[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
EXAMINING CLIMATE CHANGE: A THREAT TO THE HOMELAND
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS,
RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 8, 2021
__________
Serial No. 117-14
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
45-049 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi, Chairman
Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas John Katko, New York
James R. Langevin, Rhode Island Michael T. McCaul, Texas
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey Clay Higgins, Louisiana
J. Luis Correa, California Michael Guest, Mississippi
Elissa Slotkin, Michigan Dan Bishop, North Carolina
Emanuel Cleaver, Missouri Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey
Al Green, Texas Ralph Norman, South Carolina
Yvette D. Clarke, New York Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Iowa
Eric Swalwell, California Diana Harshbarger, Tennessee
Dina Titus, Nevada Andrew S. Clyde, Georgia
Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey Carlos A. Gimenez, Florida
Kathleen M. Rice, New York Jake LaTurner, Kansas
Val Butler Demings, Florida Peter Meijer, Michigan
Nanette Diaz Barragan, California Kat Cammack, Florida
Josh Gottheimer, New Jersey August Pfluger, Texas
Elaine G. Luria, Virginia Andrew R. Garbarino, New York
Tom Malinowski, New Jersey
Ritchie Torres, New York
Hope Goins, Staff Director
Daniel Kroese, Minority Staff Director
Natalie Nixon, Clerk
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY
Val Butler Demings, Florida, Chairwoman
Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas Kat Cammack, Florida, Ranking
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey Member
Al Green, Texas Clay Higgins, Louisiana
Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Iowa
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi (ex Andrew R. Garbarino, New York
officio) John Katko, New York (ex officio)
Lauren McClain, Subcommittee Staff Director
Diana Bergwin, Minority Subcommittee Staff Director
Kenyatta Collins, Subcommittee Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Statements
The Honorable Val Butler Demings, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Florida, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on
Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Recovery:
Oral Statement................................................. 1
Prepared Statement............................................. 3
The Honorable Kat Cammack, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Florida, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Emergency
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery:
Oral Statement................................................. 4
Prepared Statement............................................. 7
The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Mississippi, and Chairman, Committee on
Homeland Security:
Prepared Statement............................................. 8
The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Texas:
Prepared Statement............................................. 9
Witnesses
Mr. Bill Nye, Science Educator and CEO, On Behalf of The
Planetary Society:
Oral Statement................................................. 13
Prepared Statement............................................. 15
Ms. Alice C. Hill, David M. Rubenstein Senior Fellow for Energy
and Environment, On Behalf of the Council on Foreign Relations:
Oral Statement................................................. 19
Prepared Statement............................................. 21
Mr. Curtis Brown, State Coordinator and Co-founder, Virginia
Department of Emergency Management, Commonwealth of Virginia,
On Behalf of the Virginia Department of Emergency Management
and Institute for Diversity and Inclusion in Emergency
Management:
Oral Statement................................................. 28
Prepared Statement............................................. 29
Ms. Pamela S. Williams, Executive Director, BuildStrong
Coalition:
Oral Statement................................................. 33
Prepared Statement............................................. 34
For the Record
The Honorable Kat Cammack, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Florida, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Emergency
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery:
Letter From the Florida Division of Emergency Management....... 5
EXAMINING CLIMATE CHANGE: A THREAT TO THE HOMELAND
----------
Tuesday, June 8, 2021
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:04 p.m., via
Webex, Val Butler Demings [Chairwoman of the subcommittee]
presiding.
Present: Representatives Demings, Jackson Lee, Payne,
Green, Watson Coleman, Cammack, Miller-Meeks, and Garbarino.
Also present: Representatives Barragan and Clarke.
Mrs. Demings. The Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery will come to order.
The subcommittee is meeting today to receive testimony on
``Examining Climate Change: A Threat to the Homeland.''
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare the
subcommittee in recess at any point.
I would like to say good afternoon to all of you and thank
you so much for joining us today to our witnesses, as well as
our amazing Members.
We are here today to discuss climate change and our
Nation's response. Climate change is a major threat to our
country. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's mission is
to, ``secure the Nation from the many threats we face.''
Therefore, the Department's mission includes taking action to
address the effects of climate change.
Already the impacts of climate change on communities across
the country extract devastating human and financial costs. If
we fail to address the challenges posed by climate change,
those costs will only increase.
Science concludes that climate change is real, and it is
increasing in the severity and the frequency of extreme weather
events. According to NOAA, during 1980, the United States has
sustained close to 300 weather and climate disasters, like
catastrophic hurricanes, flooding, and wildfires, where overall
financial damages reached or exceeded $1 billion, and the total
costs of these events now exceeds $1.9 trillion.
In 2020, for example, multiple extreme weather events, like
Tropical Storm Eta and Hurricane Sally, to name only 2,
severely impacted the Ranking Member and my home State of
Florida and the southeastern U.S. region, and each storm
respectfully resulted in more than $1 billion of financial
damages for the United States.
Last week, the Federal Reserve Chairman, Jerome Powell,
acknowledged the serious risk the climate crisis poses to the
United States and global economy, stating, ``There is no doubt
that climate change poses profound challenges for the global
economy and certainly the financial system.''
Since 2013, including in 2021, the U.S. Government
Accountability Office included the Federal Government's fiscal
exposure to the risk of climate change in the office's High-
Risk List report. To save lives and to lower the Federal
Government's fiscal exposure to climate change, GAO stated,
``The Federal Government needs a cohesive, strategic approach
with strong leadership and the authority to manage risks across
the entire range of related Federal activities.''
Reports released by both the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security and the U.S. Department of Defense categorize climate
change as an urgent growing threat based on its ability to
cripple critical infrastructure, deplete military resources,
and fuel terrorism.
Despite the pressing need to address the risks posed by
climate change and despite the progress that has been made by
the Obama administration, President Trump disregarded these
challenges, increased the likelihood that Americans would
experience these risks and took steps to eliminate Federal
research and response climate change programs.
In contrast, through multiple Executive Orders on the
climate crisis and by providing $1 billion to communities
through FEMA's Pre-Disaster Building Resilient Infrastructure
and Communities program and through the Biden administration's
plan to invest in resilient critical infrastructure through the
American Jobs Plan and the administration's budget proposal,
President Biden continues to take swift and bold action to
restore America's leadership on climate issues and confront the
risks posed by climate change.
In preparing for and responding to the effects of climate
change, DHS, FEMA, and the broader Federal Government must
include conscious planning for racial and socioeconomic
disparities, and that is why the Biden administration is taking
action on environmental justice issues through the creation of
the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council and
other initiatives.
