th Executive Order to convene335a FEMA Review Council composed of individuals with expertise in336disaster response and recovery, who will be tasked with providing337recommendations on reform to FEMA.338    Even the best Government agencies are in continual need of reform,339and FEMA is no exception.340    The purpose of this hearing is to solicit feedback from341stakeholders within the emergency management community that can help342guide President Trump's FEMA Review Council as it explores what aspects343of FEMA deserve the most reform.344    I thank the witnesses for their perspectives and for being here345today.346    As we begin our conversation, there are a few areas of potential347reform which I would like to highlight.348    FEMA's mission set has expanded greatly in recent years to include349tasks beyond preparing for and responding to traditional disasters.350    For example, FEMA assisted the Federal Government's efforts in351providing shelters and supplies to UACs from the Southwest Border.352    It also supported the Department of Homeland Security in the353resettling of Afghan refugees via Operation Allies Welcome.354    Since 2019, FEMA has been administering funds to local governments355and nonprofit groups to offset the costs of humanitarian relief efforts356of caring for migrants, at first through the Emergency Food and Shelter357Program--Humanitarian, and, since 2023, the Shelter and Services358Program.359    As the border crisis ballooned during the Biden administration, I360wonder how much time was wasted administering this program when the361FEMA workforce was already stretched thin.362    As we contemplate how best to reconfigure or establish efficiencies363within FEMA to support its operations, we must ask whether FEMA's364expanding mission set has slowly exhausted the agency's resources and365workforce, preventing it from completing its core mission to the366highest level of sufficiency.367    In addition to FEMA's ``mission creep,'' there are concerns that368FEMA has also enabled a certain degree of waste.369    A GAO report found that FEMA mishandled the administration of funds370for its COVID-19 Funeral Assistance Program, with at least $4.8 million371dollars being approved for duplicate or ineligible applicants.372    I look forward to our witnesses' thoughts on how to make FEMA as373efficient as possible while still allowing it to carry out the fullness374of its duties.375    It is also of great importance that FEMA avoid any appearance of376partisanship.377    Following Hurricane Milton last year, a FEMA employee improperly378and illegally instructed canvassers not to go to houses displaying379signs of then-Presidential candidate Trump, disregarding FEMA's mission380of supporting every disaster survivor.381    As I'm sure we can all agree, FEMA must be impartial in the382performance of all its duties.383    The FEMA Review Council will also consider various structural384changes to FEMA, as indicated in President Trump's Executive Order.385    Some have suggested that FEMA should be removed from the Department386of Homeland Security, once again making it an independent agency with387direct access to the President.388    I look forward to hearing our witnesses' perspectives on this389matter, and whether they think this move would have a positive effect390on FEMA's efficiency and ability to operate, as well as potential391challenges this could create.392    Finally, it is evident that State and local governments have become393increasingly reliant on FEMA to meet critical disaster response needs.394    I invite our witnesses to offer suggestions on a more appropriate395structure of burden sharing between the Federal Government and State396and local governments to best position them to respond to disasters.397    Again, I thank each of you for being here today, and I look forward398to hearing your testimony on these and other issues to inform the work399of the FEMA Review Council as they seek to reform FEMA to better serve400the American people.401402    Mr. Strong. I now recognize the Ranking Member of the403subcommittee for his opening statement.404    Mr. Kennedy. Thank you, Chairman, and congratulations on405being named Chair of this great subcommittee. I want to also406recognize and congratulate my colleagues on both sides of the407aisle for taking part in this subcommittee.408    I want to recognize all of the witnesses that are here409today. Thank you for being here and thank you for the important410work that you do for our country.411    The topic of today's hearing, unfortunately, is very412timely. Disasters are striking harder and more often from413wildfires that we are seeing today yet again, floods,414hurricanes, extreme snow and ice storms, tornadoes. We have415seen hundreds of lives taken across communities and devastated416nationwide. California, Kentucky, Florida, South Carolina, New417York, and everywhere in between, we need to strengthen our418preparedness, our response, our recovery efforts like never419before. It is ever more critical that we do so.420    We have to support them from Congress every step of the way421and I am deeply concerned about the Trump administration's422attack on FEMA and the dedicated public servants in emergency423management at every level. President Trump has threatened to424dismantle the agency, fired 200 employees, pushed out 800 more425under Elon Musk's unfunded resignation scheme. It is a reckless426and dangerous move that undermines disaster response when we427need it the most.428    These brave servants attempting to help communities ravaged429by destruction are being fired without cause. It is a shameful,430despicable act, and it is wrong. Unfortunately, the Majority431has chosen not to include any representatives from FEMA to432attend this hearing and testify today about what is truly433happening on the front lines.434    Currently, there is no transparency from this435administration on how FEMA, an agency with such a critical436mission, can operate while being dismantled 1 employee at a437time. Even while the Trump administration continues to downplay438the critical role of emergency managers, the truth is that for439decades, FEMA has come to the aid of the American public time440and time again, and they have done so without being441understaffed--I am sorry, they have done so while being442understaffed and underfunded.443    In addition to the direct attacks on FEMA, President Trump444is chipping away and weakening the agencies that provide445support to FEMA, like NOAA, the National Oceanic and446Atmospheric Administration. Reportedly, the Trump447administration has fired approximately 800 probationary448employees at NOAA, while another 500 resigned, severely449undermining critical weather forecasting and climate monitoring450services. Such mass exoduses from essential agencies not only451weaken our disaster response and preparedness capabilities, but452also jeopardize public safety and economic stability.453    Let me be clear. The American people cannot afford to let454President Trump and Elon Musk take a chainsaw to FEMA. I have455seen first-hand how critical FEMA is on a number of occasions.456But in 2022, my community was ravaged by Winter Storm Elliott.457During the week of Christmas 2022, a Category 4 extratropical458cyclone created crippling winter weather conditions, including459blizzards, high winds, snowfall, and record cold temperatures460across the entire country, exacerbated in the Northeast. This461catastrophic storm claimed 47 lives in my hometown of Buffalo462and Western New York. This tragedy overwhelmed our entire463community in the days, weeks, and months following, from the464mourning of loss of loved ones, friends, and community members465to putting the pieces of lives and homes back together.466    Following this storm, President Biden ensured that FEMA467assistance was provided, but the devastating blizzard468highlighted outdated FEMA policies that left gaps in support.469Currently, FEMA has a snow assistance and severe winter storm470policy that provides a criteria for assistance following an471extreme snowstorm. However, snow assistance requires a record472or near-record snowfall over 1 to 3 days validated by the473National Weather Service and compared to historical data. For474example, where other storms are judged by the amount of damage475they cause, a snowstorm must be the worst a community has ever476experienced to qualify for assistance. That means up to 6 to 7477feet of snow just to get the attention of FEMA. That is not478acceptable. Where other storms are judged by this damage and we479have to see more snow than ever before in history, we see this480disproportionate impact on how Federal assistance can be481provided.482    So Federal assistance for snowstorms must be on par with483other national natural disasters. That is why I introduced the484Snow Act to expand disaster assistance for snowstorms, ensuring485communities get the help that they need. Specifically, my bill486removes outdated snowfall methodology and the State-wide total487damages requirement if the affected response zone and/or region488has determined by State emergency service agencies. It unlocks489Individual Assistance for snow disasters, providing monetary490relief for families who experience substantial damages to their491homes. It unlocks all categories of Public Assistance for snow492disasters, such as assistance in removing debris, rebuilding493roads and bridges, rebuilding and maintaining public utilities,494and melting agents for ice on roads. It adds snow removal495equipment under FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and496raises the Federal cost share to 90 percent Federal and 10497percent State and local if the affected areas are rural or498below the real median household income according to Census499Bureau. This will have an impact on every single community500across the United States.501    Make no mistake about it. There is work to be done to502improve FEMA, but dismantling its experienced work force is503reckless and dangerous. As climate change fuels more frequent504and severe disasters, our focus must be on strengthening FEMA's505ability to respond, not weakening it. It is more crucial than506ever before to have a robust response system. The growing507threats we face demand it.508    While a lot of today's conversation is likely to focus on509natural disasters, FEMA does more than disaster response. It510provides critical preparedness grants for communities Nation-511wide. Yet the White House froze these funds, forcing courts to512intervene. Even after a judge's order, reports indicate that513many grants remain blocked, jeopardizing emergency readiness.514This is not just bureaucratic red tape, it puts lives at risk.515This funding, frozen by the administration, supports first516responders and emergency managers in keeping us all safe.517    In my district, we know first-hand how vital the518preparedness grant resources are. In just a few short months,519we'll be commemorating the third anniversary of the racist,520white supremacist terrorist attack that robbed 10 lives,521innocent souls from my community on May 14, 2022. That day, our522first responders, our police, our firefighters, our EMS, and so523many others bravely rushed into harm's way, putting their lives524on the line to protect others. They give so much for the well-525being of our community, so the very least we can do is ensure526that they have the funding and support that they need. I look527forward to hearing from our witnesses today about all of these528issues and more.529    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.530    [The statement of Ranking Member Kennedy follows:]531             Statement of Ranking Member Timothy M. Kennedy532                             March 4, 2025533    The topic of today's hearing is, unfortunately, very timely.534Disasters are striking harder and more often--from wildfires, floods,535tornadoes, and hurricanes to extreme snow and ice storms, we have seen536hundreds of lives taken and communities devastated nationwide. From537California to Kentucky to Florida, to South Carolina, to New York, the538need to strengthen our preparedness, response, and recovery efforts has539never been more critical. Preparedness, response, and recovery efforts540must be strengthened, and that starts with skilled emergency managers.541Congress must support them at every level.542    Yet, I'm deeply concerned about the Trump administration's attack543on FEMA and the dedicated public servants in emergency management at544every level. President Trump has threatened to dismantle the agency,545fired 200 employees, and pushed out 800 more under Elon Musk's unfunded546resignation scheme. This is a reckless, dangerous move that undermines547disaster response when we need it most. These brave public servants,548attempting to help communities ravaged by destruction, are being fired549without cause. It is shameful, it is despicable, and it is wrong.550    And, unfortunately, the Majority has chosen not to include any551representatives from FEMA to attend this hearing and to testify today552about what is truly happening on the front lines. Currently, there is553no transparency from this administration on how FEMA, an agency with554such a critical mission, can operate while being dismantled--1 employee555at a time. Even while the Trump administration continues to downplay556the critical role of emergency managers, the truth is that for decades,557FEMA has come to the aid of the American public time and time again.558And they have done so while being understaffed and underfunded.559    In addition to the direct attacks on FEMA, President Trump is560chipping away at and weakening the agencies that provide support to561FEMA, like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).562Reportedly, the Trump administration has fired approximately 800563probationary employees at NOAA, while another 500 resigned--severely564undermining critical weather forecasting and climate monitoring565services.566    Such mass exoduses from essential agencies not only weaken our567disaster response and preparedness capabilities but also jeopardize568public safety and economic stability. Let me be clear: the American569people cannot afford to let President Trump and Elon Musk take a570chainsaw to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.571    I've seen first-hand how critical FEMA is on a number of occasions,572but in 2022, my community was ravaged by Winter Storm Elliott. During573the week of Christmas in 2022, a category 4 extratropical cyclone574created crippling winter weather conditions including blizzards, high575winds, snowfall, and record cold temperatures across the northeast.576This catastrophic storm claimed 47 lives in my community. This tragedy577overwhelmed our entire community in the days, weeks, and months578following, from mourning the loss of loved ones, friends, and community579members to putting the pieces of lives and homes back together.580    Following the storm, President Biden ensured that Federal581assistance was provided, but this devastating blizzard highlighted582outdated FEMA policies that left gaps in support. Currently, FEMA has a583Snow Assistance and Severe Winter Storm Policy that provides the584criteria for assistance following an extreme snowstorm.585    However, snow assistance requires a record or near-record snowfall586over 1-3 days, validated by the National Weather Service and compared587to historical data. For example, where other storms are judged on the588amount of damage they cause, a snowstorm must be the worst a community589has ever experienced to qualify for assistance.590    Federal assistance for extreme snowstorms must be on par with other591natural disasters. That's why I introduced the SNOW Act to expand592disaster assistance for snowstorms, ensuring communities get the help593they need. Specifically, my bill:594   Removes the outdated snowfall methodology and the State-wide595        total damages requirement if the affected response zone and/or596        region as determined by State emergency service agencies597   Unlocks Individual Assistance for snow disasters, providing598        monetary relief for families who experience substantial damage599        to their homes600   Unlocks all categories of Public Assistance for snow601        disasters, such as assistance in removing debris, rebuilding602        roads and bridges, rebuilding and maintaining public utilities,603        and melting agents for ice on roads604   Adds snow removal equipment under FEMA's Hazard Mitigation605        Grant Program606   Raises the Federal cost share to 90 percent Federal and 10607        percent State and local IF the affected areas are rural or608        below the real median household income according to the Census609        Bureau.610    Make no mistake about it, there is work to be done to improve FEMA,611but dismantling its experienced workforce is reckless and dangerous. As612climate change fuels more frequent and severe disasters, our focus must613be on strengthening FEMA's ability to respond--not weakening it. It is614more crucial than ever to have a robust response system. The growing615threats we face demand it.616    While a lot of today's conversation is likely to focus on natural617disasters, FEMA does more than disaster response; it provides critical618preparedness grants for communities nationwide. Yet, the White House619froze these funds, forcing courts to intervene. Even after a judge's620order, reports indicate that many grants remain blocked, jeopardizing621emergency readiness. This is not just bureaucratic red tape--it puts622lives at risk. This funding, frozen by the administration, supports623first responders and emergency managers in keeping us all safe.624    In my district, we know first-hand how vital the preparedness grant625resources are. In just a few short months, we will be commemorating the626third anniversary of the racist, white supremacist terrorist attack627that robbed the lives of 10 innocent souls on May 14, 2022.628    That day, our first responders--our police, firefighters, EMS, and629so many others--bravely rushed into harm's way, putting their lives on630the line to protect others. They give so much for the well-being of our631communities, so the very least we can do is ensure they have the632funding and support they need.633634    Mr. Strong. Thank you. Thank you, Ranking Member Kennedy.635Other Members of the subcommittee are reminded that opening636statements may be submitted for the record.637    [The statement of Ranking Member Thompson follows:]638             Statement of Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson639                             March 4, 2025640    I want to thank our witnesses for engaging in a vital discussion641regarding the future of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).642Our Nation's emergency managers and first responders are our first line643of defense during emergencies and are an integral part of our644communities.645    Yet, President Trump continues to dismiss the emergency management646community and has referred to FEMA as a ``disaster,'' and even647suggested he would get ``rid of'' the agency.648    Trump has demonstrated his blatant disregard for FEMA by directly649causing a workforce crisis within the agency. At his direction, 200650FEMA employees were fired and more than 800 are resigning--resulting in651a total loss of nearly 1,000 workers, including seasoned emergency652managers. Apparently, firing seasoned emergency managers and forcing653their resignation is Donald Trump's strategy for handling disasters.654    In addition to the mass exodus of experienced FEMA staff, Trump has655handed Elon Musk--of all people--a ``special government employee''656appointment, giving him and his minions free rein to access sensitive657FEMA data. This is data that, in the wrong hands, could wreak havoc on658our Nation's security.659    Despite Donald Trump and Elon Musk dismissing the importance of the660agency and its mission, FEMA has repeatedly delivered critical aid to661the American public, even amid staffing shortages and retention662challenges.663    We have all witnessed the devastating impact of catastrophic664storms. In my own district, FEMA's assistance was indispensable during665the March 2023 tornadoes that ravaged my community. Even now, we666continue to rely on their support during our recovery.667    Republicans have called this hearing to examine FEMA's future. I am668worried for FEMA's future, especially with Cameron Hamilton, the Senior669Official Performing the Duties of FEMA Administrator leading the670agency.671    Mr. Hamilton has little-to-no experience with being in charge of672responding to large-scale disasters. In fact, he is firing employees673with more experience than him. What is worse is that Mr. Hamilton674reportedly promoted misinformation about FEMA after Hurricanes Helene675and Milton on social media. This should be unacceptable to every Member676of Congress and the American public.677    I am also gravely concerned about the future of homeland security678grants to our communities. As someone deeply invested in emergency679response, I have consistently advocated for these programs, which680provide funding to State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments to681support everything from training first responders to investing in682infrastructure that strengthens our Nation's resilience against natural683disasters and terrorism.684    Even after the White House allegedly rescinded the order to freeze685grants, there are still reports of State and local governments and686nonprofit organizations not being rightfully awarded grant funding--687some of which is needed for disaster recovery.688    Over the weekend, it was reported that the Trump administration is689withholding ``at least 140'' grants across the country that is needed690for wildfire prevention, flood mitigation, disaster preparedness, and691programs that support ``essential health, safety, and welfare.''692Withholding this funding undermines our ability to prepare for and693respond to emergencies and puts communities at risk.694    Simply put, the Trump administration firing experienced FEMA695workers and withholding critical homeland security funding puts the696future of FEMA in doubt and makes America less safe.697698    Mr. Strong. I am very pleased to have such an important699panel of witnesses before for us today. I ask that the700witnesses please rise and raise your right hand.701    [Witnesses sworn.]702    Mr. Strong. Thank you. Please be seated. Let the record703reflect that the witnesses have answered in the affirmative.704    I would now like to formally introduce our witnesses. Mr.705Jeff Smitherman serves as the director of the Alabama Emergency706Management Agency. Previously, Mr. Smitherman served as the707acting director of Alabama Emergency Management Agency and has708also served as its executive operations officer and State709coordinating officer. Mr. Smitherman also completed a 28-year710military career, retiring in 2015 from the United States Army711and Alabama National Guard. Thank you for your service.712    Mr. Daniel Kaniewski is the managing director of public713sector at Marsh McLennan, where he develops innovative714solutions to public-sector challenges and engages 90,000715experts in risk strategy and people. From 2017 to 2020, he716served as the deputy administrator for resilience of FEMA.717Early in his career, Mr. Kaniewski served as special assistant718to the President for Homeland Security and senior director for719response policy in the George W. Bush administration.720    Ms. Carrie Speranza is a president of the U.S. Council of721International Association of Emergency Managers and is the722former chair of the FEMA National Advisory Council. Ms.723Speranza is also the director of Emergency Management Solutions724at Esri. Before joining Esri, Ms. Speranza was deputy director725of the District of Columbia's Homeland Security and Emergency726Management Agency. Thank you.727    Mr. Timothy Manning is a former deputy administrator for728protection and national preparedness at FEMA. More recently,729Mr. Manning served as the White House COVID-19 supply730coordinator. Prior to joining Federal service, Mr. Manning731served as the cabinet secretary of the New Mexico Department of732Homeland Security and emergency management and homeland733security advisor to Governor Bill Richardson. I thank the734witnesses again for being here today.735    I now recognize Mr. Smitherman for 5 minutes to summarize736his opening statement. Mr. Smitherman.737738STATEMENT OF JEFFREY ``JEFF'' E. SMITHERMAN, DIRECTOR, ALABAMA739                  EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY740741    Mr. Smitherman. Good morning and thank you, Chairman742Strong, Ranking Member Kennedy, and other distinguished Members743of the committee for the invitation to testify here today. I am744Jeff Smitherman, the director of the Alabama Emergency745Management Agency and a cabinet member to Governor Kay Ivey.746Today I want to share with you all what I believe about747emergency management and the future of FEMA.748    At Alabama EMA, we are proud to be one of the premier749emergency management programs in the country. Alabama's success750is directly tied to the professionalism, training, and751experience of our first responders and local emergency752management programs. As director and cabinet member and on753behalf of my colleagues in State and local emergency754management, we thank you for this opportunity to provide a755State perspective on the future of FEMA.756    Alabama is no stranger to large-scale disasters. While as a757State we rank 24th in population, we are 7th in major disaster758declarations. During President Trump's first term, we had 6759major disaster declarations and during my time or my tenure at760the agency, from 2015 to present, we've had 17 major disaster761declarations. However, States experienced many other events762that do not rise to a major disaster declaration, but still763required significant commitment of State resources.764    I believe disaster preparedness, response, and recovery for765all incidents start and end at the local level and that the766relationship is critical between Federal, State, Tribal, and767local emergency management. Each jurisdiction maintains768separate authorities and capabilities, but must work together769by connecting and supporting one another to effectively and770timely save lives and protect property. States are critical to771successful preparation, response, and recovery within our772communities. To fully understand the critical function of the773State, I believe a State emergency management director must be774included in the review process and on the President's FEMA775Review Council.776    I believe we must use this reset opportunity to not just777necessarily look at how to adjust the current system, but to778take a holistic look and approach to its redesign. What do we779want the emergency management system to look like after the780President's Review Council completes their work? This is a781generational opportunity for a rebuilt network with a refined782focus and efficiency.783    I believe we can gain some efficiencies through this784process. With no additional Federal funds, I believe we can785build more State and local capacity by adjusting the funding786and redefining and streamlining priorities.787    I believe preparedness and resilience are related788functions. The more deliberate focus and effort that goes into789preparedness is realized after an event with a more resilient790population and infrastructure. As such, I believe we can place791increased priority on State and local capacity using existing792Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities, BRIC,793funding. BRIC is a newer grant program that has not realized794its initial goals. By redesignating a small portion of this795funding to be made available to all States in order to develop796their capacity and the capacity at the local jurisdictions, it797would be a highly efficient and effective way to serve our798citizens who need timely and helpful assistance on their worst799days, not months or years of red tape.800    The Homeland Security grants serve to train and certify801existing local first responders, the same resources that802Alabama deployed to North Carolina for Hurricane Helene. One803important system that already exists for the States is the804Emergency Management Assistance Compact, the EMAC. I believe805EMAC is a viable, proven framework and program to execute806State-to-State mutual aid. Increased capacity can be used by807States within the EMAC system to cover requirements that FEMA808formerly tried to cover.809    I believe emergency management is a team effort. Sometimes810you rely on one aspect more than the other, such as State811versus FEMA, but everyone still has a role. I think the key812during this critical review will be an important opportunity to813clearly define the role of local, State, Federal, Tribal,814nonprofit, and private-sector partners and create a new dynamic815emergency management that works for everyone.816    I believe there is a consensus on the lack of speed,817consistency, and clarity from FEMA and I know many in FEMA818agree and welcome some level of change. The States already819built schools, parks, Government buildings, et cetera. I820believe we can rebuild better, quicker, and more efficiently in821a system more like a block grant than the cumbersome system we822currently use.823    As I conclude, I want to thank again the committee for the824opportunity to appear before you today. I believe emergency825management is critical to the Nation and the time is now to826implement improvements that will change the way we do business827and ultimately better serve the citizens of the United States.828Thank you.829    [The prepared statement of Mr. Smitherman follows:]830          Prepared Statement of Jeffrey ``Jeff'' E. Smitherman831                             March 4, 2025832                              introduction833    Thank you, Chairman Strong, Ranking Member Kennedy, and other834distinguished Members of the committee for the invitation to testify835here today.836    I am Jeff Smitherman, director of Alabama Emergency Management837Agency (AEMA) and cabinet member to Governor Kay Ivey. Today I want to838share with you all what I believe about Emergency Management. At839Alabama EMA we are proud to be one of the premiere emergency management840programs in the country. Alabama's success is directly tied to the841professionalism, training, and experience of our first responders and842local emergency management programs.843    Alabama EMA is responsible for the preservation of the lives and844property of the citizens of Alabama through coordination of emergency845preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation.846    As director and cabinet member, and on behalf of my colleagues in847State and local emergency management, we thank you for this opportunity848to provide a State perspective on the Future of the Federal Emergency849Management Agency (FEMA).850                            disaster history851    Alabama is no stranger to large-scale disasters. While as a State852we are 24th in population we rank 7th in major disaster declarations.853During President Trump's first term we had 6 major disaster854declarations and during my tenure at the agency from 2015 to present we855have had 17 major disaster declarations; however, States experience856many other events that do not rise to a major disaster declaration but857required a significant commitment of State resources.858    For example, in fiscal year 2023 Alabama supported 14 such events.859In another role, I supported the agency for Hurricane Katrina,860Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, the 2011 Tornado Outbreak, and many, many861other disasters. These disasters have allowed us to understand the862challenges that every community and citizen faces when they experience863a disaster.864    Over the years, we have tracked Federal dollars for each disaster865and program. The agency has done this work with no significant audit866findings of fraud, waste, or abuse.867    state investment in emergency management and building resilient868              infrastruction in communities (bric) funding869    I believe disaster preparedness, response, and recovery for all870incidents start and end at the local level and that the relationship is871critical between Federal, State, Tribal, and local emergency872management. Each jurisdiction maintains separate authorities and873capabilities but must work together by connecting and supporting one874another to effectively and timely save lives and protect property.875    States are critical to successful preparation, response, and876recovery within our communities. To fully understand the critical877function of the State, I believe a State Emergency Management Director878must be included in the review process and on the President's FEMA879Review Council.880    I believe we must use this reset opportunity to not necessarily to881look at how to adjust the current system, but we must look at it more882holistically. What do we want the emergency management system to look883like after the President's Review Council completes their work? This is884a generational opportunity for a rebuilt network with a refined focus885and efficiency.886    I believe we can gain some efficiencies through this process. With887NO ADDITIONAL FEDERAL FUNDS, I believe we can build more State and888local capacity by adjusting the funding and redefining and streamlining889priorities. I believe Preparedness and Resilience are related890functions. The more deliberate focus and effort that goes into891preparedness is realized after an event with a more resilient892population and infrastructure.893    As such, I believe we can place increased priority on State and894Local capacity using existing Building Resilient Infrastructure in895Communities (BRIC) funding. BRIC is a newer grant program that has not896realized its initial goals. By redesigning a small portion of this897funding to be made available to all States in order to develop their898capacity and the capacity of the local jurisdictions it would be a899highly efficient and effective way to serve our citizens who need900timely and helpful assistance on their worst days, not months or years901of red tape.902    The Homeland Security grants serve to train and certify existing903local first responders, the same resources that Alabama deployed to904North Carolina for Hurricane Helene.905             emergency management assistance compact (emac)906    One important system that already exists for States is the907Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC). I believe EMAC is a908viable proven framework and program to execute State-to-State mutual909aid. Increased capacity can be used by States within the Emergency910Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) system to cover requirements that911FEMA formerly tried to cover. Some examples are States supporting each912other with Emergency Operations Center (EOC) augmentations, National913Guard assets, swift water rescue teams, or urban search and rescue.914    I believe Emergency Management is a team sport, sometimes you rely915on one aspect more than the other (State vs FEMA) like run vs pass in916football, but everyone still has a role. I think the key during this917critical review will be an important opportunity to clearly define the918role of local, State, Federal, Tribal, non-profit, and private-sector919partners and create a new dynamic emergency management that works for920everyone.921                      state support with programs922    I believe there is a consensus on the lack of speed, consistency,923and clarity from FEMA and I know many in FEMA agree and welcome some924level of change.925    I believe in an organization dialed in on its mission, the ``WHY''926it exists. The ``why'' should drive every action. As soon as it loses927its focus on ``why'' it begins to have issues with the ``how''. We have928witnessed some of these issues of the ``how''. The core mission needs929to go back to the basics such as ``blocking'' and ``tackling'' in930football. EM must stay focused always on the ``why'' and should ask how931this rule, regulation, policy, task, or process impacts the Disaster932Survivor or Impacted Community.933    The States already build schools, parks, Government buildings etc.,934and I believe we can rebuild better, quicker, and more efficiently in a935system more like a block grant than the cumbersome system we currently936use that significantly hindered another State agency as evidenced by937the below example from Department of Conservation and Natural Resources938(DCNR).939940``FEMA has won. I am finished with this project submittal.941``As you may recall, on November 18, 2021, we were contacted by EMA942that y'all had set aside $1 million for the generator project at The943Lodge at Gulf State Park. I was, and am, very appreciative of your work944on this. However, after 3 years and responses to numerous RFIs and945constantly moving goal posts by FEMA, I feel we have wasted enough time946and money on this project.947``We were asked to provide a load analysis of the critical functions of948the Lodge. As you and FEMA can see by the detailed (and expensive)949analysis that was done, the panels are not separated by just lights, or950just AC or just outlets. Most panels are wired by zone or location that951contain all these type electrical outputs. You can't just power some952items and not others in a panel. That is not reasonable. Two panels953that are powered by the existing generator were excluded. We provided954more load detail than was asked for to be sure FEMA had all the955information.956``To be clear, I think this is a worthy project and would serve Coastal957Alabama well in a large storm event with very long power outages. The958Lodge was built to withstand damage from hurricanes and can be used as959a staging area for first responders, a lodging facility for insurance960adjustors, FEMA and EMA representatives and other personnel that are961critical after an event. To serve this function, nearly all of the962facility would need to be powered. However, this has gone on so long963with FEMA that the allotted $1 million will not be sufficient to964complete this project. The cost of generators, switches, and965construction have gone up substantially since we proposed this project.966I am not prepared to pay the cost difference between the 2021 prices we967estimated and the current costs. Also, the lead time on large968generators is now 18-24 months. That is two more hurricane seasons969without this capability. The multi-year delay on this project by FEMA970has doomed it to failure. I will never again apply for BRIC or Hazzard971Mitigation funds from FEMA. The juice is not worth the squeeze.972``Chris Blankenship, Commissioner, Alabama Department of Conservation973and Natural Resources.''974975    The Public Assistance (PA) program is most suited for a block grant976system. PA provides eligible applicants funding to remove debris,977restore bridges, culverts, school buildings, Government buildings etc.978after a disaster. These costs are estimated quickly but the Federal979process to review gets so complicated and works against the best980interests of the community with delays that often last for years. The981Hazard Mitigation Grant Program is even worse with unnecessary982complexity and layers of bureaucracy that delays projects like983community safe rooms for years at a time.984    The Individual Assistance (IA) program provides direct financial985assistance to disaster survivors and would be more difficult to986decentralize and is probably still best run by FEMA but also needs an987aggressive review to improve efficiency. Including likely a totally new988software that supports rather than hinders the program.989                               conclusion990    As I conclude, I want to again thank the committee for the991opportunity to appear before you today. Emergency Management is992critical, and the time is now to implement improvements that will993change the way we do business and ultimately better serve the citizens994of the United States.995996    Mr. Strong. Thank you, Mr. Smitherman.997    I now recognize Dr. Kaniewski for 5 minutes to summarize998his opening statement.9991000STATEMENT OF DANIEL KANIEWSKI, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE PUBLIC1001                     SECTOR, MARSH McLENNAN10021003    Mr. Kaniewski. Chairman Strong, Ranking Member Kennedy, my1004name is Dan Kaniewski and I focus on the public sector at Marsh1005McLennan. It's the world's leading professional services firm1006in the areas of risk, strategy, and people. We're a U.S.1007company with more than 90,000 colleagues world-wide, advising1008public- and private-sector clients in 130 countries.1009    We have a deep understanding of disaster resilience and1010recovery issues, having been engaged with risk management1011insurance challenges since our founding more than 150 years1012ago. We work with clients, including governments, individuals,1013businesses, organizations, and communities, to analyze their1014disaster risk exposures; help them implement solutions before,1015during, and after an event; address and mitigate the financial1016impact of natural disasters through insurance; and other risk1017transfer tools.1018    Before joining Marsh McLennan, I had the pleasure of1019serving in the first Trump administration as the second ranking1020official at FEMA. I served alongside a dedicated FEMA work1021force that managed a barrage of back-to-back disasters from10222017 to 2020. We embraced a locally-executed, State-managed,1023and Federally-supported approach. We always operated in support1024of the Governor. I believe then and continue to believe now1025that FEMA should not be viewed simply as the Federal1026Government's ATM reimbursing States for their costs, but1027instead positioned as the Nation's risk manager.1028    My proudest achievement at FEMA was launching and leading1029the Agency's Resilience Organization. The pre-disaster mission1030of the Resilience Organization is comprised of 3 equally1031important parts: preparedness, mitigation, and insurance. Much1032of my expertise relates to resilience and we at Marsh McLennan1033believe FEMA's mission of supporting State and local1034governments before a disaster can be strengthened, making the1035agent a trusted risk advisor, much in the way that we see1036ourselves at Marsh McLennan.1037    FEMA is most often associated with disaster response1038missions. Recent major disasters such as Hurricane Helene and1039Milton and the L.A. wildfires demonstrate why. That is when the1040spotlight is on FEMA. It's when what FEMA does matters most in1041the moment. But I strongly believe that what FEMA does before a1042disaster strikes is equally important.1043    Today's hearing presents an opportunity to engage in a1044long-overdue conversation about potential reforms to FEMA and,1045more broadly, appropriate levels of burden sharing between1046Federal, State, and local governments and with the private1047sector. I personally have seen FEMA reforms. I was the author1048of the Bush White House Hurricane Katrina After-Action Report,1049``The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned.''1050And at FEMA in the first Trump administration we proposed to1051Congress and then implemented provisions of the Disaster1052Recovery Reform Act of 2018, including the Building Resilient1053Infrastructure and Communities, or BRIC, Grant Program.1054    The strategic plan we developed at FEMA in 2017 contained a1055goal of closing the insurance gap. I now work in the property1056and casualty insurance industry and continue to focus on that1057goal. Just like FEMA, the insurance industry is at a1058crossroads. Given the recent deluge of recent disasters, from1059flooding to hurricanes to wildfires, there's a pressing need1060for proactive measures to mitigate risks and safeguard the1061well-being of our communities. Thus, resilience must be our1062collective North Star whereby we reduce the physical and1063financial impacts of disasters and transfer these risks off the1064backs of disaster survivors and the Federal balance sheet. But1065to do so, we must be prepared to match the magnitude of risks1066we face with the magnitude of effort required to manage them.1067    FEMA, through its various grant programs both1068disincentivizes and incentivizes resilience investments by1069State and local governments. The FEMA Public Assistance Program1070largely disincentivizes resilience because it amounts to a de1071facto insurance policy for State and local governments. In1072contrast, FEMA's pre-disaster programs, such as BRIC hazard1073mitigation programs, encourage resilience by providing the1074funding that saves taxpayer dollars and reduces disaster1075suffering.1076    The private sector can also incentivize resilience,1077particularly in the areas of finance, insurance, and real1078estate. These sectors should view themselves as co-1079beneficiaries of resilience investments and, therefore, should1080find ways to encourage individuals, businesses, and governments1081to make these investments.1082    Thank you for your time today and the opportunity to share1083how FEMA, together with its State and local emergency1084management partners and the private sector, can together make1085the Nation more resilient.1086    I look forward to your questions.1087    [The prepared statement of Mr. Kaniewski follows:]1088                 Prepared Statement of Daniel Kaniewski1089                         tuesday, march 4, 20251090    Marsh McLennan is the world's leading professional services firm in1091the areas of risk, strategy, and people. Our more than 90,0001092colleagues advise clients in 130 countries. We help corporate and1093public-sector clients navigate an increasingly dynamic environment and1094address the most complex challenges of our time through 4 market-1095leading businesses--Marsh, Guy Carpenter, Mercer, and Oliver Wyman.1096    We have a deep understanding of disaster resilience and recovery1097issues, having been engaged with risk management and insurance1098challenges since our founding more than 150 years ago. We work with1099clients--including individuals, businesses, organizations, governments,1100and communities--to analyze their disaster risk exposures, help them1101implement solutions before, during, and after an event, and address and1102mitigate the financial impact of natural disasters through insurance1103and other risk transfer tools.1104                           executive