Additionally, DHS Secretary Mayorkas has also taken steps
to inform the Department's climate response programs to include
the goals of advancing equity and increasing resilience for
vulnerable and high-risk communities. Responding to climate
change will take a unified effort among Federal, State, local,
Tribal, and territorial governments, and private-sector
partners, and President Biden's leadership, along with the
sustained focus by Members of this subcommittee are essential
to that effort.
It is with sincere gratitude that I again welcome our
witnesses here today. Thank you all for agreeing to share your
insight with this subcommittee and with the public. We look
forward to hearing your testimony.
[The statement of Chairwoman Demings follows:]
Statement of Chairwoman Val Demings
June 8, 2021
We are here today to discuss climate change and our Nation's
response. Climate change is a major threat to our country.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's mission is to, and I
quote, ``secure the Nation from the many threats we face,'' unquote.
Therefore, the Department's mission includes taking actions to address
the effects of climate change. Already, the impacts of climate change
on communities across the country extract devastating human and
financial costs; and if we fail to address the challenges posed by
climate change those costs will only increase.
The science is in, climate change is happening, and it is
increasing the severity and frequency of extreme weather events.
According to NOAA, since 1980, the United States has sustained close to
300 weather and climate disasters, like catastrophic hurricanes,
flooding, and wildfires, where overall financial damages reached or
exceeded $1 billion, and the total cost of these events now exceeds
$1.9 trillion. In 2020, for example, multiple extreme weather events,
like Tropical Storm Eta and Hurricane Sally, to name only 2, severely
impacted my home State of Florida and the Southeastern U.S. region, and
each storm, respectively, resulted in more than $1 billion of financial
damages for the United States.
Last week, the Federal Reserve Chairman, Jerome Powell,
acknowledged the serious risks the climate crises poses to the United
States and global economy, stating, and I quote: ``There is no doubt
that climate change poses profound challenges for the global economy
and certainly the financial system.'' Unquote. Since 2013, including in
2021, the U.S. Government Accountability Office included the Federal
Government's fiscal exposure to the risks of climate change in the
Office's High-Risk List report.
To save lives, and to lower the Federal Government's fiscal
exposure to climate change, GAO stated, and I quote, ``the Federal
Government needs a cohesive, strategic approach with strong leadership
and the authority to manage risks across the entire range of related
Federal activities,'' unquote. Reports released by both the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Department of Defense,
characterize climate change as an urgent, growing threat based on its
ability to cripple critical infrastructure, deplete military resources,
and fuel terrorism.
Despite the pressing need to address the risks posed by climate
change, and despite the progress that had been made by the Obama
administration, President Trump, disregarded these challenges,
increased the likelihood that Americans would experience these risks,
and took steps to eliminate Federal research and response climate
change programs. In contrast, through multiple Executive Orders on the
climate crisis, and by providing $1 billion to communities through
FEMA's Pre-Disaster Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities
program, and through the Biden administration's plan to invest in
resilient critical infrastructure through the American Jobs Plan and
the administration's budget proposal, President Biden continues to take
swift and bold action to restore America's leadership on climate issues
and confront the risks posed by climate change.
In preparing for and responding to the effects of climate change,
DHS, FEMA, and the broader Federal Government, must include conscious
planning for racial and socioeconomic disparities. And that is why the
Biden administration is also taking action on environmental justice
issues through the creation of the White House Environmental Justice
Advisory Council and other initiatives. Additionally, DHS Secretary
Mayorkas has also taken steps to inform the Department's climate
response programs to include the goals of advancing equity and
increasing resilience for vulnerable and high-risk communities.
Responding to climate change will take a unified effort among
Federal, State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments and private-
sector partners, and President Biden's leadership, along with the
sustained focus by Members of this subcommittee are essential to that
effort. It is with sincere gratitude that I welcome our witnesses here
today. Thank you for agreeing to share your insight with this
subcommittee and with the public. We look forward to your testimony.
Mrs. Demings. It is now my pleasure to recognize the
Ranking Member of this subcommittee, the gentlewoman from
Florida, Mrs. Cammack, for an opening statement.
Mrs. Cammack. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
I hope you can all hear me. Can you hear me OK?
Mrs. Demings. Yes.
Mrs. Cammack. OK. Awesome. It is a little difficult when we
are all out in the field. You never know exactly what kind of
broadband connection you are going to get, so I appreciate
that.
Thank you, Chairwoman Demings.
2020 saw one of the worst fire seasons in history, burning
millions of acres along the West Coast, and in February 2021,
ice storms in Texas left millions without power or safe water
to drink. In March of this year, a tornado outbreak caused
wide-spread damage to several southern States, and in our home
State of Florida, as the Chairwoman and I are both proud to
call Florida home, you know, we are certainly no stranger to
intense weather events. Just last year, Hurricane Sally flooded
Florida's panhandle dropping 4 inches of rain in just 4 hours.
In 2018, Hurricane Michael--well, we all know that it
devastated Florida's Gulf Coast and was the first Category 5
hurricane to make landfall in mainland United States since
1992.
Now, as we move through the second week of Atlantic
hurricane season, it is important to remember that while we
cannot control the weather, we can take steps to prepare, and
it is pre-disaster mitigation efforts by individuals and policy
makers, first responders, and emergency preparedness
professionals that ensure that no geographic region of our
country is left unsupported.
Mitigation activities, such as strengthening and upgrading
existing infrastructure from all hazards, raising structures in
identified flood zones, buying flood insurance to protect
personal property, installing hurricane shutters and other
protective measures, as well as clearing dead vegetation to
reduce the risk of wildfire all have the potential to limit the
negative effects of natural disasters.
FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program has helped
communities implement hazard mitigation measures following a
Presidential major disaster declaration to reduce the risk of
loss of life and property from future disasters.
Now, Florida's 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan highlights
4 main goals with corresponding objectives to include
implementation of an effective comprehensive State-wide Hazard
Mitigation Plan, supporting local and regional mitigation
strategies, increasing public and private-sector awareness, and
support for hazard mitigation in Florida, and support
mitigation initiatives and policies that support the State's
cultural, economic, and natural resources.
These goals have been realized through recent mitigation
projects. For example, the Hallandale Beach drainage project
was recently completed using hazard mitigation grant program
funds to address drainage issues that caused flooding
throughout the city during storms.
A new drainage project was also completed in Oakland Park
using those same grant funds. Now, despite high tidal surges
and high canal levels from Hurricane Irma in September 2017, no
flood waters entered homes in Oakland Park communities that
were served by this new system.
Not only do mitigation activities aim to reduce injuries,
deaths, and property damage, but they also limit the potential
for damage to the economic sector.
A December 2019 report by the National Institute of
Building Sciences found that by designing buildings to meet the
2018 Building Code standards, the National mitigation benefit/
cost ratio is $11 for every $1 invested. The report also found
that the impacts of 23 years of Federal mitigation grants
provided by FEMA, the Economic Development Administration, and
HUD result in a National benefit of $6 for every $1 invested.