summary1105    The Nation needs to have a clear vision--across all levels of1106government--that balances how best to prepare for and respond to1107disasters and foster resilience. The Federal Emergency Management1108Agency (FEMA) has long been a vital part of that vision.1109Resilience1110   There is an opportunity now to underscore FEMA's mission of1111        supporting State and local governments before a disaster--as a1112        risk advisor, steward of a culture of resilience, and a funder1113        of high-impact community projects.1114   With the on-going increase in the frequency and severity of1115        natural disasters, proactive measures are needed to mitigate1116        risks and safeguard the well-being of communities.1117   Risk reduction and risk transfer should be the cornerstone1118        of a resilience-focused approach.1119   Many States have developed innovative disaster resilience1120        programs that support a national resilience strategy.1121FEMA programs cut both ways1122   FEMA's pre-disaster programs--such as the Homeland Security1123        Grant Program (HSGP), Building Resilient Infrastructure and1124        Communities (BRIC), and Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA)--1125        incentivize resilience.1126   Others, such as some aspects of the FEMA Public Assistance1127        grant program, create disincentives.1128   FEMA should work to correct the belief among some people1129        that they do not need to be financially prepared before1130        disasters because, they wrongly think, the agency will make1131        them whole.1132   The agency should also encourage individuals to prioritize1133        risk-reduction measures.1134NFIP and private flood insurance1135   Flooding remains the most common peril, involved in 901136        percent of natural disasters in the United States.1137   Insurance, including through the National Flood Insurance1138        Program (NFIP), is a critical aspect of a flood resilience1139        strategy. However, there is a growing gap in funding flood1140        losses through insurance, which results in many individuals,1141        businesses, and communities not having the financial resources1142        to recover following a flood.1143   Reasons for low coverage rates include affordability1144        constraints, limited risk awareness, poor understanding of1145        insurance, and behavioral biases in decision making. The1146        continuing flood resilience gap in the United States means that1147        many individuals, businesses, and communities lack the1148        financial resources to effectively recover following a flood or1149        other disaster.1150   The public and private flood insurance markets could be1151        improved through strengthening and protecting the NFIP, growing1152        the private flood insurance market, addressing gaps in1153        coverage, embracing innovations such as parametric insurance,1154        and more.1155   At the same time, local building and zoning laws can go a1156        long way to creating more resilient communities.1157Innovative programs1158   Programs such as community-based catastrophe insurance1159        (CBCI) can help enhance financial resilience, provide1160        affordable coverage, and incentivize risk reduction.1161   Public-private collaboration will also be essential for1162        developing solutions and incentivizing resilience to address1163        the increasing impacts of natural disasters.1164                              introduction1165    On January 24, 2025, President Donald J. Trump issued an Executive1166Order (EO) establishing the Council to Assess the Federal Emergency1167Management Agency. The EO and associated Council present an opportunity1168to have needed conversations about potential FEMA reforms and, more1169broadly, appropriate levels of burden-sharing between Federal, State,1170and local governments, as well as the private sector.1171    As stated in the New York Times:1172    A growing number of Federal emergency managers say FEMA is1173overextended. ``The real question is how those burdens should be shared1174at all levels of government,'' said Daniel Kaniewski, the second-1175highest ranking official at FEMA during Mr. Trump's first1176administration and now a managing director at Marsh McLennan, a1177consulting firm.1178    The past 4 administrators of FEMA--2 appointed by Democrats, and 21179appointed by Mr. Trump--have made versions of that argument, calling1180for States to do more. But States generally want more help, not less.1181    The Stafford Act of 1988, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and1182the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 are the principal statutes1183that form the basis of FEMA's mission. Adding in a patchwork of1184regulations, policies, and guidance, you can see the challenges facing1185recipients of FEMA assistance and FEMA itself.1186    Numerous potential FEMA reforms have been proposed over the years1187by stakeholders, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and1188various think tanks. Following Hurricanes Katrina and Maria, policy1189makers adopted reforms, such as the Post-Katrina Emergency Management1190Reform Act of 2006 and the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018.1191    It's important to underscore that FEMA is not a first responder.1192State and local emergency managers are on the front lines of disasters.1193Consistent with the Stafford Act, FEMA provides supplemental assistance1194when requested by a Governor and approved by the President.1195    FEMA provides both a coordinating function among Federal agencies1196and a funding mechanism through its Disaster Relief Fund. The goal of1197the agency is to support State and local governments and disaster1198survivors in their time of need.1199    While recent commentary has largely focused on FEMA's disaster1200response and recovery mission, this hearing and the President's EO1201provide an opportunity to consider the agency's equally important1202mission of helping State and local governments before a disaster1203strikes. The agency refers to this pre-disaster mission as1204``resilience,'' with FEMA Resilience housing its pre-disaster programs.1205    Marsh McLennan operates at the nexus of risk management and risk1206transfer, and is thus directly aligned with FEMA's resilience mission.1207Insurance plays a strong role in both signaling and mitigating risk,1208and as such can help inform State and local officials' risk-based1209decisions.1210    Insurance pricing is driven by the level of risk--for today's1211discussion, the frequency and severity of disasters. For example, some1212are questioning insurance pricing and whether Southern California1213communities remain insurable against wildfires. But the real question1214is whether we are prepared to match the magnitude of risks we face with1215the magnitude of effort required to manage them.1216    By reducing the physical and financial impacts of disasters, we can1217transfer risks off the backs of disaster survivors--and the Federal1218balance sheet. To do so we must align on resilience as our collective1219North Star.1220                               resilience1221    Without a long-term commitment to resilience, society faces a1222never-ending risk crisis. We must break the cycle of destruction and1223instead build stronger and more resilient structures and communities.1224FEMA defines resilience as ``the ability to prepare for threats and1225hazards, adapt to changing conditions, and withstand and recover1226rapidly from disruptions.'' More practically, resilience at FEMA can be1227thought of as 3 equally important elements: preparedness, mitigation,1228and insurance. Each is a core component of the FEMA Resilience1229organization and, more generally, any emergency management resilience1230strategy, with each component complementary to the other. For example,1231investing in hazard mitigation can make insurance more available or1232affordable to a community.1233    In an era of escalating risks and evolving challenges, the1234insurance industry--like FEMA--is at a crossroads. As we witness the1235increasing frequency and severity of natural hazards such as flooding1236and wildfires, there is a pressing need for proactive measures to1237mitigate risks and safeguard the well-being of communities. Embracing1238the transformative power of risk reduction in the built environment is1239not just a strategy for sustainable development; it is a vital step1240toward reducing Federal taxpayer impacts and fortifying insurance1241markets against the uncertainties of our changing world.1242    Resilient reconstruction--rebuilding in a way that reduces future1243disaster impacts--also has a role to play. To rebuild following a1244disaster using the same guidelines and methods as before would be1245shortsighted. For example, California and Los Angeles officials are now1246considering how best to reconstruct the homes, businesses, and, in many1247cases, entire neighborhoods that were destroyed this year by wildfire.1248Incorporating fire-resistant building materials and adopting and1249enforcing wildland-urban interface (WUI) building codes would make LA1250more resilient to future wildfires. These actions would also encourage1251insurers to provide coverage.1252    By collectively prioritizing resilience, we have an opportunity to1253not only reduce the frequency and severity of losses, but also to1254foster a more resilient and insurable built environment.1255                   fema incentives and disincentives1256    FEMA, through its various grant programs, both incentivizes and1257disincentivizes resilience investments by State and local governments.1258FEMA programs that incentivize resilience1259    FEMA's pre-disaster programs aimed at incentivizing resilience1260include preparedness and hazard mitigation grants. The Homeland1261Security Grant Program (HSGP) is one example of a preparedness grant1262program, described as ``a suite of risk-based grants to assist State,1263local, Tribal, and territorial efforts in preventing, protecting1264against, mitigating, responding to, and recovering from acts of1265terrorism and other threats.''1266    Other examples of grants that incentivize resilience include FEMA's1267Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) and Flood1268Mitigation Assistance (FMA) grant programs. BRIC was created through1269the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 with the aim of reducing1270disaster losses; both programs provide funding for communities to1271reduce risks and build resilience.1272    FEMA's hazard mitigation grant programs have a demonstrable benefit1273to society. The National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) study1274Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves found that every $1 invested in1275disaster mitigation saves $6 in future disaster-related costs.1276    A 2024 report--The Preparedness Payoff--by the U.S. Chamber of1277Commerce and AllState built on the NIBS findings and found that for1278every $1 invested in hazard mitigation, there is a return of $13 in1279reduced losses and economic savings.1280    Following a disaster, FEMA incentivizes resilient reconstruction1281through its Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), which provides1282post-disaster hazard mitigation funding based on estimated total1283Federal assistance provided following a Presidentially-declared1284disaster. This can be up to 15 percent (or 20 percent with a FEMA-1285designated enhanced State mitigation plan), which can be spent on1286allowable hazard mitigation activities.1287    And most importantly, mitigation measures not only save money--they1288save lives. More resilient homes, businesses, and infrastructure means1289individuals, employees, and families will be safe when disaster1290strikes.1291FEMA programs that disincentivize resilience1292    There are also FEMA grants that can be seen as disincentivizing1293State and local governments from investing in resilience. These are the1294post-disaster Public Assistance (PA) grants, particularly those focused1295on so-called ``permanent work.'' By providing a minimum reimbursement1296of 75 percent of disaster losses related to government infrastructure1297and buildings, the Federal Government provides de facto no-cost1298insurance to public entities. It does so without regard to any efforts1299made by these governments to reduce their risks.1300    Under the current approach, the Federal Government agrees to1301reimburse a State receiving a disaster declaration at a minimum of 751302percent of all costs, without regard to risk. No private insurance1303underwriter would agree to such terms. This creates a potential moral1304hazard, whereby the Federal Government shifts the costs of disaster1305risk from their communities to the Federal taxpayer.1306    The most glaring of the various categories of Public Assistance is1307the so-called ``Category E--Public Buildings and contents.'' In the 201308years from 1999 to 2019, FEMA provided $19 billion to States to1309reimburse them for their losses to public buildings and contents. At 221310percent of the total amount obligated during this period, it represents1311the largest share of any permanent work category.1312    FEMA and other stakeholders have long recognized both the burden1313such a program places on FEMA and Federal taxpayers and how it1314discourages State and local governments from investing in resilience.1315Consider this example from 25 years ago, described in a RAND study on1316the FEMA PA program:13171318``In 2000, FEMA published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking in1319the Federal Register outlining potential reforms to the PA program. In1320the notice, FEMA argued that, by paying for facility repair costs1321regardless of whether the facility had insurance, the PA program1322creates a disincentive for the owner to obtain insurance before a1323disaster occurs. OIG echoed these concerns several years later,1324stating, ``[T]he PA program pays for building repair costs following a1325first disaster. This effectively eliminates any incentive to purchase1326insurance before a disaster occurs.''13271328    In 2016, FEMA proposed a ``disaster deductible'' concept, which1329would have required a predetermined level of financial or other1330commitment from a State before providing PA funding.13311332``FEMA believes the deductible model would incentivize Recipients to1333make meaningful improvements in disaster planning, fiscal capacity for1334disaster response and recovery, and risk mitigation while contributing1335to more effective stewardship of taxpayer dollars. For example,1336Recipients could potentially receive credit toward their deductible1337requirement through proactive pre-event actions such as adopting1338enhanced building codes, establishing and maintaining a disaster relief1339fund or self-insurance plan, or adopting other measures that reduce the1340Recipient's risk from disaster events. The deductible model would1341increase stakeholder investment and participation in disaster recovery1342and building for future risk, thereby strengthening our nation's1343resilience to disaster events and reducing the cost of disasters in the1344long term.''13451346    More recently, in the first Trump administration, the President's1347fiscal year 2021 budget request included the following language (page1348112):13491350``FEMA's current program is a no-limit, no-premium insurance policy for1351State and local governments, which disincentivizes self-protection and1352burdens taxpayers with the risky decisions made by State and local1353governments. Eliminating this assistance will encourage State and local1354governments to more responsibly manage their risk, including better1355land management and planning, purchasing insurance, and/or investing in1356mitigation.''13571358    Despite the attention brought to Category E expenses over the past135925 years, no actions were taken.1360    Local governments own over 3 million buildings. Having the Federal1361taxpayer pay for damage to these insurable structures represents a1362missed opportunity to transfer risk off the Federal balance sheet and1363onto the private insurance markets. Thus, FEMA should consider1364eliminating eligibility for Category E projects.1365    Moreover, with the development of innovative risk transfer1366solutions, such as parametric insurance (described below), public1367infrastructure once thought to be uninsurable could be covered by the1368private insurance markets. This means that FEMA could consider1369limiting, over time, other categories of PA beyond Category E as1370governments and the insurance industry adjust to a new reality of1371public-private burden sharing.1372FEMA assistance to individuals vs homeowners/renters insurance1373    Up to this point, we have focused on programs that provide funding1374to governments. But FEMA also provides funding to those impacted by1375disasters. The FEMA Individual and Households Program (IA) provides1376assistance to disaster survivors following a Presidential declaration.1377FEMA IA provides a safety net, nothing more, nothing less. Those with1378insurance will recover more quickly and more fully than those who rely1379solely on FEMA assistance.1380    Insurance is a financial shock absorber for disasters. By1381purchasing homeowners or renters insurance, individuals are protecting1382themselves and their families against the financial trauma they would1383otherwise face in the wake of a disaster. This includes not only1384repairing or replacing your home and personal belongings, but also1385temporary housing and additional living expenses while you are1386displaced from your home. According to a recent study, those with1387property insurance were 82 percent less likely to have significant1388financial burdens after a hurricane than those without.1389    FEMA should do its best to correct a belief among many Americans1390that they do not need insurance because the agency will make them1391whole.1392    The process of buying insurance also forces homeowners (as well as1393business owners and governments) to understand their risks, and the1394price of these risks. Homeowners can consult home disaster guides1395produced by the industry-funded nonprofit Insurance Institute for1396Business & Home Safety to learn more about steps they can take to1397address these risks. Insurance agents and brokers can also help advise1398homeowners how best to mitigate these risks and potentially lower their1399premiums.1400    Similarly, FEMA should encourage homeowners in disaster-prone areas1401to invest in hazard mitigation measures, such as retrofitting a home in1402a seismically active area or elevating a home in a flood zone. Some of1403these actions are relatively easy and affordable, such as reducing the1404risk of wildfire losses by removing brush around a home. Taking these1405steps can save lives, reduce financial losses, and even reduce1406insurance premiums. For more on this topic, see: Americans lack savings1407for unrelenting disasters.1408    FEMA can incentivize individuals to take these actions by1409encouraging grant recipients (primarily States) to focus on community-1410based programs. States on their own can also incentivize these actions1411through grant programs to homeowners.1412              how fema can further incentivize resilience1413    As discussed earlier, FEMA preparedness and hazard mitigation1414grants incentivize resilience, while post-disaster Public Assistance1415grants generally disincentive governments from investing in resilience.1416One exception to this rule of thumb is the Public Assistance incentive1417authority granted to FEMA in the 2018 Balanced Budget Act.1418FEMA Public Assistance Incentive Policy1419    The Public Assistance Incentive authority amends Section 406(b) of1420the Stafford Act to increase the Federal cost share of its PA programs1421for communities that take proactive steps to reduce hazards. The1422resilience measures identified in the statute--mitigation plans,1423insurance, emergency management programs, building codes, risk ratings,1424State/local mitigation funding, and tax incentives--aim to reduce1425financial losses and human suffering while getting communities up and1426running quickly after a disaster. By raising the Federal cost share for1427FEMA PA on a sliding scale from 75 percent to 85 percent, a community1428that takes proactive steps could receive millions of dollars more in1429post-disaster funding.1430    At the tail end of the last administration, FEMA issued an interim1431Public Assistance Mitigation Cost Share Incentives Policy. However, as1432noted in a letter from BuildStrong America, signed by our firm and such1433organizations as the National Institute of Building Sciences and the1434U.S. Chamber of Commerce:1435    While the law aimed to incentivize proactive State investments in1436risk reduction, the interim policy falls short of meeting Congressional1437intent, missing critical opportunities to operationalize key measures1438of the law.1439    Instead of encouraging proactive State and local investments in1440disaster resilience, the interim policy spends additional taxpayer1441funds on post-disaster activities. Rather than encouraging pre-disaster1442mitigation, it focuses on post-disaster grant compliance. It disregards1443effective State-led resilience programs, neglects critical1444infrastructure, ignores the role of insurance, and fails to acknowledge1445the tools emergency managers could employ to build resilience.1446    We encourage FEMA to revise the interim policy to foster a1447proactive approach to resilience. The policy should empower States,1448recognize successful programs, and prioritize essential mitigation1449measures to safeguard our communities from future disaster risks.1450Insurance roadblocks1451    Insurance is just as critical to achieving resilience as are1452preparedness and mitigation, yet applicants may not purchase insurance1453under existing FEMA grant programs. This poses a challenge for State1454and local officials who wish to reduce the financial risks to their1455communities. It also stands in contrast to other resilience measures1456which are eligible under FEMA grants programs. Thus, a community that1457has already taken other resilience actions is not eligible to protect1458their (and, in the case of those actions funded by Federal grants, the1459Federal taxpayers') investment.1460    Further, the PA program creates additional challenges. Without1461insurance, a community struck by a disaster will be eligible for1462Federal assistance following a Presidential disaster declaration. Those1463with insurance will not. This creates a disincentive for governments to1464use insurance to protect themselves and their communities from the1465financial impacts of disasters, resulting in a potential moral hazard1466underwritten by the Federal taxpayer.1467New challenges1468    With recent reported staff cuts at FEMA, the agency is being asked1469to do more with less and may need to triage where it spends its limited1470resources. Historically, when its funding runs low or the agency is1471stretched thin due to current disasters, FEMA prioritizes the immediate1472needs of disaster survivors. Whether due to staff shortages or other1473resource constraints, this could mean a shift away from resilience1474activities, which could have significant long-term implications for1475communities at risk of disasters.1476    Such a disruption could mean a larger role for State and local1477governments, and the insurance industry. The conversation about burden-1478sharing among Federal, State, and local governments will become more1479acute. Even if programs continue to exist, staff shortages could mean1480delays in the delivery of assistance. Such delays could be financially1481untenable for State and local governments with cash-flow needs, making1482insurance more necessary for State and local governments.1483    Thus, the insurance industry should be prepared to support State1484and local officials as they consider alternative funding arrangements,1485including budgeting for disasters with ``rainy day funds'' and placing1486insurance to reduce budget impacts.1487              nfip and the private flood insurance market1488    While FEMA takes an all-hazards approach, flooding remains a1489persistent peril, with 90 percent of natural disasters in the United1490States involving floods. Flooding disproportionately affects lower-1491income communities, which are more vulnerable and more exposed to1492flooding. One way to help bridge the divide is by increasing1493participation in flood insurance. Studies have shown that individuals1494and communities with flood insurance recover better and faster than1495those without.1496    It's important to keep in mind that insurance is but one piece of a1497flood resilience strategy, along with investment in risk reduction1498measures, enhanced access to flood risk data, and smarter land use1499planning. But, while insurance is a critical part of recovery from1500natural disasters, many households and businesses simply do not have1501adequate coverage for repairs and rebuilding.1502    In fact, as stated in a recent report from Marsh McLennan's Torrent1503Technologies: ``There is a persistent and growing gap in funding flood1504losses through insurance. Closing this gap is essential for1505accelerating recovery, alleviating suffering, and enhancing flood1506resilience.''15071508    The reasons for low coverage rates vary and include affordability1509constraints, limited risk awareness, poor understanding of insurance,1510and behavioral biases in decision making. The continuing flood1511resilience gap in the United States means that many individuals,1512businesses, and communities do not have the financial resources to1513effectively recover following a flood or other disaster.1514    We believe there are several ways to improve the public and private1515flood insurance markets, including:1516    Strengthen the NFIP.--With current debt of more than $22 billion1517and hundreds of millions of dollars in interest payable annually, the1518NFIP needs reform and long-term reauthorization to become a sustainable1519source of flood insurance. A sound financial framework for the NFIP1520authorized by Congress would help reinforce the program.1521    A key part of FEMA's sound financial framework is its new pricing1522methodology, Risk Rating 2.0. The rating program is intended to make1523NFIP premiums more actuarially sound to better reflect the underlying1524flood risk and recognize loss mitigation efforts. To address1525affordability concerns associated with the new risk-adjusted rates,1526Congress could consider authorizing targeted assistance, such as a1527means-tested assistance program.1528    Protect the NFIP with reinsurance solutions.--Guy Carpenter, a1529business of Marsh McLennan, is FEMA's broker, securing reinsurance for1530the NFIP. Reinsurance is backed by professional reinsurers and capital1531market investors; these programs help to supplement the financial1532resources of the NFIP following significant flooding events, while at1533the same time protecting the NFIP and taxpayers by transferring risk.1534For example, Hurricane Harvey triggered a full reinsurance payout,1535saving taxpayers over $850 million.1536    Grow the private flood market.--FEMA has proposed a package of NFIP1537reforms in which the agency recognizes the role of a private flood1538insurance market in supplementing and supporting the government-backed1539program. As flood risks increase, so too has the need for the private1540flood insurance market, which is expected to keep growing.1541    At the same time, advances in risk assessment and data analytics1542are making the flood peril increasingly predictable and revealing that1543many properties--especially those outside FEMA flood zones--are at1544greater risk than previously understood.1545    Private flood insurance can offer options that make purchasing1546flood coverage easier and more attractive. Each property that obtains1547flood coverage in the private market is a risk the NFIP and U.S.1548taxpayers do not have to bear. The private market offers the1549possibility for innovation and products to further close the flood1550insurance gap.1551    Address gaps in NFIP coverage.--The NFIP has gaps in coverage for1552residential and commercial properties. For residential properties,1553additional living expenses (funds to pay living expenses while the1554flooded property is repaired) are not included in NFIP policies. For1555commercial properties, business interruption is not covered by NFIP. As1556we have seen in previous flood events, those homeowners and businesses1557without these types of coverage struggled to recover. Of note, private1558flood policies often do cover these expenses for homeowners and1559businesses.1560    Embrace innovations such as parametric insurance.--To attract new1561stakeholders, the flood insurance market and its regulators must1562embrace innovative alternatives that complement the NFIP. One option1563that has gained increasing traction in recent years is parametric1564insurance, which deploys a measurable index with predefined triggers1565for payout.1566    Unlike most forms of traditional property insurance, pricing is1567based primarily on the probability of the loss indexed being triggered,1568rather than by the specific risk of damage suffered by the benefit's1569recipients. Parametric solutions offer a more expedited contract1570payout, typically getting funds into the hands of those who have1571suffered a loss in a matter of days, which can accelerate recovery.1572This is particularly important when it comes to floods, as a delay in1573restoration can result in the proliferation of mold, which over time1574contributes to health problems.1575    Promote excess flood coverage to complement the NFIP.--While the1576NFIP remains a valuable source of flood insurance, its coverage limits1577are insufficient for many higher-value properties with flood exposure.1578Such properties need excess coverage to supplement NFIP protection. For1579example, in the third quarter of 2023, the median price of homes sold1580in the United States was $431,000, according to Federal Reserve data;1581this substantially exceeds the NFIP dwelling limit of $250,000.1582    Leverage existing NFIP incentive programs such as the Community1583Rating System (CRS).--CRS is a voluntary incentive program that1584recognizes and encourages community floodplain management practices1585that exceed the NFIP's minimum requirements. Over 1,500 communities1586participate nationwide.1587    In CRS communities, flood insurance premium rates are discounted to1588reflect the reduced flood risk that results from community efforts to1589address the program's three goals:1590    1. Reduce and avoid flood damage to insurable property.1591    2. Strengthen and support the insurance aspects of the NFIP.1592    3. Foster comprehensive floodplain management.1593    Tulsa, Oklahoma, and Roseville, California, are the only 21594communities to have achieved the highest rating of Class 1. NFIP policy1595holders in these cities receive the CRS program maximum discount of 451596percent. Both communities made concerted efforts to invest in flood1597resilience following catastrophic flooding events.1598    See also: As Floods Become Bigger and More Common, Risks from1599Insurance Gaps Also Grow.1600             innovative state and local resilience programs1601    As FEMA has put in place resilience programs, States too have1602launched programs that build resilience.1603    While Federal resilience grants often receive the most attention,1604several States are allocating State budgets and leveraging other1605funding sources to build resilience programs. For example, South1606Carolina's Strategic Statewide Resilience and Risk Reduction Plan is1607notable because it's not simply a plan; the State provided $200 million1608to fund identified project priorities, largely focused on flood1609resilience.1610    Other States offer resilience grant programs directed to1611homeowners. Many of these programs are in the southeastern United1612States and focus on home retrofits for wind events, such as hurricanes1613and tornadoes.1614    Alabama.--The Strengthen Alabama Homes program provides grants for1615homeowners to fund wind mitigation measures for single-family homes.1616The grants pay 100 percent of mitigation costs up to $10,000 to meet1617the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS)1618FORTIFIEDTM standard, designed to reduce wind and wind-1619driven water impacts caused by hurricanes. Funding for this program is1620provided by the insurance industry, rather than the Government (which1621administers the program).1622    Given the program has been providing homeowners grants for a1623decade, researchers from the University of Alabama, Auburn University,1624and the University of Mississippi sought to determine the benefits of1625the program, and of hazard mitigation investments more broadly. Their1626landmark study empirically demonstrated the value of hazard mitigation1627investments, providing strong incentives for homeowners to invest in1628hazard mitigation:1629   Lower insurance premiums.--Fortified homes have 16 percent1630        to 40 percent lower property insurance premiums.1631   Higher resale value.--Fortified homes sell for 6 percent to1632        7 percent more than other homes.1633    This is not a Federal program, but a standard promulgated by a non-1634profit organization (IBHS) together with a State statute linked to1635insurance premiums and real estate market dynamics. The study's1636findings demonstrate that a homeowner can be incentivized to invest in1637hazard mitigation even in the absence of Federal funding.1638    Florida.--My Safe Florida Home Program aims at strengthening homes1639against hurricanes. Owners of single-family homes and townhouses may1640apply for a free home hurricane inspection. If recommended by the1641inspection, homeowners become eligible to apply for financial1642assistance for improvements to roofs, doors, and windows. It is a1643matching program--for every $1 invested by the homeowner the State will1644provide $2 toward the project, equivalent to two-thirds of the project1645cost, up to $10,000. The program also waives State sales tax (61646percent) on the retail purchases of impact-resistant doors, garage1647doors, and windows. The Florida legislature provided over $176 million1648for the program.1649    South Carolina.--The South Carolina Safe Home program, administered1650by the South Carolina Department of Insurance, provides matching and1651non-matching grant funds to help coastal property owners retrofit their1652homes to make them more resistant to hurricanes and high winds. The1653funds provided by the program are for the sole purpose of retrofitting1654owner-occupied, single-family homes.1655    Louisiana.--Louisiana officials launched a $30 million hazard1656mitigation grant program for residential and commercial buildings,1657modeled on the above-mentioned Alabama program. The grants will provide1658up to $10,000 to retrofit roofs to a Fortified home standard, thereby1659making Louisiana homes and businesses more resilient to hurricanes.1660Unlike the Alabama program, which is funded by the insurance industry,1661the Louisiana program is State-funded. Similar to what researchers1662found in Alabama, Louisiana residents who retrofit or build their homes1663to the Fortified standard could save 20 percent to over 50 percent on1664the wind portion of their homeowner's insurance.1665Building codes and zoning laws1666    Local officials have significant influence over the resilience of1667their communities because they can determine how and where residential1668and commercial structures are sited and built. This is best1669demonstrated through zoning and building code ordinances. By requiring1670that structures be situated outside disaster-prone areas and built to a1671resilient standard, local officials can reduce disaster impacts to1672their communities. NIBS has determined that adopting a disaster-1673resistant model building code results in a savings of $11 for every $11674spent to adopt and enforce the code.1675    In the decades since Hurricane Andrew struck southern Florida in16761992, the State has developed some of the country's strongest building1677codes, which are credited with significantly reducing the damage from1678hurricanes. Among other things, Florida's building codes require new1679construction to withstand high winds, floodwaters, and other storm-1680related stresses. This has helped protect homes and reduced the overall1681impact hurricanes have on communities, avoiding more than $1 billion in1682average insured losses for Florida alone.1683                 community-based catastrophe insurance1684    An innovative approach to boost financial protection for1685communities that Marsh McLennan is involved in is known as community-1686based catastrophe insurance (CBCI). Essentially, CBCI provides disaster1687insurance arranged by a local government, quasi-governmental body, or1688community group to cover a group of properties.1689    The benefits of CBCI fall into 3 main areas: enhancing financial1690resilience, providing affordable coverage, and creating incentives for1691risk reduction at the community and individual levels (see Figure 1).16921693    This type of program is flexible and can be created to cover a1694single hazard or a range of natural disasters for a given community,1695including floods, wildfires, earthquakes, and others. Such broad1696applications can further incentivize a community's risk management1697efforts--risk reduction, risk communication, and risk transfer--across1698multiple perils.1699    One benefit of community-based catastrophe insurance is the1700flexibility it allows in defining ``community,'' which can be an agency1701or municipal government, a neighborhood association, a business1702improvement district, or any number of entities. The primary1703requirement is that the involved community has the authority to secure1704or facilitate insurance coverage on behalf of multiple properties.1705    Within broad parameters, CBCI has much flexibility in its structure1706and design, with varying degrees of community responsibilities possible1707(see Figure 2). These range from a facilitator model, where the1708community members contract with insurers, to a captive insurer, in1709which the community establishes and operates its own risk-bearing1710entity.17111712    To facilitate these types of transactions, it would be helpful for1713FEMA to allow eligibility for grant funding for CBCI, and to clarify1714whether the proceeds from a parametric insurance policy (specifically1715tailored to cover losses not eligible under the Public Assistance1716program) can count toward the State's Public Assistance matching1717requirement.1718A CBCI pilot program: Boosting financial resilience in NYC1719        neighborhoods1720    Marsh McLennan is currently involved with a project in New York1721City, which is the Nation's first CBCI. The project's goal is to1722increase the financial resilience of low- and moderate-income1723households to flood risk. These communities are increasingly vulnerable1724to flooding and are, in many instances, under-insured or uninsured.1725    Guy Carpenter, a business of Marsh McLennan, is working with the1726city of New York; the non-profits Center for NYC Neighborhoods (CNYCN),1727Environmental Defense Fund, and SBP; reinsurer Swiss Re; and insurtechs1728ICEYE and Raincoat to pilot the program in designated neighborhoods.1729    The program, which was recently renewed for a second year, is built1730on a parametric model, described earlier. Once a qualified event1731triggers a payment, homeowners can apply for assistance. Qualified1732applicants can then quickly receive a grant up to $15,000 from CNYCN1733following a qualified flood event.1734    The payments will support residents and their broader communities1735in getting back to normal faster. We are proud to have helped kickstart1736this innovative program and hope it will help other communities to1737establish their own CBCI program. Federal grant funding could be a1738catalyst here.1739                      public-private partnerships1740What the insurance industry can do1741    Public-private collaboration involving policy makers is essential1742for developing sustainable solutions.1743    Relationships matter in insurance. For example, insurance agents1744often have strong connections with homeowners and businesses in their1745communities. We believe that agents and brokers talking with clients1746about their exposure and ways they can manage the risk and build1747resilience is a good way for them to demonstrate their value and1748enhance those relationships. Likewise, insurers and reinsurers should1749see how resilience actions by their insureds not only reduce risks to1750an individual home or business, but also to the (re)insurer's1751portfolio.1752    The insurance industry and FEMA should work with national1753stakeholder organizations that advocate and educate on the importance1754of resilience as a force multiplier at the State and local levels. For1755example, BuildStrong America has advocated for increased investments in1756resilience on the Federal and State level for over a decade. Joining1757forces with firefighters, emergency responders, insurers, engineers,1758architects, contractors, manufacturers, consumer organizations, code1759specialists, and many others committed to resilience, BuildStrong1760successfully pushed for the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018. The1761Act created FEMA's BRIC program, as well as additional measures to1762enhance BRIC through proposals like the Resilient AMERICA Act, which1763would create a set-aside for building code adoption and enforcement and1764another set-aside for residential retrofits.1765    The Federal Alliance for Safe Homes (FLASH) is the leading consumer1766advocate for strengthening homes and safeguarding families from natural1767and manmade disasters. Through programs like Inspect2Protect--which1768helps local communities and individuals to understand the building code1769where they live--and The Homeowner's Guide to Insurance, FLASH designs1770and develops effective and easy-to-use tools and techniques to foster1771mitigation behavior change.1772    The insurance industry and other stakeholders should work with FEMA1773and consensus-based model code-developing organizations, such as the1774International Code Council (ICC), to encourage additional hazard1775mitigation opportunities and investments for communities and1776individuals. For example, FEMA and the insurance industry could1777encourage modern code adoption and enforcement requirements following a1778major disaster. Currently, only repair and reconstruction of public1779facilities is required to be done to the latest editions of model1780codes.1781How the private sector can incentivize resilience1782    In addition to FEMA's preparedness and hazard mitigation grants,1783the finance, insurance, and real estate industries can also incentivize1784resilience investments. The National Institute of Building Sciences1785(NIBS) developed a road map for resilience incentives, specifically1786focused on residential buildings subject to flood. NIBS identified1787``co-beneficiaries'' of mitigation investments and highlighted how1788these co-beneficiaries can help pay for such investments (see Figures 41789and 5).17901791    Engaging co-beneficiaries is not without its challenges, as the1792NIBS report highlights:1793    1. Mitigation saves, but it doesn't do so in proportion to1794        individual stakeholder investments.--Investment in disaster1795        resilience makes financial sense for society--but for1796        individual stakeholders the cost can seem to exceed the1797        benefits.1798    For example, the $5,000 it might cost to retrofit an existing house1799        benefits the current owner, future owners, insurers (by1800        limiting the risk of flood-related claims, assuming the1801        property is insured against flood), financial institutions1802        holding the property owner's mortgage, and so forth. The1803        retrofit saves society more than it costs in places with at1804        least a 1-in-100 chance of basement flooding per year. It saves1805        up to 13 times the cost in the highest hazard locations.1806    But, to the homeowner paying the entire cost, the investment can1807        seem hard to justify. (Building for flood resilience at the1808        time of initial construction is less expensive and more cost-1809        effective, and it makes sense even when flooding occurs less1810        frequently.)1811    2. Co-beneficiaries can share the cost of such investments--but1812        they face similar challenges to those of the property owner.--1813        In the $5,000 basement-flood retrofit example, mortgage holders1814        and governments would save in the long run by offering a total1815        of $3,300 in incentives anywhere with at least a 1-in-1001816        chance of basement flooding per year. Homeowners would end up1817        paying only $1,700 and saving more than they pay in both1818        moderate- as well as high-hazard locations. Why don't co-1819        beneficiaries provide these incentives? Because stakeholders'1820        interests are intertwined, but not aligned.1821    3. Public-private coordination is essential.