Our approach to mitigation needs to shift from a pre-
disaster mindset so that we are anticipating the need and not
responding after the fact and after the damage has been done.
I am encouraged by recent changes to pre-disaster
mitigation funding, including the introduction of the Building
Resilient Infrastructure and Communities grant program, BRIC,
makes additional Federal funds available to States, U.S.
territories, Indian Tribal governments, and local communities
for pre-disaster mitigation activities.
Now, as we have hardened and continue to harden our
defenses against a potential terrorist attack, we must also be
prepared for the devastating effects of a severe weather event.
As I have said, the Chairwoman and I being Floridians, I think
we know this pretty much as well as anyone could. The reality
is, quite frankly, that the natural disasters have always
occurred, and they will continue to occur. We should use every
single disaster as an opportunity to learn and improve our
mitigation capabilities and strategies to decrease the loss of
life and damage to our homes and infrastructure and to lessen
the economic strain that these disasters present.
I look forward to hearing our witnesses here today on how
to continue our preparedness and resiliency in the face of
unpredictable future natural disasters and all hazard
emergencies.
At this time, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the
record this letter from the Florida Division of Emergency
Management highlighting their mitigation and resiliency
projects. With that----
Mrs. Demings. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
Letter From the Florida Division of Emergency Management
June 8, 2021.
The Honorable Kat Cammack,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery, Committee on Homeland Security, U.S. House of
Representatives, Washington, DC 20510.
Dear Ranking Member Cammack: Thank you for the opportunity to share
information regarding mitigation programs and projects overseen by
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and the Florida Division of Emergency
Management.
The State is committed to ensuring communities have every resource
they need for resilience planning and project implementation. In May,
Governor DeSantis signed Senate Bill 1954. This bill, for the first
time ever, requires the development of the Comprehensive Statewide
Flood Vulnerability and Sea Level Rise Data Set, led by the Chief
Science Officer. Additionally, it facilitates the development of
Statewide sea level rise projections and other data necessary to
determine the risks to inland and coastal communities. The data set is
to be completed by July 1, 2022, and the Comprehensive Statewide Flood
Vulnerability and Sea Level Rise Assessment is to be completed by July
1, 2023. The Statewide Flooding and Sea Level Rise Resilience Plan is
to be submitted by Dec. 1, 2023.
This bill also authorizes local governments to develop Regional
Resilience Coalitions to allow communities to join in resilience
planning efforts and share technical assistance. It also creates the
Florida Flood Hub for Applied Research and Innovation at the University
of South Florida to coordinate efforts between the academic and
research institutions of Florida.
This bill is part of the largest investment in the State's
history--over $640 million--to support efforts to ensure State and
local communities are prepared to deal with the impacts of sea level
rise, intensified storms and flooding.
In addition, the Division houses the Bureau of Mitigation, which is
an integral part of the agency. Due to Florida's weather, geography and
miles of coastline, the State is highly vulnerable to disasters. To
assist communities in reducing the impacts of these disasters, the
Bureau of Mitigation administers three Federal mitigation grant
programs: the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, the Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities Program and the Flood Mitigation
Assistance Program.
The Federal mitigation grant programs play a significant role in
the development of mitigation programs throughout the State. To
supplement those programs, the Division has taken additional efforts to
support disaster resiliency including loss avoidance studies, a
Statewide interagency working group called Mitigate FL to discuss
ongoing mitigation efforts and the Local Mitigation Strategy system.
The Division's framework for mitigation starts with the State
Hazard Mitigation Plan. The purpose of the State Hazard Mitigation Plan
is to reduce death, injuries, and property losses caused by natural
hazards in Florida. The 2018 plan serves several purposes, including
the implementation of a comprehensive mitigation program and guidance
to ensure that the State effectively uses available mitigation funding.
Though the State Hazard Mitigation Plan, the State is eligible to
receive additional funding through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
This program supports projects that specifically reduce disaster
losses. The Division works with local governments to develop projects
that address an existing issue. For example, the Division recently
completed the Hallandale Beach Drainage Project through this program.
This project addressed drainage issues throughout the city that caused
flooding during storms. To prevent future flooding, the city is
constructing a system that would manage stormwater in 195 acres of
residential and commercial properties. The project also includes the
installation of drainage pipes and pressurized pump stations.
Typically, projects within this program range from retrofitting public
structures, drainage projects and elevation of private structures.
As of June 1, the State is currently managing $1 billion in funding
through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
The Division also administers the Flood Mitigation Assistance
Program. This program provides funding specifically for projects
intended to reduce or eliminate the risk of repetitive flood damage to
buildings and structures insurable under the National Flood Insurance
Program. Eligible projects include property acquisition and structure
demolition, structure elevation, dry floodproofing, soil stabilization
and other community flood mitigation projects.
The Division also supports the Local Mitigation Strategy system.
FEMA requires local governments to develop and adopt such hazard
mitigation plans as a condition for receiving certain types of non-
emergency disaster assistance, including funding for mitigation
projects. These plans are referred to as local mitigation plans.
Jurisdictions must update their hazard mitigation plans and re-submit
them for FEMA approval every 5 years to maintain eligibility. Local
mitigation plans identify the natural hazards that may affect a single
or multiple local jurisdictions, such as a town, city, or county. Plans
assess risks and vulnerabilities, identify actions to reduce losses
from those hazards identified, and establish a coordinated process to
implement the plan using a wide range of public and private
investments.
To ensure jurisdictions continue to be eligible for funding, the
Division provides technical assistance to counties as they update their
plans and also provides approvals for local plans. The Division has
also developed a Florida Review Tool for counties that streamlines the
review process and has issued a local mitigation strategy manual that
provides specific guidance during the planning process.
Although the State has seen great success through mitigation
efforts, the Division has also identified challenges associated with
mitigation funding and projects.
The biggest challenge will be ensuring local governments are able
to receive funding quickly. The State receives certain mitigation
funding, such as the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, through FEMA
obligations. Due to COVID-19, FEMA will be managing Public Assistance
reimbursement funding from every eligible State, county, nonprofit and
place of worship that has disaster-related costs associated with COVID-
19. The agency will be simultaneously providing obligations to eligible
applicants, while also supporting other disaster responses, such as
hurricanes. The Division is anticipating a delay in funding due to the
high volume of applicants, which may impact how quickly the Division
can disburse funds to local governments. While we continue to await
additional guidance, the Division will continue to work with local
governments to ensure they have all available resources as they
continue to create resilient communities that are prepared to withstand
any disaster.