--Co-beneficiaries are1822        interested in aligning incentives, though it would require1823        engagement from governments and industry stakeholders.1824    Engaging industry and government stakeholders to align resilience1825incentives is essential, just as we raised with the financial services1826sector at a U.S. Department of the Treasury roundtable following1827Hurricanes Helene and Milton.1828                  a comprehensive resilience strategy1829    Federal, State, and local officials need a clear vision that moves1830beyond unsustainable paradigms of protection and strikes a balance1831between addressing crises and fostering resilience. Insurance and risk1832transfer certainly have an important role to play, but must be combined1833with a broader, coordinated resilience strategy.1834    Ideally, insurance would be paired with risk reduction measures1835such as hazard mitigation, building codes adoption, enforcement,1836retrofits, and community resilience planning. While a few States (such1837as those mentioned earlier) have their own resilience grant programs,1838the preponderance of resilience grant funding is provided by the1839Federal Government, principally FEMA (such as through the BRIC and FMA1840programs).1841    Pairing these Federal and/or State grants with risk transfer1842solutions can be a force multiplier. We believe that CBCI projects,1843like the NYC pilot, demonstrate the value of risk reduction measures1844alongside the benefits of risk transfer. We would like to see FEMA1845encourage more such innovation and experimentation.1846    That said, CBCI and other private risk transfer programs could be1847more successful if disincentives present in existing statutes and1848regulations are addressed. For example, the Stafford Act contains1849disincentives for homeowners and governments from purchasing insurance1850because FEMA's recovery programs provide funding to uninsured1851individuals and State and local governments after a disaster.1852    As such, many individuals wrongly believe they will be made whole1853by FEMA assistance following a major disaster. Meanwhile, governments1854are not inclined to insure their buildings and infrastructure because1855they will receive funding that covers most of their losses if the1856President declares a disaster. Mitigation investment will fall short of1857desired outcomes without corresponding risk transfer strategies.1858                               conclusion1859    Given the scale and complexity of the challenges presented by1860disaster risk, we believe that FEMA plays a vital role in preparing1861for, responding to, and mitigating disasters. As with any long-standing1862organization, it is good to revisit its mission, tools, and impact at1863times, and we are glad to have been asked to participate in this1864hearing.1865    While the effects of disasters are felt most acutely in the States1866and communities where they occur, their ripple effects extend more1867broadly to human, economic, and social costs such as supply chain1868disruptions, infrastructure failure, and hardship to the economy. Over1869time, FEMA has had a positive influence in helping to mitigate and1870manage the risks.1871    Today, conventional strategies and policies are insufficient to1872address the rapidly-changing risk levels, and it appears we are at a1873time in which market forces are helping to drive decision making toward1874the social good promoted by resilience.1875    The Federal Government's unqualified financial support of the1876Nation's spiraling disaster recovery costs is unsustainable. FEMA and1877emergency management agencies at all levels of government need to1878embrace a proactive approach that prioritizes preparedness, hazard1879mitigation, and insurance. In short, disaster resilience. But1880governments alone cannot solve this challenge.1881    Achieving resilience will require partnerships between governments1882and private industry. Together, the public and private sectors can1883incentivize individuals and governments to reduce disaster impacts and1884build resilience in their homes, and their communities.18851886    Mr. Strong. Thank you, Dr. Kaniewski.1887    I now recognize Ms. Speranza, there we go, for 5 minutes to1888summarize her opening statements.18891890  STATEMENT OF CARRIE SPERANZA, CERTIFIED EMERGENCY MANAGER,1891  PRESIDENT, U.S. COUNCIL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF1892                       EMERGENCY MANAGERS18931894    Ms. Speranza. Good morning, Chairman Strong, Ranking Member1895Kennedy, and Members of the subcommittee. My name is Carrie1896Speranza and I'm appearing before you today as president of the1897U.S. Council of the International Association of Emergency1898Managers, an organization representing emergency management1899practitioners world-wide, with over 5,000 U.S. members.1900    Members of the subcommittee, your local, State, Tribal, and1901territorial emergency management agencies ensure your1902communities are prepared to respond to and recover from1903emergencies and disasters. We create and manage systems that1904save lives, minimize damage to property and infrastructure,1905mitigate future risks, and help restore communities after a1906disaster. We are grateful to be a part of today's conversation1907because we know that our efforts are only possible with the1908support of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.1909    To serve our communities effectively, disaster management1910must be Federally supported, State administered, and locally1911executed. Together with the private industry, this multi-sector1912approach is a necessary partnership, particularly when1913disasters overwhelm local and State resources. Reform of1914Federal disaster programs is long overdue, but I'd like to1915highlight a few FEMA programs that must be sustained through1916this process and also speak to opportunities for change.1917    First, sustainment. FEMA must maintain its role in driving1918change through its preparedness programs. These programs serve1919as the underlying foundation from which all local and State1920emergency management capabilities are derived. Through this1921investment, FEMA helps to establish national standards for1922State and local personnel so that assets could be provided1923through mutual aid. This capability is essential as illustrated1924by Hurricanes Helene and Milton, where over 6,300 public safety1925personnel deployed for 290 mutual aid missions.1926    Preparedness is not a matter of insurance before a1927disaster. Instead, these FEMA preparedness programs provide1928assurances that we can aid each other in times of disaster, and1929preparing through planning, training, exercising, and1930standardization is crucial.1931    FEMA's hazard mitigation programs must also be sustained as1932they drive long-term change by helping communities safeguard1933against future risk. Without FEMA's partnership, communities1934will become more vulnerable. As the National Institute of1935Building Sciences outlined in its 2019 ``Mitigation Saves''1936report, public-sector grant investments in mitigation save $61937for every $1 spent, meaning mitigating risks is simply good1938business.1939    Opportunities for change. First, reform must prioritize1940building a disaster-resistant America by incentivizing and1941rewarding smart decision making and fiscal responsibility at1942the local and State levels. Examples include establishing and1943adhering to building codes in all communities and requiring1944adequate property and rental insurance.1945    Additionally, jurisdiction should prioritize emergency1946management as a necessary function to invest in. All States1947should establish a disaster relief fund as their first line of1948defense to provide immediate aid to survivors before calling on1949FEMA to help. FEMA can play a role in incentivizing these1950actions by increasing preparedness and pre-disaster mitigation1951assistance or by reducing the non-Federal cost share1952requirements post-disaster.1953    The second opportunity for reform involves efforts to1954minimize long-term recovery costs by adjusting the disaster1955declaration process and establishing a Federal long-term1956recovery exit strategy. FEMA has the expertise that provides1957communities with best practices for long-term recovery planning1958and coordination, making them an invaluable partner at the1959onset of the recovery process. However, a calculated exit1960strategy that transitions leadership to the local jurisdiction1961coupled with recovery funds will help everyone when they need1962it most and the decrease in extended Federal oversight will1963expedite the rebuilding process.1964    Recent ideas about FEMA reform have included shifting1965response and recovery responsibilities and block grant1966administration to the States. I want to offer that this1967approach will only work if the methodology is transparent and1968financial controls are implemented. To reduce long-term1969recovery costs, policies must require a mandatory minimum1970passthrough to the jurisdictions affected by the disaster. This1971will ensure that resources are not redirected to non-disaster-1972related activities.1973    Finally, to implement any of these recommendations,1974Congress must amend the Stafford Act, providing a modernized1975framework for FEMA to operate more effectively. It is a1976necessary step in this process and we need your help.1977    Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, the International1978Association of Emergency Managers fully supports a1979comprehensive review and reform of FEMA. Reform will ultimately1980help the people of America. That is what emergency managers do:1981we help people before, during, and after disasters.1982    Thank you again for the opportunity to be here today and I1983look forward to your questions.1984    [The prepared statement of Ms. Speranza follows:]1985                 Prepared Statement of Carrie Speranza1986                             March 4, 20251987    Good morning, Chairman Strong, Ranking Member Kennedy, and Members1988of the subcommittee. My name is Carrie Speranza, and I am appearing1989before you today as president of the U.S. Council of the International1990Association of Emergency Managers, an organization representing1991emergency management practitioners world-wide with more than 5,000 U.S.1992members.1993    Members of the subcommittee, your local, State, Tribal, and1994territorial emergency management agencies ensure your communities are1995prepared to respond to and recover from emergencies and disasters. We1996create and manage systems that save lives, minimize damage to property1997and infrastructure, mitigate future risks, and help restore communities1998after a disaster. We are grateful to be a part of today's conversation1999because we know that our efforts are only possible with the support of2000the Federal Emergency Management Agency.2001    To serve our communities effectively, disaster management must be2002Federally-supported, State-administered, and locally-executed. Together2003with private industry, this multi-sector approach is a necessary2004partnership, particularly when disasters overwhelm local and State2005resources.2006    Reform of Federal disaster programs is long overdue, but I'd like2007to highlight a few FEMA programs that must be sustained through this2008process, and also speak to opportunities for change.2009    First, sustainment. FEMA must maintain its role in driving change2010through its preparedness programs. These programs serve as the2011underlying foundation from which all local and State emergency2012management capabilities are derived. Through this investment, FEMA2013helps to establish national standards for State and local personnel so2014that assets can be provided through mutual aid. This capability is2015essential, as illustrated by Hurricanes Helene and Milton, where over20166,300 public safety personnel deployed for 290 mutual aid missions.2017Preparedness is not a matter of insurance before a disaster. Instead,2018these FEMA preparedness programs provide assurances that we can aid2019each other in times of disaster, and preparing through planning,2020training, exercising, and standardization is crucial.2021    FEMA's hazard mitigation programs must also be sustained, as they2022drive long-term change by helping communities safeguard against future2023risk. Without FEMA's partnership, communities will become more2024vulnerable. As the National Institute of Building Sciences outlined in2025its 2019 Mitigation Saves report, public-sector grant investments in2026mitigation save $6 for every $1 spent, meaning mitigating risks is2027simply good business.2028    Opportunities for change. First, reform must prioritize building a2029disaster-resistant America by incentivizing and rewarding ``smart2030decision making'' and fiscal responsibility at the local and State2031levels. Examples include establishing and adhering to building codes in2032all communities and requiring adequate property and rental insurance.2033Additionally, jurisdictions should prioritize emergency management as a2034necessary function to invest in, and all States should establish a2035disaster relief fund as their first line of defense to provide2036immediate aid to survivors before calling on FEMA to help. FEMA can2037play a role in incentivizing these actions by increasing preparedness2038and pre-disaster mitigation assistance or reducing the non-Federal2039cost-share requirements post-disaster.2040    The second opportunity for reform involves efforts to minimize2041long-term recovery costs by adjusting the disaster declaration process2042and establishing a Federal long-term recovery exit strategy. FEMA has2043the expertise that provides communities with best practices for long-2044term recovery planning and coordination, making them an invaluable2045partner at the onset of the recovery process. However, a calculated2046exit strategy that transitions leadership to the local jurisdiction,2047coupled with recovery funds, will help everyone when they need it most,2048and the decrease in extended Federal oversight will expedite the2049rebuilding process.2050    Recent ideas about FEMA reform have included shifting response and2051recovery responsibilities and block grant administration to the States.2052I want to offer that this approach will only work if the methodology is2053transparent and financial controls are implemented. To reduce long-term2054recovery costs, policies must require a mandatory minimum pass-through2055to the jurisdictions affected by the disaster. This will ensure that2056resources are not redirected to non-disaster-related activities.2057    Finally, to implement any of these recommendations, Congress must2058amend the Stafford Act, providing a modernized framework for FEMA to2059operate more effectively. It is a necessary step in this process, and2060we need your help.2061    Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, the International Association of2062Emergency Managers fully supports a comprehensive review and reform of2063FEMA. Reform will ultimately help the people of America, and that is2064what emergency managers do. We help people before, during, and after2065disasters.2066    Thank you again for the opportunity to be here today, and I look2067forward to your questions.20682069    Mr. Strong. Thank you, Ms. Speranza.2070    I now recognize Mr. Manning for 5 minutes to summarize his2071opening statement.20722073 STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY MANNING, FORMER DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR2074    PROTECTION AND NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS, FEDERAL EMERGENCY2075                       MANAGEMENT AGENCY20762077    Mr. Manning. Chairman Strong, Ranking Member Kennedy,2078Members of the subcommittee, good morning. I'm Tim Manning.2079Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the state of2080FEMA.2081    FEMA is truly at a tipping point, as is our national2082emergency management system. The timing of this hearing2083couldn't be more critical. Over the past 30 years, I've served2084at all levels of emergency management, from county fire and EMS2085to the state to FEMA to the White House. FEMA has never been2086more called upon and its work force more stretched thin. The2087growing frequency of catastrophic disasters and a once-in-a-2088century pandemic have had wide-spread impacts on emergency2089management writ large. This changing hazard landscape and the2090operations tempo is now coupled with indiscriminate firings,2091regressive changes in policy, and freezes in funding, all2092resulting in significant impacts on the Nation's preparedness2093for emergencies, disasters, and terrorist attacks.2094    These impacts are far wider than just the Federal Emergency2095Management Agency. FEMA is but the Federal player in a broader2096collective team. In a disaster, when the crisis exceeds the2097capabilities of a local government, that local government2098requests assistance from the State and when it exceeds the2099ability of that State, they request the help of the Federal2100Government from the President. FEMA, on behalf of the2101President, is the executor of that assistance. FEMA coordinates2102the Federal Government's response, but does not assume command2103of the overall response. States have always and continue to2104bear the primary responsibility and those and who, along with2105their local governments, respond to a great deal more2106emergencies and disasters than FEMA ever gets involved in.2107    It was in the 1970's, for example, that after decades of2108fragmented and uneven support from the Federal Government that2109the southern Governors requested of the President that FEMA be2110created. Eliminating or drastically reducing the size and role2111of FEMA at this time would be intentionally rolling back hard-2112learned lessons, erasing 70 years of reforms rooted in trying2113to avoid the mistakes of the past.2114    Continuing to learn, however, is important. Rebuilding2115roads, bridges, hospitals can take time and Government2116contracting and oversight rules to prevent fraud, waste, and2117abuse can be burdensome. But when the public complains about2118disaster response, saying where's FEMA, it's usually individual2119assistance that they need. The rules create their challenges2120that many Americans struggle to overcome, and misinformation2121exacerbates these challenges. Public assistance reforms such as2122block grants could benefit State and local government2123administrative operations and individual assistance reforms2124would benefit disaster survivors more directly and more2125visibly.2126    Reform should also include a review of FEMA's operational2127response capabilities, such as the 28 Urban Search and Rescue2128teams, the MERS Disaster Emergency Communications units. The2129resources provided to these critical assets have not kept up2130with the significant increase in the number of disaster2131deployments. But FEMA's strongest asset is its work force. For2132its mission FEMA is relatively small. It has no helicopters, no2133airplanes, no ships. Its strength is in its people. The recent2134firing of the agency's CFO and grants management staff for2135managing a Congressionally-authorized and -appropriated program2136has had a dramatic chilling effect.2137    The indiscriminate firing of a wide range of people and2138expectations of more has hurt morale and operational capacity.2139Its whole work force is critical. As is true across the2140emergency management profession, every FEMA employee has a2141disaster response role. Whether someone's day job is managing a2142terrorism grant or flood insurance, everyone in FEMA also has a2143second responsibility in which they support a disaster2144response. They work in an EOC or deploy downrange to support2145survivors. Everyone is critical.2146    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, Members of the subcommittee,2147almost 20 years ago, I was here testifying on almost this exact2148same issue, were FEMA and DHS structured correctly and were the2149dramatic unilateral changes put in at that time responsible for2150poor response? Congress passed reforms and the administration2151at that time listened.2152    In the ensuing decades, the Nation has made dramatic2153improvements. Congress' investments and capabilities through2154grants and legislative reform have resulted in more prepared2155communities. Mitigated disasters provided a more effective2156response. It's saved lives. Recovery is still challenging and2157slow to implement. The individual assistance provided to people2158and families is complicated and often less than anticipated by2159the public. Reforms to those programs would be greatly2160beneficial, but there should be no question of the need for a2161single Federal coordinating agency working with Governors in2162support of the American people.2163    Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity this morning. I2164look forward to your questions. Thank you.2165    [The prepared statement of Mr. Manning follows:]2166                 Prepared Statement of Timothy Manning2167                             March 4, 20252168    Chairman Strong, Ranking Member Kennedy, Members of the2169subcommittee; good morning. I am Tim Manning, thank you for the2170opportunity to testify today on the state of FEMA and emergency2171management in America. From 2009 to 2017 I served as the deputy2172administrator of FEMA for Protection and National Preparedness,2173coordinating the Nation's efforts to build capabilities to prevent,2174protect against, mitigate, response, and recover from all emergencies2175and disasters and acts of terrorism. Prior to joining FEMA, I served in2176the State of New Mexico's emergency management agency, where after2177joining as a career civil servant, I later served as State director of2178emergency management, secretary of homeland security and emergency2179management, and homeland security advisor to the Governor. I've been a2180local government wildland and urban firefighter and EMT and served in2181non-governmental emergency response organizations. More recently I2182served in the White House helping coordinate the response to the COVID-218319 pandemic. Now, among other roles, I am on the faculty at Georgetown2184University where I teach courses in the theory and legal frameworks of2185emergency management. In short, over the past 30 years I have served at2186all levels of emergency management in operational, policy, and academic2187roles.2188    FEMA has never been more called upon and its workforce stretched2189more thin. A growing frequency of catastrophic disasters and a once-in-2190a-century pandemic have had wide-spread impacts on emergency management2191writ large. This changing hazard landscape and operations tempo is now2192coupled with indiscriminate firings, regressive changes in policy, and2193freezes in funding resulting in significant impacts on the Nation's2194preparedness for emergencies, disasters, and potential terrorist2195attacks and the impacts are far wider than just the Federal Emergency2196Management Agency.2197    We're here today to discuss whether FEMA and its programs are2198adequate to serve the needs of the American people. We're considering2199the future of FEMA, but I think it is valuable to consider it as the2200state of emergency management in the United States. It's tempting to2201look at FEMA as a typical distinct Federal agency, with unitary2202programs and operational capabilities, in a severable fashion. Most2203Federal agencies operate solely within discrete Federal authority. FEMA2204however, does not work in that kind of environment. As we discuss the2205future of FEMA, I believe we must take a wider, holistic look at the2206key role FEMA plays Nation's preparedness, the President's directive to2207study it's potential elimination, the impacts to the workforce from2208recent and planned indiscriminate firings, the dangers posed by the2209freezing of critical preparedness assistance, and the blind eye turned2210to the impacts of a changing climate.2211    It is important to understand these impacts to FEMA in the context2212of the American system of emergency management. Unique in our local,2213State, and Federal Government relationships, emergency management is a2214collaborative, mutually supporting system, one where unlike any other2215crisis response, when the Federal Government becomes involved, it does2216not assume command and control or exert Federal preeminence. In most2217other crisis situations, for example the FBI in an act of terrorism or2218the U.S. Coast Guard in an oil spill, the Federal Government response2219is exerting Federal authority and assumes legal command and control. In2220disaster response however, each additional level of governmental2221involvement comes in support of the impacted community. FEMA's2222involvement following a Presidential declaration is one of support to2223the State, working in partnership. FEMA coordinates the Federal2224Government's response, but does not assume command of the overall2225response. When a crisis exceeds the capabilities of a local government,2226and they need assistance from beyond their capacity, they request help2227from the State. And when it exceeds the ability and resources of a2228State, and the State needs capabilities beyond what any one State can2229support, they request that help from the President. And on behalf of2230the President, FEMA is the executor of that assistance.2231                    the future of fema as an agency2232    There has been much discussion of late of eliminating FEMA and2233shifting the responsibility to the States. Aside from the point that2234the States have always and continue to bear the primary responsibility2235for disaster response, and who along with their local governments2236respond to a great deal more emergencies and disasters than FEMA ever2237gets involved with, an unwinding of FEMA would be an erasing of more2238than 70 years of learning from mistakes. Our American system of2239emergency management is born of learning from prior disasters. Prior to2240the 1950's, Federal support to States in disasters was ad-hoc and2241financial support was strictly the result of Congressional emergency2242action. Following the enaction of the Civil Defense Act and the Federal2243Disaster Relief Act in 1950, the U.S. Government began to be more2244thoughtful and coordinated in its response, but preparedness and2245response were still separate, and the structure put the majority of the2246burden on the States. By the 1970's disaster assistance was still2247spread among a variety of agencies and Federal support was fragmented.2248This decentralized system was challenging and led to poor responses, so2249at the urging of southern Governors, FEMA was created. Again, learning2250from what worked and what didn't, a lessons-learned approach, drove the2251Federal Government to centralize the coordination efforts, creating a2252more efficient system and empowering an agency to act on behalf of the2253President in marshaling the resources of the Federal. Eliminating or2254drastically reducing the size and role of FEMA would be intentionally2255rolling back hard-learned lessons, erasing 70 years of reforms rooted2256in trying to avoid the mistakes of the past.2257    The very nature of emergency management is preparing for events for2258which no one level of government or one jurisdiction can manage, either2259operationally or financially. It was created out of necessity through2260tragedy and a commitment to learn from the hard-won lessons of the2261past. The American emergency management system of 2025 is one of2262intergovernmental collaboration and cooperation to combine forces and2263efforts to provide for those most in need. If one were to eliminate any2264one element of that system, one would simply need to recreate it, in2265whole or in part, and in the mean time suffer the inefficiency and2266suboptimization that would result.2267    In recent months, FEMA has undergone unrelenting criticism of its2268disaster assistance efforts, much of it rooted in misunderstanding and2269rumors, but also intentional misinformation. This criticism and2270misinformation has led the administration to discuss eliminating the2271agency altogether. Identifying those specific elements of law, policy,2272or grant guidance in need of reform are critical. But it is also2273important to step back and examine what those impacted by disasters see2274and what they're dissatisfied with.2275    In this Federalized system, local, State, and Federal Governments2276work together, but that is largely transparent and unrecognized by the2277public. As with every complicated and professional endeavor, the2278intergovernmental structures and systems of how it all comes together2279is complicated and nuanced. And that often results in muddled2280narratives and communication.2281           disaster assistance reforms and public perception2282    Administratively, emergency managers discuss disaster assistance as2283``public assistance'' (funds to rebuild public infrastructure) or2284``individual assistance'' (funds given to individuals and families to2285help support their recovery). In many cases, public assistance can be2286very expensive and take many years; rebuilding roads, bridges,2287hospitals, and schools can take time, and Government contracting and2288oversite rules to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse can be burdensome.2289    But often when the public complains about disaster response,2290``where's FEMA,'' what they are referring to is help to them personally2291and their property. It's debris removal, its direct assistance, and its2292financial assistance, it is individual assistance. Many of the2293administrative and legal rules, for example the prohibition on2294duplication of benefits creates challenges many Americans struggle to2295overcome.2296    FEMA's response and recovery programs could be improved with a2297potential broad review of authorities and limitations, and an overall2298simplification. While public assistance reforms would benefit State and2299local government administrative operations, individual assistance2300reforms would benefit disaster survivors more directly and visibly. The2301need for reform at FEMA should also include a review of FEMA's Response2302assets. FEMA's operations response capability, its logistics2303distribution and its field teams such as the 28 Urban Search and Rescue2304teams it sponsors and Mobile Emergency Response System disaster2305emergency communications units need augmentation. The significant2306increase in the amount of disasters that require these assets has not2307kept up with resources provided for maintenance, replacement, training,2308and staffing. As a Nation we have benefited from the dedication,2309professionalism, and technical skills of these professionals to always2310make it work.2311                            fema's workforce2312    Another lesson learned from previous disasters is reflected in2313FEMA's workforce structure. For its mission, FEMA is relatively small.2314According to OPM data, FEMA is roughly half the size of ICE and a2315quarter the size of Customs and Border Protection. FEMA has no2316helicopters, airplanes, or heavy machinery, its strength is in its2317people. FEMA's role is that of a conductor of an orchestra, marshaling2318the whole of the Federal Government's resources to support the needs of2319a State. The recent firing of the agency's chief financial officer and2320line-level grants management staff for simply managing a2321Congressionally-authorized and -appropriated program had a dramatic2322chilling effect. And the indiscriminate firing of a wide range of2323people on probationary status impacted moral and operational capacity2324even more. With statements from the administration of even more firings2325forthcoming, rumored to be targeting the Resilience side of the agency2326in particular, FEMA is truly at a tipping point. There have been2327suggestions that non-response personnel may not be critical. However,2328as is true across the emergency management profession, every FEMA2329employee has a disaster response role--whether someone's day job is2330managing terrorism grants, or flood insurance, or instructing classes2331in bioterrorism response, everyone in FEMA has a second job assignment2332in which they support a disaster response. They may work in the2333National Response Coordination Center, or deploy down range to support2334survivors, or work hand-in-hand with State and local officials.2335                             grant funding2336    Recent freezes and slowdowns in grant funding is also hurting2337American preparedness for terrorist attacks and disasters. FEMA acts as2338the U.S. Government's channel of fiscal support to State and local2339governments. FEMA's grants program directorate is how the Department of2340Homeland Security supports State and local terrorism preparedness,2341border security, and law enforcement efforts through the State Homeland2342Security Grant Program, Urban Area Security Initiative, and Law2343Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program. For years, DHS's support to2344State homeland security border security efforts, through Operation2345Stonegarden, came through FEMA. More recently, as DHS's granting arm to2346State and local governments, FEMA was asked to operate a CBP program in2347support of State and local government migrant operations. Like the2348Urban Area Security grants, these funds are appropriated and managed2349separately from the Disaster Relief Fund and administered by different2350parts of the organization. Nevertheless, those differences were2351blurred, intentionally or unintentionally, resulting in doubt being2352sowed in the public eye, and the firing of long-serving, highly-2353qualified, and critical personnel. Freezes and uncertainty in FEMA2354grant funding and impacts to its people harms our security.2355    In the disaster risk reduction space, FEMA's mitigation grants such2356as the pre-disaster BRIC program and the post-disaster Hazard2357Mitigation Grant Program support communities' efforts to lessen their2358vulnerability to disasters, and have dramatic returns on investment,2359saving up to $13 on disaster costs for every dollar invested according2360to a 2020 National Institute of Building Sciences study.2361    Another program administered by FEMA is the Emergency Management2362Performance Grant, a 50/50 match grant that's been described as the2363backbone of emergency management in America. EMPG is the program that2364supports the vast majority of State and local government emergency2365management programs from emergency operations centers to preparedness2366and response teams, and disaster training and exercises. Without it,2367few States and local governments could support the level of2368preparedness and response that America currently enjoys. And in the2369context of current policy debates of a smaller or no FEMA, it's hard to2370envision a greater share of the operational responsibility being2371undertaken by States in its absence.2372                       climate change adaptation2373    There are also a number of policy changes that have and will2374continue to have wide-reaching impacts. A core part of any emergency2375management system, indeed any public administrative or budgeting2376effort, is a understanding of the environment in which one is working2377and the base-level requirements. As simple as how many fire companies2378or ambulances do I need or how many police officers: what are the2379operational expectations of me, what hazards I am dealing with, and2380what do I need to respond. Understanding the population size, road2381networks, and hospital locations will drive the number of ambulance2382crews a city would support. Change to any of those variables will2383change how many ambulances. In emergency management, core to that2384effort is an understanding of the impacts of natural hazards on our2385communities. We often think of those events in terms of ``return2386periods'', often referred to as ``100-year'' events, or those storms2387that have a 1-percent chance of occurring in any year. Those2388calculations are based on the number of events of similar scale over2389the period of record, converted to a probability, and forecasted into2390the future. Our challenge is the base data of those calculations are2391changing. A changing climate is resulting in a growing number of more2392intense storms and greater rainfall. The result is, as we see over and2393over in the media, more storms of greater intensity than would be2394predicted by historic data. We see over and over headlines of record2395events, multiple 100-year storms a year, and even 500-year and 1,000-2396year events. Consideration of these changing storm patterns is2397considered ``climate change'' and prohibited by policy and threat of2398termination. To maintain a policy that the emergency management2399community cannot plan for the world in which we live, where lives at2400are risk, is tantamount to instructing the Department of Defense to2401ignore strategic threats and intentionally underprepare.2402    Mr. Chairman, in 2007, almost 20 years ago, I was here testifying2403before a different House committee on this same issue--was FEMA and DHS2404structured correctly and were the dramatic unilateral changes put in at2405that time responsible for poor emergency cooperation and coordination.2406Was there a more optimal way for States and the Federal Government to2407work together to protect our fellow citizens. Congress passed reforms,2408and the administration at that time listened. In the ensuing decades2409the Nation has in fact made dramatic improvements. We developed more2410cooperative national doctrine. Congresses' investments in capabilities2411through grants and legislative reform has resulted in a more prepared2412communities, mitigated disasters, and provide more effective response.2413It's saved lives. The administrative burden on State and local2414governments in public assistance is still challenging and slow to2415implement, and the individual assistance provided to people and2416families is complicated and often less than anticipated by the public.2417Reforms to those programs could be greatly beneficial. But there should2418be no question of the need for a single Federal coordinating agency,2419working with Governors and their single State-level coordinating2420agencies. Progress in emergency management is based on learning lessons2421and adapting and growing capabilities. We have both the opportunity and2422responsibility at this point in time to learn from recent disasters,2423and grow our ability to support each other, not regress to the2424uncoordinated and chaotic early 1970's and before.24252426    Mr. Strong. Thank you, Mr. Manning.2427    Members will be recognized by order of seniority for their24285 minutes of questioning. An additional round of questioning2429may be called after all Members have been recognized. I now2430recognize myself for 5 minutes of questioning.2431    Mr. Smitherman, it is good to see you here representing the2432great State of Alabama. Since 1980, Alabama has faced 1162433weather-related disasters averaging 1 to 2 incidents per year.2434As a result, emergency management leaders throughout the State2435have forged strong partnerships with the Federal Government,2436particularly FEMA, to support community recovery and aid2437individuals in their greatest time of need.2438    As you all know, the President recently announced FEMA's2439Review Council aimed at identifying areas of improvement within2440the agency and suggest changes to help State agency emergency2441management agencies respond to the aftermath of crisis.2442    Mr. Smitherman, based on your experience, what do you think2443is the appropriate level of FEMA involvement that enables2444States to maintain the lead in disaster response?2445    Mr. Smitherman. Thank you, Chairman Strong.2446    Well, to start with, from my experience we have a lot of2447disasters and we've dealt--had FEMA come in and we established2448a joint force, joint field headquarters. We've done--or joint2449field office. We've done that many times and often that's2450really not necessary.2451    For Alabama, we were one of the pilot States that piloted2452the State-managed disaster. We did that for Hurricane Nate in2453Alabama. So we've already managed a disaster at the State2454level. I think with proper resourcing and considerations we2455could do that for many of the disasters we experienced and save2456the limited FEMA resources for the most catastrophic of events.2457So like what you see in Katrina and Helene, when we've had our2458tornado outbreak 2011, we kind-of rank up there with that in2459terms of when we would ask FEMA to come in.2460    We are not a State that relies on FEMA during the response2461phase. We bring them in, they're there. We have the Regional2462Incident Management Assistance teams in there with us. They're2463integrated into our EOC and we keep the FEMA Headquarters2464informed of what we're doing through that process. But as far2465as the need, the biggest value to us from FEMA is during the2466recovery phase. When they come in, we just have got to figure2467out a way to make that more responsive, less complex, less2468bureaucratic and actually get the funds down to the locals who2469are trying so desperately to get their communities put back in2470in order from--after that disaster or incident.2471    Mr. Strong. You got it. I saw it first-hand as the chairman2472of the second-largest county in the State of Alabama, 350 homes2473totally destroyed. That tornado EF5/4 was on the ground for 1262474miles. Thousands of homes totally destroyed and we were without2475power for 10 to 12 days in some areas. But it was definitely2476something that we will never forget.2477    How can coordination be improved between Federal and State2478components and disaster response and recovery?2479    Mr. Smitherman. So I would say right now, so the2480communication, I think the communication flow works fairly2481well. It's just that there's so much that goes on day-to-day2482that has limited impact. I think, as one of my panel colleagues2483here stated, one of the critical components of that is that2484being in the preparation and the preparedness phase really, so2485what they can do to help identify and get consistency2486throughout the States.2487    So, one area that I would say is in the EMAC system. The2488more we can empower and encourage the use of the EMAC system2489where the States can provide the mutual aid back and forth. As2490a particular State is able to use resources, pre-event2491resources, funding from FEMA to establish capability and2492capacity at that local level and at the State level, it gives2493us a venue to be able to share that so that not everybody has2494to have everything. We can empower what we already have and2495train and certify and equip it.2496    Mr. Strong. Thank you. As I mentioned in my opening2497statement, FEMA has been tasked with managing an increasingly2498diverse mission set. Mr. Kaniewski, in your opinion, how has2499FEMA, the expanded missions affected its ability to fully2500respond to any singular disaster?2501    Mr. Kaniewski. Well, I think certainly at various times2502we've seen FEMA stretched thin. That most often takes place2503when there's a major disaster, especially when there are2504multiple major disasters or like what we saw in 2017, when I2505was at FEMA, with hurricanes that--back-to-back, back-to-back2506hurricanes. When you have that, you simply can't recover. So2507this--and that applies both to FEMA, which manages a variety of2508these disasters, as well as the State and local governments2509that they themselves have been directly impacted.2510    Mr. Strong. Thank you. My time has expired.2511    I now recognize the Ranking Member, Mr. Kennedy, for his 52512minutes of questioning.2513    Mr. Kennedy. Thank you, Chairman.2514    Last month, President Trump and Elon Musk fired at least2515200 FEMA employees. Now, under the Trump administration's2516deferred resignation program, over 800 FEMA employees,2517including highly-skilled emergency professionals, are leaving.2518Mr. Manning, how will these reckless staff firings impact2519FEMA's disaster response? What will happen to the communities2520that rely on FEMA support?2521    Mr. Manning. Thank you, Member. Thank you for the question.2522    It's really devastating to the FEMA work force to lose the2523broad swath of team members that they have. You know, the2524firings, the original indiscriminate firings, were challenging2525enough and that they were targeting probationary employees, but2526not just beginning-of-career employees, people throughout the2527organization, including senior leaders and people who have been2528there for a long time and recently promoted. The additional2529departure of a wide number of very senior, very influential and2530important career leaders within the organization is going to2531slow its decision making, inhibit its effectiveness, and will2532have real implications in preparedness and disaster response.2533    Mr. Kennedy. Thank you. Earlier this year, the2534administration chose to illegally freeze funding previously2535appropriated by Congress, including FEMA funding. Despite court2536orders to release disaster relief funds, at least 140 FEMA2537grants remain frozen, impacting wildfire protection, flood2538mitigation, disaster preparedness efforts. A coalition of2539attorneys general has now filed a motion urging the court to2540enforce its ruling, arguing that FEMA's manual review process2541is simply a freeze by another name.2542    Mr. Smitherman, are FEMA's preparedness grants and disaster2543relief funding important to your operation?2544    Mr. Smitherman. Yes, Congressman, they are. To date,2545Alabama has only experienced small delays with receipt of those2546funding, with exception of, I think, a couple of grants that2547the Notice of Opportunity for Funding has been withdrawn. I2548think they're rewriting some of them and put it back out. But2549to date, we've not been impacted by that freeze. The money that2550we're able to draw down where we're obligated, we've been able2551to draw down. The process has become a little bit slower due to2552the review, but we have not missed any payments at the State2553level based on that.2554    Mr. Kennedy. Would funding cuts to FEMA grants help or hurt2555your operation in your community?2556    Mr. Smitherman. I think the answer is obvious anytime you2557cut funding to an item. But I think you really have to take a2558look holistically at the entire emergency management system.2559What is it that--the answer isn't always the Federal system.2560What are we doing at the State? What are we doing at the local?2561How are we managing the funds that we're given? Are we2562efficient at that? Are we effective at that? I think that would2563be the true measure, you know, and reward those who2564demonstrated financial solvency in the way that they handle the2565money.2566    I think I would venture that Alabama, we have--Alabama has2567a committee. In 2019, our legislature established something not2568too dissimilar from the DOGE. It's called the Alabama2569Commission on Efficiency and Services. So we have to--and I get2570audited every year. We've passed our audits. We track our2571money. We know where it's at, we keep up with it and we spend2572it, I think, effectively and efficiently.2573    Mr. Kennedy. But cutting funding would not be helpful.2574    Mr. Smitherman. Excuse me, sir.2575    Mr. Kennedy. Cutting funding would not be helpful.2576    Mr. Smitherman. I think there's readiness that can be2577gained across the Nation as long as funding's available to2578attain