Another challenge includes the Building Resilient Infrastructure
and Communities program. The recent announcement regarding the
increased funding for this program in fiscal year 2021-2022 is an
exciting investment in mitigation. However, we continue to advocate for
additional funding for this program. In Florida, there are currently
mitigation projects totaling up to $20 billion that are awaiting
funding. We hope this program continues to grow so we can support all
mitigation projects intended to reduce disaster impacts. Additionally,
with the recent announcement, a portion of this funding will be
required to support underserved communities in areas with a high Social
Vulnerability Index, as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. The Division is concerned that underserved communities may
not be able to support the 25 percent cost share through this program.
We recommend that the cost share either be reduced or waived for
entities in areas with a high Social Vulnerability Index.
Overall, mitigation and supporting resilient communities continue
to remain top priorities for the Division. The Division has compiled
information related to all mitigation programs on the Division's
website and we encourage our partners to visit FloridaDisaster.org/DEM/
Mitigation for more in-depth information regarding mitigation efforts
within the State.
The Division looks forward to continuing to work closely with local
governments as they develop mitigation projects for their communities.
Thank you again for providing us with the opportunity to share
information on our programs within the State and please let me know if
we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Kevin Guthrie,
Director.
Mrs. Cammack. Thank you. With that, I yield back to the
Chairwoman.
[The statement of Ranking Member Cammack follows:]
Statement of Ranking Member Kat Cammack
2020 saw one of the worst fire seasons in history--burning millions
of acres along the West Coast. In February 2021, ice storms in Texas
left millions without power or safe water to drink. In March of this
year, a tornado outbreak caused widespread damage to several southern
States.
And in my home State of Florida, we are certainly no stranger to
intense weather events. Just last year, Hurricane Sally flooded
Florida's Pan Handle--dropping 4 months of rain in just 4 hours. And in
2018, Hurricane Michael, that devastated Florida's Gulf Coast, was the
first Category 5 hurricane to make landfall in mainland United States
since 1992.
As we move through the second week of Atlantic Hurricane Season,
it's important to remember that while we can't control the weather, we
can take steps to prepare. Pre-disaster mitigation efforts by
individuals, policy makers, first responders, and emergency
preparedness professionals ensure that no geographic region of the
country is left unsupported.
Mitigation activities such as strengthening and upgrading existing
infrastructure from all-hazards, raising structures in identified flood
zones, buying flood insurance to protect personal property, installing
hurricane shutters and other protective measures, and clearing dead
vegetation to reduce the risk of wildfire all have the potential to
limit the negative effects of natural disasters.
FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program helps communities implement
hazard mitigation measures following a Presidential Major Disaster
Declaration, to reduce the risk of loss of life and property from
future disasters.
Florida's 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan highlights 4 goals with
corresponding objectives to include:
Implement an effective comprehensive State-wide hazard
mitigation plan;
Support local and regional mitigation strategies;
Increase public and private-sector awareness and support for
hazard mitigation in Florida; and
Support mitigation initiatives and policies that protect the
State's cultural, economic, and natural resources.
These goals have been realized through recent mitigation projects.
For example, the Hallandale Beach Drainage Project was recently
completed using Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) funds to address
drainage issues that caused flooding throughout the city during storms.
A new drainage project was also completed in Oakland Park using HMPG
funds. Despite high tidal surges and high canal levels from Hurricane
Irma in September 2017, no flood waters entered homes in Oakland Park
communities served by the new system.
Not only do mitigation activities aim to reduce injuries, deaths,
and property damage, but they also have the potential to limit the
economic impact of disaster recovery efforts.
A December 2019 report by the National Institute of Building
Sciences found that by designing buildings to meet 2018 building code
standards, the National mitigation benefit-cost ratio is $11 for every
$1 invested.
The report also found that the impacts of 23 years of Federal
mitigation grants provided by FEMA, the Economic Development
Administration, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development,
result in a National benefit of $6 for every $1 invested.
Our approach to mitigation needs to shift to a pre-disaster
mindset, so we are anticipating the need, and not responding after the
damage is done.
I am encouraged by recent changes to pre-disaster mitigation
funding, including the introduction of the Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities Grant Program (BRIC). BRIC makes
additional Federal funds available to States, U.S territories, Indian
Tribal governments, and local communities for pre-disaster mitigation
activities.
As we've hardened and continue to harden our defenses against a
potential terrorist attack, we must also be prepared for the
devastating effects of a severe weather event.
The reality is that natural disasters have always occurred and will
continue to occur. We should use every disaster as an opportunity to
learn and improve our mitigation capabilities and strategies to
decrease loss of life and damage to our homes and infrastructure, and
to lessen the economic strain that disasters present.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on how to
continue to improve our preparedness and resilience in the face of the
unpredictable nature of disasters and all-hazard emergencies.
Mrs. Demings. I want to thank the Ranking Member for her
remarks.
Also, I would like to remind the committee that we will
operate according to the guidelines laid out by the Chairman
and Ranking Member in their February 3 colloquy regarding
remote procedures.
Without objection, Members not on the subcommittee shall be
permitted to sit and question the witnesses. Members may also
submit statements for the record.
[The statements of Chairman Thompson and Honorable Jackson
Lee follow:]
Statement of Chairman Bennie G. Thompson
June 8, 2021
Climate change is very real and creating more frequent and extreme
natural disasters. Extreme weather and its accompanying negative
impacts make climate change one of the biggest threats to our homeland.
For evidence of the impacts of climate change, you can look to the
2020 Atlantic hurricane season, which was the most active and the
fifth-costliest Atlantic hurricane season on record. The 2020 Atlantic
hurricane season was so active that we ran out of names and proceeded
to use the Greek alphabet. Also in 2020, we witnessed devastating
California wildfires. By the end of the year, we had nearly 10,000
fires that had burned through more than 4 million acres, making 2020
the largest wildfire season on record in California.
We are also seeing the impacts of climate change in my home State.
Over the past year, Mississippi has dealt with several catastrophic
weather events and, as a result, the State has received 6 storm-related
Major Declarations and 5 Emergency Declarations. The damage from these
horrific storms has caused more than $100 million in damages. In
addition to the cost of extreme weather events, recent disasters are
shining a light on long-standing inequities in which low-income and
underserved communities suffer disproportionate impacts of climate
change. These communities will continue to suffer disproportionately
from severe weather unless we make equity a priority in addressing
climate change.
Policy makers cannot afford to ignore climate change as it
threatens our infrastructure, agriculture, economy, health care,
population, and so much more. For example, Federal Reserve Chairman
Jerome Powell acknowledged that the climate crisis ``could impact the
broader economy, including inflation, jobs and the financial sector.''
America lost years of progress on addressing climate change due to the
Trump administration's outright refusal to accept science and its work
to dismantle climate science programs across the Federal Government.
I am proud that the Biden administration is taking climate change
seriously. President Biden is committed to rebuilding our communities
by investing in preparation for extreme weather events while also
ensuring that policies tackling the climate crisis are more inclusive.