that readiness. Now, we would discuss at what level we2579place that.2580    Mr. Kennedy. Thank you. DHA's grant funding has been2581essential for first responders, providing local agencies with2582the resources needed to handle disasters and emergencies. We2583know that first responders nationwide have stressed how2584critical these needs are. Yet during his first term, President2585Trump pushed major cuts and forced a 10 percent reduction in2586fiscal year 2024.2587    Mr. Manning, with climate change driving more frequent and2588severe disasters, how crucial is it to sustain or increase2589funding to ensure first responders can protect vulnerable2590communities?2591    Mr. Manning. I believe the Homeland Security Grant Program,2592all of FEMA's Grant Preparedness Program, from the Emergency2593Management Performance Grant through the Resilience Grants that2594Dr. Kaniewski was mentioning earlier, have been absolutely2595critical in building capacity for the Nation. Any reduction in2596the resources available from the Federal Government to build2597the Nation's response capacity to build preparedness will have2598a detrimental impact on our ability to prepare and respond to2599disasters and acts of terrorism.2600    Mr. Kennedy. If you cut that funding from the Federal level2601to FEMA that would otherwise go to the States, the States have2602to make up for that funding in the moment?2603    Mr. Manning. Correct.2604    Mr. Kennedy. I yield back. Thank you.2605    Mr. Strong. Thank you. The gentleman's time has expired.2606    I now recognize the gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Brecheen.2607    Mr. Brecheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have expressed to2608the Chairman privately, I want to say publicly, how grateful I2609am for this hearing. I think this is something that is, to many2610of your comments, long overdue.2611    I don't think most people realize that prior to 1979 there2612was no FEMA and it was established by an Executive Order by2613Jimmy Carter. So I think it would well serve us if we go back261440 years. I would love to find the people that were in2615emergency management 40 and 50 years ago to get their2616experience about the ease of not having to adhere to the2617regulatory burden.2618    Last year 50 percent of our supplemental funding, and I say2619``our,'' I need to rephrase that. The taxpayer-financed2620spending taken from the taxpayer, whether it's a direct tax or2621an indirect tax of inflation because of our deficit spending,2622last year, 50 percent of our supplemental spending, all2623borrowed money, was FEMA-directed. In 1980 it was 1 percent of2624the total supplemental funding that Congress allocated went to2625FEMA.2626    So for some of you that are experts, if you look at the2627chart of the growth of FEMA it is unbelievable. It way2628surpasses, it passes inflation. We now have a FEMA that has2629become the Uber service for illegal immigrants in the last 22630and 3 years. It is way outside of its bounds. FEMA is involved2631with 30 different Federal agencies now. So we have a major2632mission creep that has to be reined in, it has to be bridled,2633and somebody has to holler whoa. So I am grateful that this2634conversation is happening.2635    I want to give you a personal example because I want to tie2636it into my questions. I have a ag and dirt-moving background.2637When I was serving on the State level, a friend of mine, Mark2638Allen, a State senator at the same time I was a State senator,2639after a 2012 tornado hit an area I represented, he was kind2640enough to say, hey, I will bring my dozer down. You get on the2641dozer, I will get on the skid steer, and we will do some clean-2642up to help people that don't have the ability to finance it. So2643we did that.2644    So I am moving this dozer. I am in a very rural setting,2645Tushka, Oklahoma, and I am moving material. I am separating the2646vegetative from the nonvegetative to make sure we abide by the2647FEMA regulations, many brush piles over. I watched because of2648Federal regulations, because I was in the dirt works business,2649I was in the dozer excavator trucking business. What could have2650been something that in a country setting could have been solved2651like that, that is done every day today where people in the2652country pull timber together, they light it on fire, we were2653not allowed to do that. We had to multiply the cost 4 times2654over. You had to bring in a half-round, which is a bathtub on2655the back of a semi, and you had to take an excavator track hoe,2656and you had to load that material that I had pushed up into a2657brush pile, dismantle it, load it in a half round, haul it off2658miles and miles, whether to be incinerated, major cost, or to2659be buried by another bulldozer.2660    I can tell you because I turned in estimates to many2661customers that I served when I was out of the Government in the2662free market, you multiplied that cost at least by 4. It didn't2663make any sense. We have had stories come before this committee2664of not allowing snow to be moved, snow that melts, because of2665FEMA and environmental regulations in tandem.2666    So I am setting you up because I would love to hear, Mr.2667Smitherman, from your experience, the waste that you have seen2668because of Federal--let me ask you a simple question. I love2669what you said, we piloted a State response. How freeing was2670that for you all to be able to make your own decisions and make2671a decision that you knew would save taxpayer money and2672immediately respond in Alabama?2673    Mr. Smitherman. Of course, I'm a fan of our performance2674during that. I think if you take a look at FEMA's evaluation of2675our performance, you'll see an alignment with that. So, you2676know, we have had one small disaster where the cost of FEMA2677coming in and establishing the joint field office almost2678exceeded the cost of the disaster itself. So I think that would2679be my one example.2680    Now, that's not to say that--or an attack on FEMA being2681wasteful. It's the process they use. I think if you look at a2682State-managed disaster, for those that we can handle, just help2683us handle it and let us go. So I think that's one example of2684efficiency.2685    Sir, if I may, let me refine my answer on funding that the2686Ranking Member asked. Of course, if there's funding cuts, but2687really what I want to talk about is where you cut and where you2688put the resources. Because if you're talking about the first2689responders that are responding during the disaster, by no means2690am I talking cutting them. I'm talking reallocating funding2691that you save elsewhere to put at the capacity level so that2692you have those capabilities that are so needed across the2693States and the region and the United States. That's really what2694I meant with where to allocate the funding.2695    Mr. Brecheen. Mr. Chairman, if I may, since you answered2696another Member's question, if I could have a little leniency on2697my time. Yes. Glad you were able to respond to him. Years ago,2698U.S. senator in Oklahoma, Tom Coburn asked for our State2699director of transportation to build a mile of road under2700Federal regulations and use an apple-to-apple comparison and2701build a mile of--or what turned into be a mile-and-a-half under2702State regulations. Apples-to-apples comparison. This is about270310, 15 years ago. He could build a mile of road at the same2704cost he could build a mile-and-a-half under State authority.2705This was quality work.2706    The dollars will go farther, you will have more decision2707making and control and in a rate of inflation that deals with2708everything that FEMA is involved with, especially when you are2709talking about the large equipment that comes in under disaster2710recovery. This is a solution that we have to make happen given2711where we are at financially as a country.2712    I yield.2713    Mr. Strong. Thank you. The gentleman's time has expired.2714    The gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, is recognized.2715    Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2716    In February 2021, Texas was hit with our biggest winter2717storm to date, killing over 240 Texans. Texans were left2718without power, busted pipes, drinkable water, and freezing to2719death, not to mention the millions of property damage all2720across our State. Throughout this disaster, support from FEMA2721was critical in saving the lives across North Texas2722communities. Simply put, without FEMA, this disaster would have2723been 10 times worse. Look, not all of us could flee to Cancun.2724But abandoning FEMA now would mean abandoning Texas and would2725serve to set up our State for even worse disasters in the2726future.2727    FEMA's rapid response provided Texans with 70,000 gallons2728of gasoline, 5 million liters of water, 60 generators, and2729helped over 650 households retain power. These resources proved2730to be invaluable and likely saved thousands of Texans from the2731worst-case scenario.2732    We all remember back in 2017, when Texas was destroyed by2733Hurricane Harvey. Thirty-five hundred FEMA employees, along2734with 31,000 members of the National Guard were deployed to2735provide assistance to our Gulf Coast. Almost 800,000 homes had2736at least 18 inches of water inside and 24 hospitals were2737evacuated. Within 30 days of Hurricane Harvey, over 270,0002738households were provided with $1.5 billion from FEMA that2739covered temporary housing, advancement pay for flood insurance,2740and repairs to keep their homes safe. All of this was approved2741by President Trump.2742    We know that climate change is an escalating threat to our2743homeland security and we would be lying to ourselves if we said2744a catastrophe like this is not on the rise and will not ever2745happen again. Last May, tornadoes tore through North Texas,2746killing 7 people, including 3 children, and injuring over 1002747of my neighboring residents. FEMA stepped in and provided2748displacement and home repair assistance at a very critical2749time.2750    President Trump's decision to fire over 200 FEMA employees2751last month was not only irresponsible, but will overwhelm2752current employees who are already burned out and, most2753importantly, it will endanger the lives of Texans and many2754people throughout this entire country. I am all for cutting2755waste, fraud, and abuse, but we can't lose sight of the2756humanity the time of crisis needs that FEMA provides. Elon Musk2757may not think that saving lives is an efficient use of Federal2758dollars, but I know that it is and I know that my neighbors2759would agree with me.2760    At this very moment, the people of North Carolina, who are2761just now starting to get on their feet from the catastrophic2762floods last year, are currently on fire. Parts of California2763were just burned to the ground, and my colleagues on the other2764side of the aisle have the audacity to support the President's2765unconstitutional behavior and allow him to dismantle this2766important Federal agency. Just last night the Dallas area was2767hit by yet another round of tornadoes and the damage is now2768still being calculated.2769    FEMA is not the end-all and be-all. But with an unreliable2770grid in Texas and natural disasters becoming more frequent,2771Americans cannot afford to lose the life-saving services that2772FEMA provides.2773    Mr. Manning, how can Federal, State, and local governments2774effectively prepare for and respond to the growing climate2775threats without Federal support? What consequences will these2776cuts have on underserved communities?2777    Mr. Manning. Thank you for that question. The inability or2778at least the change in policy to disincentivize or even2779prohibit the consideration of climate change will have a2780incredibly detrimental effect on preparedness across the2781country. It is changing the complexion of hazards in America.2782There are more severe storms, more severe impacts than we have2783seen historically. If we only plan forward based on what we've2784experienced historically, we will be drastically underpreparing2785going forward and people will be in danger and may lose lives.2786    Texas has a very strong emergency management system, but2787even Texas needs the assistance of FEMA over and over again. A2788strong collaborative partnership between FEMA and the States is2789how we move America forward and how we assure that our most2790vulnerable communities have the protection that they need.2791    Ms. Johnson. Thank you so much for your answer. I believe I2792am out of time and I yield back.2793    Mr. Strong. The gentlewoman's time has expired.2794    I now recognize the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Evans, for27955 minutes of questioning.2796    Mr. Evans. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you, Ranking2797Members, and thank you, of course, to the witnesses for taking2798the time to come today.2799    So I spent 2 decades in between military and law2800enforcement. On the military side as a Blackhawk helicopter2801pilot in the National Guard in Colorado. So I have commanded2802all National Guard aviation assets in the State of Colorado2803responding to wildfires. As a police officer for a decade I was2804pretty integrally involved in a lot of these disaster response2805and emergency management things. So have a couple of questions2806here.2807    Mr., and I apologize if I butcher it, Kaniewski, did I get2808it? Mr. Kaniewski, just looking through your bio here, it looks2809like you have some experience in the insurance space. So one of2810the things that I hear specifically with regard to wildfire2811from a lot of my electric utility providers is the exploding2812insurance rates that they have to pay to be able to provide2813electrical services through some of these high wildfire risk2814areas. So looking through your comments here, you are talking2815about effectively how an ounce of prevention is worth a pound2816of cure.2817    Can you expound a little bit on how being able to do some2818of these preemptive mitigation strategies might potentially be2819able to help alleviate some of the insurance burden that my2820electric utilities are facing as they try to provide2821electricity through some of these high wildfire risk areas?2822    Mr. Kaniewski. Yes, wildfire is a risk that requires a2823partnership. It requires partnerships, not just those2824traditional partners that we think of, maybe those of us in2825emergency management or those of us that were first responders,2826but it requires partnerships from critical infrastructure, as2827you highlighted. And as critical infrastructure owners and2828operators, you've mentioned the power industry, they need to2829understand what their risks are and what they can do about it.2830Unfortunately, all of that has now come to the fore because2831when someone loses power, questions are raised, fingers are2832pointed, blame is placed, and the reality is it's no one2833stakeholder. It's not just that critical infrastructure owner2834and operator. There's only so much they can do themselves.2835    By working with the local community, as well as working2836with the State and local governments and looking at regulations2837that may inhibit or enhance the resilience of critical2838infrastructure, we can hopefully make that infrastructure, No.28391, more resilient and, No. 2, reduce the risks that everyone2840faces. So that wildfire risk that might threaten a power line2841also threatens homes. So taking a community-based approach and2842understanding that by reducing that wildfire risk, it actually2843benefits everyone, whether it be their home, which is the most2844obvious I think all of us think about when we think of wildfire2845risk, but we also think about the loss of power.2846    Now, I would say our company works very closely and our2847clients include major energy companies, and this certainly is2848top of mind with them and making sure that there are insurance2849products available to protect them. But I would say it requires2850a partnership on the regulatory side with those State2851regulators to make that feasible.2852    Mr. Evans. So what are some of those specific partnerships2853that currently exist? Then are there any regulatory barriers2854that we can look to reduce to be able to build that Federal,2855State, to local partnership ultimately with the goal of being2856able to reduce some of the insurance burden that a lot of my2857rural electric co-ops are facing by being able to lower the2858risk, specifically in my area for wildfires? What are some of2859those partnerships? What are the barriers that we need to work2860on to make those more accessible?2861    Mr. Kaniewski. So, first, a general statement, insurance is2862just a reflection of the risk. So when we talk about insurance2863premiums going up, it's because the risk has gone up. So2864anything we can do to reduce that risk, again, it can be as2865simple as removing combustible materials around, whether it be2866power lines or homes. That's wildfire risk. But the interesting2867thing about wildfire risk, it's not just what you do, it's what2868your neighbors do or what that community does.2869    So building codes play a preeminent role here. So making2870sure that the building code, it's a wildland urban interface2871fire code, would be really--a building code would be very2872important to protect that community, whether it be, again,2873power lines or homes. At the State level, because insurance is2874regulated at the State level, there's really no one answer I2875can give you. It depends on the State. So it's really a2876partnership, whether it be emergency managers working with2877insurance commissioners or with energy regulators in that2878State, I think would be a very advisable way to go to build2879those partnerships. So that we all see the term I used in my2880opening statement that we're all cobeneficiaries of that2881investment. We all benefit from that investment in resilience.2882    Mr. Evans. Thank you. Yield back.2883    Mr. Strong. The gentleman from Colorado's time has expired.2884    I now recognize the gentleman from Puerto Rico, Mr.2885Hernandez, for 5 minutes of questioning.2886    Mr. Hernandez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2887    I bet if I ask my constituents to name one Federal agency,2888they will all say FEMA. FEMA has had a huge role in Puerto Rico2889following Hurricane Maria. I will be the first to acknowledge2890FEMA has serious problems with efficiency and bureaucracy. You2891know, out of tens of billions of dollars that were assigned to2892Puerto Rico by FEMA, we have only seen a fraction. Our electric2893grid is probably worse off today than it was the day before2894Hurricane Maria struck. So there is a lot of work to be done2895with regards to FEMA.2896    So my first question. Mr. Manning, what concrete2897legislative changes could we enact to make sure that Federal2898funds that are obligated under FEMA are dispersed more2899efficiently?2900    Mr. Manning. Thank you, Congressman. You know, if we talk2901about the pre-disaster side of the mitigation preparedness2902grants and the post-disaster side, there are slightly different2903answers. But it comes down to FEMA administers a broad swath of2904legal requirements both out of the Stafford Act, but also a2905myriad of grants laws and fiscal law. So there are going to be2906reforms that need to be looked at in public assistance to2907streamline the provision of resources and the approval of2908projects, which is where a lot of delays I believe in Puerto2909Rico are experiencing. It's the negotiation between the2910Commonwealth, Puerto Rico, and FEMA in the context of all of2911these fiscal and Stafford Act laws.2912    In the mitigation side and some of the pre-disaster and2913post-disaster mitigation, a lot of those are coming through.2914There are some delays now in the current administration's2915review process that could be fast-tracked as well if they were2916to rescind some of those. But there is, I think, that2917collaboration and that view through the Stafford Act reforms2918that we're discussing today are the most important.2919    Mr. Hernandez. Great, thank you.2920    My second question is, and this is for Mr. Smitherman,2921let's assume that Congress moves toward dismantling or2922decentralizing FEMA to promote more interstate cooperation.2923Should it consider some sort of special treatment for non-2924Continental United States jurisdictions? Because I am concerned2925Alabama can get help from Florida, from Tennessee, from2926Georgia. Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, the USVI, the2927Mariana Islands, American Samoa, I hope I left nobody out, can2928have a harder time. We got a lot of help from the States. I2929don't want to undermine that, but it obviously it takes a lot2930longer to send a few trucks to an island in the Caribbean or2931the Pacific than it does from one State to a neighboring State.2932    So how could we reconcile that with these views of2933decentralizing FEMA and giving more support to the States to2934help each other?2935    Mr. Smitherman. Thank you for that question. So2936unabashedly, yes, States that are in the Continental United2937States obviously have an advantage in that regard. I think you2938have to look at it just totally from a different approach with2939regards to an island support. Yes, you have to find those2940different Federal agencies, whether it be a DOD or maybe2941incorporate some additional way to pre-stage some of the State-2942to-State assistance.2943    I particularly had a situation this past week or I think 22944weeks ago, I was out at the U.S. Northern Command working on a2945course and we had a member from Guam there and they talked2946about the challenges they're having with both disaster--you2947know, taking care of the planning for disaster support and any2948nation-state threats. I think they've seen some specific2949nation-state threats here recently and it's a challenge for2950them. They talk specifically to that, how do we get this2951assistance? They are looking at more of a DOD approach.2952    So maybe, I think, when we talk about looking, looking2953holistically at redesign, you know, FEMA is just one part of a2954larger emergency management system. Any time you make an2955adjustment on one area of a system, you've got to account for2956other areas in that system to make up that shortfall or that2957change. So if you move away something from FEMA, somebody2958somewhere has got to take that up.2959    So I think regardless of what the broad outcomes of the2960FEMA Review Council that the President's putting together,2961whatever their recommendations are, I think you have to follow2962on with that--is what functions have moved, before you2963establish what form that's going to look like. So where are you2964moving that requirement? Who's going to pick up the response2965for island response and someone's got to pick that up and who2966is that going to be? Unless if a move that function, let's2967resource that function.2968    Mr. Hernandez. I am sorry to interrupt because I have very2969few seconds left. I am not fully convinced of DOD taking over2970FEMA, but I look forward to working, you know, to find2971bipartisan solutions should that be the approach that the2972majority in my--in what I think would be unfortunate, but2973should that be the approach to find some bipartisan solution to2974address the needs of the non-Continental U.S. jurisdictions.2975    Thank you. I yield back.2976    Mr. Strong. Thank you. The gentleman's time has expired.2977    Does the Ranking Member seek recognition?2978    Mr. Kennedy. Yes, Chairman, thank you very much. I would2979just like to ask for unanimous consent to offer these 32980documents into the record: Bloomberg article on disaster relief2981funds asking the attorneys general, asking that the wildfire2982aid be released; senior leaders leaving an already depleted2983disaster agency; the New York Times article regarding FEMA and2984the rank-and-file workers that have already left before the2985cuts; and a GAO report on FEMA staffing challenges from 2023.2986    Mr. Strong. Without objection.2987    [The information follows:]2988       Article From Bloomberg Submitted by Ranking Member Kennedy2989    trump must release wildfire aid, disaster relief funds, ags say2990By Maia Spoto/February 28, 2025 8:39PM ET2991    States have been unable to access millions of dollars in disaster2992relief funding since Feb. 7, a coalition of attorneys general said in a2993Friday court filing, asking a judge to force Trump to unlock the funds.2994    The freeze on Federal Emergency Management Agency spending is2995impacting wildfire prevention, flood mitigation, disaster preparedness,2996and other programs that support ``essential health, safety, and2997welfare,'' the coalition wrote in a motion.2998    They asked, for a second time, that Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of2999the US District Court for the District of Rhode Island enforce his Jan.300031 restraining order temporarily blocking Trump's funding freeze.3001    At least 140 FEMA grants are still frozen, the coalition said,3002despite McConnell ordering the administration Feb. 10 to immediately3003release all funds after finding that the Trump administration violated3004his Jan. 31 order.3005    FEMA has said it is manually reviewing the grants, which the motion3006says is ``simply a freeze by another name.''3007    The States aren't moving to hold Trump in contempt, according to a3008footnote, though attorneys general said Feb. 11 it was a possibility if3009he continues to defy court orders.3010    The case is State of New York v. Trump, D.R.I., No. 1:25-cv-00039,30112/28/25.3012    To contact the reporter on this story: Maia Spoto in Los Angeles at3013mspoto@bloombergindustry.com.3014    To contact the editor responsible for this story: Stephanie Gleason3015at sgleason@blqombergindustry.com.3016                                 ______30173018  Article From the New York Times Submitted by Ranking Member Kennedy3019     senior leaders are leaving an already-depleted disaster agency3020By Christopher Flavelle3021Feb. 27, 20253022            Christopher Flavelle has covered FEMA for a decade.3023    More than a dozen of the senior leaders at the Federal Emergency3024Management Agency, including those with the most experience in leading3025disaster recovery, have either been fired or have resigned, thinning3026its management ranks weeks ahead of hurricane season.3027    The departures in the senior ranks are in addition to job cuts and3028resignations of about 1,000 of the agency's roughly 17,000 employees.3029    Those changes represent a significant loss at an agency that was3030already struggling with personnel shortages as it tried to help3031communities recover from catastrophic storms and wildfires in western3032North Carolina and Los Angeles, among other missions.3033    Soon after his return to the White House, President Trump mused3034about formally disbanding FEMA. The departures suggest that the agency3035is already being thinned out.3036    ``The massive reduction in staff at FEMA will have dangerous ripple3037effects for communities across the country,'' said Shana Udvardy,3038senior climate resilience policy analyst at the Union of Concerned3039Scientists. ``At a time when FEMA staff is low capacity, this is going3040in the wrong direction.''3041    Under the Trump administration's so-called deferred resignation3042offer, more than 800 FEMA employees are leaving, according to several3043people familiar with the situation who spoke on the condition of3044anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. They3045include the agency's top lawyer and his deputy, as well as senior3046officials in charge of human resources, information technology and3047reducing the risk communities face from future disasters.3048    The agency's leadership plans to hold a ``clap out'' on Friday for3049the employees who are leaving, according to a document viewed by The3050New York Times. FEMA staff members are encouraged to gather in the3051lobby of the Washington headquarters on Friday afternoon and applaud as3052their colleagues leave the building.3053    The administration fired FEMA's chief financial officer, as well as3054a senior official responsible for the Federal flood insurance program,3055along with more than 200 probationary employees.3056    In addition, the administration has indicated it will eliminate the3057jobs of an unknown number of other FEMA employees who work on issues3058related to climate change or equity.3059    FEMA's press office referred a request for comment to the3060Department of Homeland Security, which includes FEMA. A spokeswoman for3061the department declined to comment.3062    Before Mr. Trump's return, the agency was already struggling to3063fill its positions. In 2023, the nonpartisan U.S. Government3064Accountability Office reported that FEMA had managed to staff two-3065thirds of its allotted positions. That gap partly reflected the toll3066posed by FEMA's need to respond to a growing number of disasters made3067worse by climate change.3068    In his first week back in office, Mr. Trump said states should3069manage disasters on their own and established a council led by the3070secretaries of defense and homeland security to consider FEMA's future.3071``I think we're going to recommend that FEMA go away,'' Mr. Trump said.3072It is unclear whether that council has met.3073    Among the top managers who are departing is Adrian Sevier, who has3074worked as FEMA's chief counsel for 10 years, and as deputy chief3075counsel for 8 years before that. On Tuesday, Mr. Sevier wrote on3076LinkedIn that he was leaving and thanked the people who worked for him.3077``You have all supported and defended the constitution,'' he wrote,3078``and well and faithfully discharged your duties.''3079    Mr. Sevier's deputy, Michael Cameron, is also leaving, according to3080three people familiar with his decision, who spoke on the condition of3081anonymity out of a fear of retaliation.3082    Neither Mr. Sevier nor Mr. Cameron could be reached for comment.3083    The role of top lawyer at FEMA carries particular importance at an3084agency where a fast response is required and often hundreds of millions3085of dollars in emergency assistance are involved. FEMA's top lawyers3086guide the staff in quickly and appropriately spending money in ways3087that avoid fraud, waste and abuse.3088    In addition to those executives, FEMA is losing at least seven3089staff members responsible for managing disaster recovery operations,3090according to people inside the agency. Those workers, called ``Federal3091coordinating officers,'' are both extremely valuable and in short3092supply: As of Thursday morning, 54 of those officers were already3093deployed, leaving just three available to be sent to manage any new3094disasters that might happen.3095    Other departing senior managers include FEMA's acting chief human3096capital officer, the deputy chief human capital officer for operations,3097and the deputy assistant administrator for mitigation, who oversees3098programs designed to reduce communities' exposure to disasters. Two of3099FEMA's deputy chief information officers, who are responsible for3100information technology--including computers, software and3101cybersecurity--are also departing.3102    Two weeks ago, the agency fired its chief financial officer, Mary3103Comans, after Elon Musk claimed misleadingly that FEMA had spent money3104to shelter migrants in ``high end hotels'' in New York City. Ms. Comans3105had overseen payments allocated by Congress for emergency housing,3106which was part of her job.3107    A week later, Christopher Page, who worked on the National Flood3108Insurance Program, was fired from his job. Mr. Page wrote on LinkedIn3109that he had worked at FEMA since 2010 but had recently been promoted;3110his new role meant he was technically on probation and therefore easier3111to terminate.3112    The flood insurance program insures millions of homes around the3113United States that otherwise cannot get coverage. That insurance is3114what allows the real estate market to function in those areas: Without3115insurance, banks won't issue mortgages; without a mortgage, most people3116can't afford to buy a house. Mr. Page's job was to look for ways to3117improve the program.3118    ``I wanted to be there for disaster survivors on their worst day,''3119Mr. Page wrote.3120                                 ______31213122             GAO Report Submitted by Ranking Member Kennedy3123[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]31243125    Mr. Strong. The gentleman from Guam, Mr. Moylan, is3126recognized for 5 minutes of questioning.3127    Mr. Moylan. Thank you, Chairman Strong, and Ranking Member3128Kennedy for allowing me to waive and speak on the importance of3129FEMA to my district.3130    As Guam continues to recover from typhoons and prepares for3131other disasters, FEMA's assistance is still needed. To3132demonstrate the need of FEMA and its deficiencies in the3133territories, I will use FEMA's 4 phases of emergency3134management.3135    The first 2 are mitigation and preparedness. No one can3136predict how future disasters will affect us. But FEMA has3137provided the tools to reduce the damage from the next--for the3138next emergency. Utilizing bottom-up approaches, FEMA has3139ensured that readiness begins at the local level. FEMA provides3140assessments, early warning, and awareness methods that are3141vital to disaster preparedness. While Guam and many other U.S.3142locations face difficulties in hardening infrastructure and3143telecommunications, Guam's partnership with FEMA has been3144extremely fruitful.3145    The other 2 phrases in FEMA's preparedness management here3146is response and recovery. For all the success we can achieve3147before disasters come, FEMA's true value is seen during3148emergencies and the recovery efforts after. Stretched thin,3149FEMA is often limited to how they can respond to disasters. It3150has been 2 years since Typhoon Mawar destroyed our island and3151we are still recovering. Funding opportunities, like Emergency3152Operations Center Grants and recovery funds ensure that Guam3153can respond efficiently in disasters.3154    Now, despite these successes, we have a long way to go for3155streamlined emergency responses and recovery. Guam's disaster-3156prone location is burdened with outdated grant criteria,3157limited funds, and other administrative challenges. FEMA's3158Region 9 is also associated with multiple pressing emergencies:3159typhoons, wildfires, and flash floods. While successes in the3160most recent disaster relief fund represent a meaningful step3161toward full recovery, we can't rely on legislative wins for the3162next emergency.3163    The battle against disasters is a never-ending effort.3164Let's not forget that the work we do today, whether in3165Government, law enforcement, or in communities, will protect3166our country from the unpredictable nature of emergencies. So3167together we can ensure that the future of FEMA remains an3168organization committed to mitigating, preparing, and responding3169and recovering from disasters.3170    Mr. Manning, as I already mentioned, FEMA's bottom-up3171approach is crucial to an integrated and effective disaster3172response. Yet, the spirit of integration has only traveled so3173far in the previous administration. While my colleague from3174Puerto Rico could elaborate more on the controversies3175associated with this, could you speak more about how FEMA has3176looked at the Jones Act waivers when preparing for future3177disasters?3178    Mr. Manning. Thank you for that question. That is a3179perennially challenging issue. I can't, of course, speak to the3180previous administration of FEMA's operations in either Puerto3181Rico or Guam, not having been at FEMA at the time, but I know3182that that is--provision of assistance, the logistics delivery3183of assistance to our island territories and Hawaii are always3184challenging. I know the logistics organization within FEMA pays3185special attention to that, in particular the Pacific Area3186Office, FEMA's Pacific Area Office in Hawaii. I know that3187there's plans in between Guam, American Samoa, and Hawaii as3188well.3189    Going forward, as we discuss the revisions to the public3190assistance process, that would absolutely, I believe--3191considerations of Jones Act challenges should absolutely be3192considered in any of those planning going forward.3193    Mr. Moylan. Very good. Thank you.3194    Ms. Speranza, your organization has regional councils in3195every major region across the world. For Guam specifically, we3196often suffer from the same disasters that affect Pacific Island3197countries or Asia. In terms of coordinated emergency3198management, how can the United States promote disaster response3199interoperability across every region?3200    Ms. Speranza. That's a really great question. So I think3201one of the ways that we can better coordinate across all3202regions is through the standardization that I talked about in3203my testimony. Right. That's through the preparedness programs.3204That's making sure that every emergency manager at the State,3205local, Tribal, territorial, and even private-sector levels have3206the training available to them to make sure that they can3207respond through mutual aid should the need arise.3208    That's why those programs are really important, is because3209it ensures that every emergency manager or public safety3210official is trained to the same criteria. So if something3211happens in your region and perhaps all of your resources have3212exceeded capacity, you can reach back to another region for3213help. In theory, the people that come to your region are also3214qualified in that.3215    So I think that that is the primary priority for reform, is3216to ensure that our preparedness programs can make sure that3217mutual aid is provided from region to region, including in the3218Islands.3219    Mr. Moylan. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.3220    Mr. Strong. The gentleman from Guam's time has expired.3221    I now recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Moskowitz,3222for 5 minutes of questioning.3223    Mr. Moskowitz. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Thank you for3224allowing me to waive on today.3225    In a previous life, I was the State emergency management3226director of Florida for Governor Ron DeSantis as the State3227coordinating officer where an emergency is declared in Florida,3228almost all of the Governor's powers are also invested in the3229emergency management director. All secretaries of all3230departments report to the State coordinating officer. So, yes,3231it was a little awkward to have all these other Republican3232appointees having to listen to a Democrat. But I got that job3233because I was qualified.3234    I got to work with both Brock Long, who was the director,3235the administrator of FEMA during the Trump administration, and3236Pete Gaynor when I was there. I was there for the Category 53237Hurricane Michael recovery. I ran the Hurricane Irma public3238assistance reimbursement process, the citrus block grant3239program, the timber block grant program, and Florida's COVID3240response.3241    Let me first say this. Any day that we are talking about3242emergency management is a good day because we are often3243overlooked and we are often under-invested in. No one cares3244about us during blue skies, but when gray skies hit, that is3245when we get all of the attention.3246    During Hurricane Michael in the Panhandle, I was deeply3247concerned about fiscally-constrained areas. This is a3248Republican area. Some of these towns had only $5 million city3249budgets. Their city budgets were $5 million a year, but they3250had $35 million of cost. Those cities would have failed. Those3251residents would have had to leave. Those towns would have not3252have been rebuilt.3253    Actually, who helped save them? It was President Trump.3254President Trump helped save them because what he did was, is he3255expedited the reimbursement to those towns and he increased the3256reimbursement rate to 90 percent. Without that, these towns of3257the panhandle would have absolutely never recovered.3258    Another piece of disaster management that a lot of people3259don't know is a lot of it is done by the private sector. It is3260not done by government. Right? The private sector does all3261sorts of functions: technical assistance, monitoring,3262logistics, debris removal, all done by the private sector.3263    Mr. Smitherman, and thank you for your service because I3264know what that job is like, you rely heavily on the private3265sector through vendors to go and complete a mission. It is not3266done by Government.3267    Mr. Kaniewski, you talked about resiliency and mitigation.3268You are 100 percent right. It would be great if we could be3269more proactive with the disasters. But the problem is, is that3270a lot of people don't want to change the building code. A lot3271of people don't want to do these things. Why? Because it makes3272the cost of houses more expensive. After Hurricane Andrew, when3273we redid the building code in Florida, which by the way, has3274saved us a lot of money in disasters, many people didn't want3275to do that because they said the cost of homes in Florida would3276go up.3277    So, sure, can we make homes more resilient to fire in3278California? We can. It is going to slow the rebuilding process.3279It is going to slow recovery. Can we elevate homes in Florida?3280We can. It is going to slow down the rebuilding process. So3281there is a give and take with all of that stuff.3282    I want to talk about FEMA reimbursement. It is super3283critical. Right? Mr. Smitherman, you would know this, Alabama3284could not have afforded the Tuscaloosa tornado on their own if3285there was no Federal reimbursement. It is a $2\1/2\ billion3286disaster. Oklahoma gets 68 tornadoes a year. OK. Oklahoma and3287Alabama have, what, a $12-, $15 billion budget? Right? These3288aren't budgets like Texas or California or Florida or New York.3289A lot of these red States cannot afford a major disaster if3290there was no Federal reimbursement. So the idea of FEMA going3291away would dramatically hurt red States.3292    Could you survive a Category 4 coming in from the Gulf of3293America without Federal reimbursement? I know the answer. Your3294State would have to raise taxes, it would have to raid the3295education fund, it would have to raid DOT. If it didn't do3296that, it would have to raid taxes. People would say to me,3297well, Jared, how do the power companies do it? How can the3298power companies come in? How can they amass all these huge3299forces? It's very simple. They pass that cost off to the3300consumer.3301    So when my power companies come in and spend $300- or $4003302million getting the power up, and, thank God, they do because3303getting power up is the most important thing after life,3304health, and safety in a disaster, how do they do it so quickly?3305Cost doesn't matter because they push that cost off to the3306consumer in a surcharge.3307    So listen, what do we do? How do we fix FEMA? First of all,3308I support the President's EO. I think the President coming out3309and forming a commission is the right idea. Let's put experts3310on there that know what they are doing.3311    I have been proposing for years now to take FEMA out of3312Homeland. That is my bill and I am doing that with Byron3313Donalds of Florida in the House and we got Thom Tillis coming3314out in the Senate. We will be announcing that bill again, but I3315have been doing it for 2 years. Why? Homeland is a great3316agency. It is, but it has become too big and FEMA cannot3317function there. For an agency that needs to be fast, it can't3318function in an agency of 22 others.3319    Talking about them getting involved in immigration, they3320shouldn't be involved in immigration. But why are they? Because3321Homeland is using FEMA to run every grant of every agency, all3322within Homeland. Half of FEMA's personnel now is running3323grants. They are not doing response. So we got to get them out3324of that.3325    The second thing we can do is we can block grant money3326down. We absolutely can do that. I did citrus block grant--Mr.3327Chairman, would you allow me just a couple of----3328    Mr. Strong. Yield 45 seconds----3329    Mr. Moskowitz. Thank you, sir.3330    Mr. Strong [continuing]. Because balance the clock. Thank3331you.3332    Mr. Moskowitz. Thank you, sir. I did citrus block grants, I3333did timber block grants. We can block grant down the public3334assistance money. We can get FEMA out of the housing business.3335They are terrible at housing. We can block grant that down to3336local governments and to States to do that stuff. That would3337shrink the size of FEMA. It would. It would also allow FEMA to3338refocus on response. When we say response, FEMA doesn't have3339much. They coordinate other Federal resources. In fact, that is3340what Mr. Smitherman does. He coordinates the other, the other3341State resources that he has.3342    So EMAC is great, but we got to make sure they get the3343reimbursement. Police, fire, the National Guard, they are all3344great resources. They can't--they will not come and help from3345other States on EMAC if they don't get their reimbursement.3346    So I implore my colleagues, let's not politicize disaster3347aid. That will not help blue States or red States. You are3348going to be punishing your constituents, Americans, patriots,3349soldiers, first responders, police departments, fire3350departments. But we can fix FEMA, we can reform it, we can save3351it.3352    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.3353    Mr. Brecheen. Mr. Chairman, can I ask unanimous consent to3354enter Republican applause for some of his comments to my3355Democrat colleague----3356    Mr. Moskowitz. You got it.3357    Mr. Brecheen [continuing]. Into the record?3358    Mr. Strong. The gentleman from Florida's time has expired.3359    Mr. Brecheen. Some of his comments.3360    Mr. Strong. I thank the witnesses for their valuable3361testimony and the Members for their questions. The Members of3362the subcommittee may have some additional questions for the3363witnesses, and we could ask the witnesses to respond to these3364in writing. Pursuant to the committee rule VII(E), the hearing3365record will be held open for 10 days.3366    Without objection, this subcommittee stands adjourned.3367    [Whereupon, at 11:43 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]33683369                                 [all]