We must be bold in addressing climate change. We need to make
critical investments in mitigation and adaption investments today, to
reduce damage from future extreme weather occurrences. I hope to hear
from our witnesses today about how we can take bold steps to combat the
on-going climate crisis. I look forward to working with the Biden
administration and my colleagues in supporting communities in our fight
to combat climate change and build stronger, more resilient
communities.
______
Statement of Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee
June 8, 2021
Thank you Chairwoman Demings, and Ranking Member Cammack for
convening this important hearing on ``Examining Climate Change: A
Threat to the Homeland.''
I welcome today's witnesses and look forward to their testimony.
Bill Nye, science educator and CEO, The Planetary Society;
Alice C. Hill, David M. Rubenstein senior fellow for energy
and environment, Council on Foreign Relations;
Curtis Brown, State coordinator, Virginia Department of
Emergency Management, co-founder, Institute for Diversity and
Inclusion in Emergency Management; and
Pamela S. Williams, executive director, BuildStrong
Coalition (Minority witness).
This hearing will give Members an opportunity to hear testimony on
the impacts of climate change, including extreme weather events, and
their implications for homeland security.
Climate change is a long-term change in the average weather
patterns that have come to define Earth's local, regional, and global
climates.
These changes have a broad range of observed effects that are
synonymous with the term.
Changes observed in Earth's climate since the early 20th Century
are primarily driven by human activities, particularly fossil fuel
burning, which increases heat-trapping greenhouse gas levels in Earth's
atmosphere, raising Earth's average surface temperature.
These human-produced temperature increases are commonly referred to
as global warming.
Increases in Earth's climate has led to unprecedented melting of
Artic ice, which eventually contributes to ocean rise.
Additional water contributes to extreme weather by impacting the
process of cloud formation, which increases the size of rainstorms and
large weather systems that form hurricanes and typhoons.
The stress that extreme weather is placing on the Nation's critical
infrastructure cannot be understated.
It is the task of the Committee on Homeland Security to take action
to direct the work of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS),
to address any threat to the homeland, no matter the source of the
threat-including dangers posed by climate change.
Climate change is not simply an issue--it is a threat with credible
and uncompromising dangers.
In January 2021, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin announced that
the Defense Department ``will immediately take appropriate policy
actions to prioritize climate change considerations in our activities
and risk assessments, to mitigate this driver of insecurity.
On April 22, 2021 Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N.
Mayorkas made this statement, ``the impacts of the climate emergency on
both our National and collective global security are vast,'' and
continued by noting that, ``DHS will implement a new approach to
climate change adaptation and resilience, and we will do so with the
sense of urgency this problem demands.''
Since 1980, the United States has sustained close to 300 weather
and climate disasters ranging from catastrophic hurricanes to raging
wildfires.
The total cost of these disasters now exceeds $1.9 trillion
according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Nevertheless, we know the true cost of climate change is real human
pain and loss--the incalculable grief of losing loved ones, homes, and
communities.
To fail to address climate change is to fail our citizens.
And by these standards, State officials in my home State
categorically failed when a severe ice and snowstorm in the form of a
polar vortex hit Texas in February 2021.
It is expected that the costs incurred through lost income,
property damage, and long-term reduction in economic activity due to
the storm will amount to between $195 billion and $295 billion.
The State of Texas official record of deaths caused by the ice
storm currently stands at 151 dead, with the majority of the deaths
centered in Harris County (home to Houston), Travis County (Austin),
and Dallas.
However, Buzzfeed News, using a method called ``excess deaths''
analysis, which has also been employed to calculate the full toll of
the COVID-19 pandemic, found that even by the most conservative
estimates, the true number is at least 3 times higher.
The analysis, also reviewed by 3 independent experts, suggests that
between 426 and 978 more people died during the week ending Feb. 20
than what the State has accounted for.
The best estimate from the analysis on excess deaths suggests that
702 people were killed in the storm that week, which is nearly 4 times
higher than the State's tally.
Hurricane season 2021 began on June 1, 2021 and we may see storms
that bring damaging destruction to the Gulf and Atlantic coasts and
tropical areas of the Nation.
hurricane harvey
Death of Family
It is a particularly painful tragedy from the Hurricanes of 2017,
which took so much from us including 6 members of the Saldivar family.
I still recall where I was when I learned that the family's bodies
had been discovered in their van that was swept away by raging Harvey
flood waters.
My office received desperate calls from constituents who were
trapped by flood waters.
One instance involved over 100 men, women, and children at a gas
station parking lot--the only patch of dry land in a residential area
surrounded by flood water.
Many elderly were without medication and there was no water or food
for children who were in need.
I worked to get city dump trucks, the only city vehicles capable of
driving through flood waters, to that location before night when rescue
operations would stop until dawn the next day.
My work over the days following Harvey involved getting medical
help, food, and water to people in areas cutoff by flood waters or
damaged streets.
The recovery from Hurricane Harvey is not finished.
Today, there are still blue-tarped roofs in neighborhoods that have
not gotten repaired following Harvey.
harvey by the numbers
The 9-county Houston metro area impacted by Hurricane Harvey covers
9,444 square miles.
Harris County covers 1,778 square miles, enough space to fit New
York City, Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, Seattle, Austin, and Dallas,
with room still to spare.
There was over 41,500 square miles of land mass impacted by
Hurricane Harvey and the subsequent flooding that covered an area
larger than the States of Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
Rhode Island, and Vermont combined.
Hurricane Harvey dropped 21 trillion gallons of rainfall on Texas
and Louisiana, most of it on the Houston Metroplex.
In September 2017, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory reported that
Hurricane Harvey's rainfall created 275 trillion pounds of water, which
caused the crust in and around Houston to deform and sink nearly 2
cubic centimeters because of its weight.
At its peak on September 1, 2017, one-third of Houston was under
water, and leaving 34,575 in shelters across Texas.
Hurricane Harvey is the largest housing disaster to hit the United
States which left 203,000 damaged homes, of which 12,700 were
destroyed.
Thousands of others with severe damage to their homes were living
with family or friends.
Hurricane Harvey followed Hurricanes Katrina and Maria in 2005 and
Hurricane Ike in 2008 with each hurricane season more damaging than the
previous.
The damage is real, the threat present, and the consequences grave.
And there is no way to divide climate change from these
catastrophes--one emerges from the other, and the science speaks to
this in unyielding and irrefutable terms.
According to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), ``temperatures are increasing due to human activities,
specifically emissions of greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide and
methane,'' and in 2020, Earth's global average surface temperature tied
2016 as the warmest year on record, and even ``edged out 2016 by a very
small amount, within the margin of error of the analysis.''
Those who wish to reject science must understand that the evidence
of climate change speaks louder than anything else and we must listen
to what the climate is telling us.
President Biden is listening and acting in the best interest of our
Nation and our people.
The President will not waiver in his fidelity to science and his
commitment to the safety of the American People.
The National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) reports that
disaster losses across the country are growing about 6 percent a year,
costing an average of $100 billion.
However, there are policy tools at our disposal to greatly reduce
these costs and make communities more resilient to the impact of
damaging weather.
The National Institute of Building Sciences found that every $1 of
mitigation funding saves approximately $6 on future disaster costs.
The Biden administration's directive for FEMA (Federal Emergency
Management Agency) to provide $1 billion to communities through the
Pre-Disaster Building Resilient Infrastructure and communities (BRIC)
program is proof of the President's data-driven and human-centered
approach to the climate crisis.
President Biden is moving fast in the right direction.
His Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and
Abroad and the Executive Order on Climate-Related Financial Risk
represent a departure from his predecessor's failure to reckon with the
threats of climate change.
Moreover, President Biden's plan to invest in resilient critical
infrastructure through the American Jobs Plan and the administration's
budget proposal will shore up our communities, safeguard our country,
and once again restore our global leadership.
Our response to climate change necessitates coalition-building
between activists, communities, the private sector, and Government.
This will require a unified effort among Federal, State, local,
Tribal, and territorial governments.
The GAO's 2021 High-Risk Series reports testifies to the urgency
and need for whole-of-Government coordination:
The Federal Government needs a cohesive, strategic approach with
strong leadership and the authority to manage risks across the entire
range of related Federal activities.
This strategy must also account for vulnerability, specifically the
pre-existing vulnerabilities in many communities of color around the
country who are disproportionally affected by the impacts of climate
change.
Texas is no exception.
Following the winter storm, I worked to bring much-needed
assistance to Houstonians through water and food deliveries, and the
Austin Justice Coalition delivered food to more than 40 families around
Austin.
Around 90 percent of those families were Black or Latino.
Joao Paulo Connolly, director of housing and community development
at Austin Justice Coalition, spoke to this disparity.
He observed that while the storm hit everyone, families of color in
low-income areas often do not have a car or the funds to make speedy
repairs on busted pipes--meaning the recovery process extracts a higher
burden on them.
Chauncia Willis, chief executive of the Institute for Diversity and
Inclusion in Emergency Management, puts it bluntly:
``What you will see, as with COVID-19 and with any disaster, is
disproportionate death and negative impacts for those who are most
vulnerable among us.
``These inequities are easily identifiable before disaster and, of
course, they're rooted in systemic bias, racism, and the country's
anti-poverty mindset.''
The toll that climate change is taking on low income and poor
households should not be forgotten as we look at solutions for climate.
The President's American Jobs Plan takes a broad view of the need
to address failing infrastructure and the need to have more resilient
infrastructure to better weather climate change.
I look forward to witness testimony in today's hearing.
Mrs. Demings. I now want to again welcome our panel of
witnesses.
The first witness is Mr. Bill Nye, appearing in his own
capacity. Mr. Nye is the CEO of The Planetary Society, a
nonprofit organization working to advance scientific study and
co-founded by the famous planetary scientist Carl Sagan, Mr.
Nye's former astronomy professor. Well-known for his work in
the fields of science and engineering and his popular
television show, ``Bill Nye, the Science Guy,'' Mr. Nye has
made it his life's mission to help foster a scientifically
literate society, one ready to confront the threats posed by
climate change.
Our second witness is Ms. Alice Hill, the David M.
Rubenstein senior fellow for energy and the environment at the
Council of Foreign Relations. Ms. Hill's work for the council
focuses on climate change. Ms. Hill also served as a special
assistant to President Obama and senior director for resilience
policy on the National Security Council staff where Ms. Hill
led the NSC's work on developing National policies to increase
resilience to biological threats and climate change. Ms. Hill's
public service also includes service with NDHS, as senior
counselor to the Secretary in 2009. During her time there, Ms.
Hill led the Department of DHS's first-ever climate adaptation
plan and the formulation of strategic plans regarding
catastrophic, biological, and chemical threats, including
pandemics.
Our third witness is the Virginia State coordinator for
emergency management, Mr. Curtis Brown. Mr. Brown is the first
African American to serve in that role. Mr. Brown is also the
co-founder of the Institute of Diversity and Inclusion in
Emergency Management. As a State official, Mr. Brown has a key
role in the State's climate change response efforts and has
worked to ensure Virginians, including those in the vulnerable
and high-risk communities, have access to resources,
information, and support.
Mr. Brown has also served as deputy secretary of public
safety and homeland security, regional emergency management
administrator for the Hampton Roads Planning District
Commission, and was also a professional staff member on the
U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security.
Mr. Brown, welcome back. Thank you so much for being with
us.
Finally, but certainly not least, our fourth and final
witness is Pamela Williams, the executive director of the
BuildStrong Coalition, a group of individuals and organizations
with the stated purpose of building a more resilient America.
Prior to her time with the coalition, Ms. Williams served as
counsel for the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Building, and
Emergency Management. Ms. Williams also has experience working
within the Federal Emergency Management Agency as associate
chief counsel for legislation and policy and as deputy director
of Congressional affairs.
Ms. Williams, welcome back. We are so glad to have you with
us.
To all of our witnesses, thank you so much for being here.
Without objection, the witnesses' full statements will be
inserted in the record.
I now ask each witness to summarize their statement for 5
minutes, beginning with Mr. Bill Nye.
STATEMENT OF BILL NYE, SCIENCE EDUCATOR AND CEO, ON BEHALF OF
THE PLANETARY SOCIETY
Mr. Nye. Chairwoman Demings, Ranking Member Cammack, and
distinguished Members of this subcommittee, thank you indeed
for the opportunity to testify before you today. It is an honor
to share my thoughts on climate change and the threats our
Nation faces because of it.
My name is Bill Nye, as you may infer. These days I am a
science educator and a television presenter. I may be known to
you and your families as The Science Guy. I began my career as
a mechanical engineer working at Boeing. My professional
license is still in Washington State. I worked on aviation's
FEMA acronym, Failure Effects and Modes Analysis. I was paid to
solve physics problems and figure out what could go wrong on a
747 airplane. I learned a great many things.
First, a modern jetliner is an amazingly reliable,
extraordinarily safe machine largely because it is subject to
good regulations.
Second, commercial airplanes only get into trouble when
they take off with something that is already broken: A system
the crew thought was working isn't working; then several things
go wrong at once.
When it comes to climate change, the analogy to things
already broken, along with multiple problems developing at the
same time, is compelling.
Suppose Russian hackers had attacked the Colonial Pipeline
while a hurricane was coming ashore at Gulf Port, Mobile, or
Gainesville. Recently, the entire State of Texas, as was
mentioned earlier, was shut down because of a snap of cold
weather. It was the product of years of insufficient failure
effect and modes analysis. It killed almost 200 people. Along
with the heartache, the cost is estimated at $130 billion.
These miserable outcomes could have been avoided for a
fraction of what we will all end up paying. The pipeline hack
was a mean-spirited thing and a lot of trouble. The mess in
Texas was a disaster. But the next time or the next times may
be much, much worse.
Back in 1977, as you may have heard, I took a course from
Professor Carl Sagan that eventually led to my day job as CEO
of The Planetary Society, and Dr. Sagan often spoke of what he
called comparative planetology. By comparing Earth's atmosphere
with those of Mars and Venus scientists came to understand the
importance of carbon dioxide and the greenhouse effect. You may
have heard researchers at Exxon understood this too and wrote
about the potential for disasters back in that same 1977, but
we have done almost nothing about it.
Greenhouse gases are inducing climate change here on Earth,
and it is happening now on larger and larger scales. We are
seeing bigger storms, more floods, more droughts, more fires,
more loss of shoreline, and more businesses and people
displaced as the ocean swells.
Therefore, the sooner we stop adding greenhouse gases to
our air, the better off we have a chance of being. If we don't
stop, more of these events will happen, more of them will
happen at the same time, and that will increase the likelihood
of convergent problems.
It was stated earlier in her opening statement, the Ranking
Member said we can't control the weather. It turns out we are
controlling the weather. Inadvertently, by accident, we are
controlling the weather, and we have got to cut it out.
Now, everything on an airplane, from the wheel under the
nose to the light on the tip-top of the tail, is there for a
reason. Anything extra that you put on an airplane would add
weight, which would shorten the range, make the plane less
efficient, make it more costly to fly. But even with that in
mind, airplanes are required to carry all sorts of emergency
equipment, life vests, rafts, exit doors right in the middle
that no one ever uses. You want the plane to have everything it
needs to fly normally but also everything it needs when things
go wrong.
These regulations are good. They keep us safe. So just like
extra pieces and parts of an airplane that you don't need, we
don't want regulations that we don't need. But when it comes to
addressing climate change, regulations are essential. Having
healthy neighborhoods where things do not stop working is a way
to keep people healthy and working. It is why we have
infrastructure, like smoke detectors, fire hydrants, and all of
that plumbing so firefighters can keep us and the built
environment we rely on safe.
Now this is where you all come in, Members of this
subcommittee. We want all of the rules we need to create all of
the systems we need to address climate change.
As you may know, I grew up right here in Washington, DC. I
rode my Schwinn bicycle to the first few Earth Day events on
the National Mall. I locked my bicycle to a flagpole, probably
not allowed these days, but back then we emphasized individual
actions. Every little bit hurts. That was one of the slogans.
But when it comes to climate change, everybody----
Mrs. Demings. Mr. Nye.
Mr. Nye [continuing]. Has these big ideas----
Mrs. Demings. Mr. Nye.
Mr. Nye. Yes.
Mrs. Demings. Can you hear me?
Mr. Nye. Yes. I have 13 seconds?
Mrs. Demings. You are actually out of time. But if there is
something more that you would like to say, please do so during
the question-and-answer period.
So thank you so much.
Mr. Nye. OK. I apologize for running over. I thought I set
a stopwatch dead on. I apologize.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nye follows:]
Prepared Statement of Bill Nye
Tuesday, 8 June 2021
more than one problem at a time
Chairwoman Demings, Ranking Member Cammack, and distinguished
Members of this subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify
before you today. It is an honor to share my thoughts on climate change
and the threats our Nation faces because of it.
My name is Bill Nye. These days, I am a science educator and
television presenter. I may be known to you and your families as the
Science Guy. I began my career as a mechanical engineer working at
Boeing. My professional license is still in Washington State. I worked
on aviation's F.E.M.A. acronym, Failure Effects and Modes Analysis. I
was paid to solve physics problems and figure out what could go wrong
on a 747 airplane. I learned a great many things: First, a modern
jetliner is an amazingly reliable, extraordinarily safe machine,
largely because it is subject to good regulations. Second, commercial
airplanes only get into trouble, when they take off with something
already broken. A system the crew thought was working isn't working,
then several things can go wrong at once.
When it comes to climate change, the analogy to things already
broken, along with multiple problems developing at the same time, is
compelling. Suppose Russian hackers attacked the Colonial Pipeline,
while a hurricane was coming ashore at Gulfport, Mobile, or
Gainesville. Recently, the entire State of Texas was shut down, because
it got a little chilly. It was the product of years of insufficient
Failure Effects and Modes Analysis. It killed almost 200 people. Along
with the heartache, the cost is estimated at $130 billion. These
miserable outcomes could have been avoided for a fraction of what we'll
all end up paying. The pipeline hack was mean-spirited and a lot of
trouble; the mess in Texas was a disaster. But next time--or the next
times, may be much, much worse.
Back in 1977, I took a course from Professor Carl Sagan. It
eventually led to my current day job as CEO of The Planetary Society.
Dr. Sagan often spoke of what he called comparative planetology. By
comparing Earth's atmosphere with those of Mars and Venus, we have come
to understand the importance of carbon dioxide and the greenhouse
effect. Per predictions by researchers at Exxon going back at least to
that same 1977, greenhouse gasses are inducing climate change here on
Earth, and it is happening now on larger and larger scales: Bigger
storms, more floods, more droughts, more fires, more loss of shoreline,
and more businesses and people displaced as the ocean swells.
Therefore, the sooner we stop adding greenhouses gases to our air, the
better off we have a chance of being. If we don't stop, more of these
events will happen; more of them will happen at the same time, and that
will increase the likelihood of convergent problems. Ask any Martian or
Venusian.
Everything on an airplane, from the wheel under the nose to the
light on the tip-top of the tail is there for a reason. Anything extra
would add weight, which would shorten the range, make the plane less
efficient and more costly to fly. Even with that in mind, airplanes are
required to carry all sorts of emergency equipment: Life vests, rafts,
exit doors right in the middle that no one ever uses. You want the
plane to have everything it needs to fly normally, but also everything
it needs, when things go wrong.
In the same way, we don't want regulations we don't need. But when
it comes to addressing climate change, regulations are essential. It is
in everyone's best interest to have rules that require us to stop
adding greenhouse gasses to our skies as soon as possible, while
providing reliable clean energy, reliable clean water, and reliable
internet service to everyone. Having healthy neighborhoods where things
do not stop working, is a way to keep people healthy and working. This
is where you all come in. We want all the rules we need to create all
the systems we need.
I grew up here in Washington, DC. I rode my Schwinn bicycle to the
first few Earth Day events on the National Mall. Back then, we
emphasized individual actions. Every litter bit hurts, was one of the
slogans. But when it comes to climate change, we need big ideas, huge
ideas. Recycling water bottles alone will not address climate change or
prepare us for disaster.
I know what many of us are feeling. Climate change is frightening.
The effects and changes are so big and coming so fast that many of us
are in denial about the consequences. I've come to believe that climate
change contrarians especially are just scared. So am I. You've probably
read recent reports concerning decreasing birth rates world-wide. Ask
around. Women and men everywhere are thinking twice about bringing kids
into a world that's on fire. It's time to take action now. Let's build
utility systems that work all the time. Let's invest in robust
electrical grids, excellent water supplies, and cyber-secure control
schemes for all of our infrastructure, especially the internet. Let's
stop pumping and dumping greenhouse gasses into the air we all share.
We can do this.
In conclusion, I thank Chairwoman Demings, Ranking Member Cammack,
and the Members of the subcommittee for allowing me to speak before you
today. I appreciate the leadership this subcommittee has demonstrated
on this important issue.
I look forward to your questions.
Attachment
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mrs. Demings. It is OK. But thank you so much for your
opening comments.
At this time, I now recognize Ms. Alice Hill to summarize
her statement for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF ALICE C. HILL, DAVID M. RUBENSTEIN SENIOR FELLOW
FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT, ON BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN
RELATIONS
Ms. Hill. Thank you so much, Chairwoman Demings and Ranking
Member Cammack and Members of the subcommittee, for inviting me
to testify today.
As we have heard, climate change impacts are no longer a
matter for the distant future. Last year, in the midst of a
global pandemic, our country suffered 22 separate extreme
weather events influenced by climate, each costing over a
billion dollars, and that has been going on for quite a long
time, seeing the United States pummeled by worsening disasters
from climate change.
America is simply not doing enough to prepare for the
heightened threats posed by a changing climate. The Nation, in
short, suffers from a large resilience gap. That gap needs to
be closed to safeguard homeland security. Development of a
National resilience strategy is essential, as you have noted,
Chairwoman. Without a comprehensive approach, individual agency
efforts could lead gaping holes in the Nation's resilience to
climate threats.
The Department of Homeland Security can and should play a
central role in the effort to build a National resilience plan.
Core to resilience is improved risk communication. The United
States lacks comprehensive risk mapping that is sufficiently
downscaled to inform Americans regarding the risks they face
now, much less those they face in the near future. That means
that we have many families and businesses who today rent and
buy facilities that are destined to burn and flood.
The Federal Government should compile risk information in a
way that is easy to understand, interactive, has a visual
format that permits people to determine what is ahead, what
does it mean for me, what does it mean for my family, what does
it mean for my company, and what does it mean for the United
States. Without that, it is difficult for us to make the kinds
of risk reduction choices that we need to make. As
Representative Cammack stated, we need to prepare ahead. A
National resilience plan would help us do that, and it would
provide incentives to improve decision making about where and
how we build.
As you know, land use and building code choices rest almost
entirely in the hands of State and local governments in the
United States. Currently those officials encounter a moral
hazard when they make choices about where buildings should
occur and how it should occur since they know that the Federal
Government may well end up footing most or all of the disaster
costs after disaster strikes. This moral hazard has led to
risky development occurring in many places across the Nation.
We also need stronger building codes. As you have heard,
according to the National Institute of Building Sciences, for
every $1 we spent in disaster resistant building codes, we can
avert $11 in damages. But despite this astonishingly high cost-
benefit, 65 percent of cities and towns across this Nation have
failed to adopt modern disaster resistant codes. The Nation
needs to accelerate the development and adoption of modern
building codes that account for future climate risks.
To protect homeland security, the Nation also must work to
ensure that critical infrastructure continues to perform under
new extremes. We saw this in Texas. Since it has been
mentioned, we will see this in California this summer when
wildfires streak across that State, and we will see it as
hurricanes that are predicted to occur this season hit the
United States.
When the infrastructure fails, particularly the electric
sector, it cascades, the damage cascades through all sectors,
public health, transportation, communication, and we need to
have resilient infrastructure that can take what we know will
come with climate change.
Climate change will also drive increased migration. We know
that changing conditions can affect transnational crime,
including terrorism. During extreme events, organized crime and
extremists have been known to take advantage of a failed
Government response to expand their territory and increase
recruitment.
We will also see increased pressure at our borders, as we
are currently seeing with Central America immigrants.
Immigrants that are seeking survival will move in the face of
devastating climate events, either droughts or hurricanes, as
we saw 2 back-to-back hurricanes this year in Central America.
We need frameworks to get ahead and do this better, plan for
where people will move.
DHS should also continue to close the environmental justice
gap----
Mrs. Demings. Ms. Hill.
Ms. Hill. Yes.
Mrs. Demings. I am sorry, your time has expired.
Ms. Hill. All right. Thank you.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much for your testimony.
Ms. Hill. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Hill follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alice C. Hill
Thank you Chairman Demings, Ranking Member Cammack, and Members of
the subcommittee for inviting me to testify before you today about
climate change as a threat to the homeland. My remarks will focus on
how the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) could better address the
homeland threats posed by climate change to our country.
introduction
Climate change impacts--bigger wildfires, heavier precipitation
causing ``rain bombs,'' deeper droughts, greater temperature extremes,
and sea-level rise--are no longer a matter for the distant future. They
are already wreaking extensive damage to all 50 States and 6
territories. Last year, in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, the
country suffered 22 separate weather events each costing over $1
billion, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA). Americans in 2020 witnessed so many named storms
in the Atlantic basin that meteorologists had to resort to the Greek
alphabet for names; wildfires scorched over 10 million acres in the
American west, spawning a new vocabulary word--``gigafire''--to
describe a fire that burns more than a million acres; and probably the
highest-ever recorded temperature on earth--130 degrees Fahrenheit--
registered in the aptly named Death Valley in California. Experts
anticipate that this year will offer little respite.
The 2021 hurricane season will likely bring above-average storm
activity and firefighters across the American west are already bracing
for a severe wildfire season. The property research firm, CoreLogic,
has estimated that more than 31 million homes on the Gulf and Atlantic
coasts, with a combined value of $8.5 trillion, face risk of damage
from hurricane winds, and nearly 8 million homes are vulnerable to
flooding from storm surge during the Atlantic hurricane season. The
firm opined that as ``climate change continues to reshape the way
storms behave, the risk . . . will continue to increase.''\1\ Close to
90 percent of the American west is currently in drought, with over half
of the area in extreme to exceptional drought. According to the U.S.
Drought Monitor, this is the most intense and expansive drought this
century. Snowpack fell to new record lows in some areas. Not
surprisingly, wildfire researchers have forecasted a ``grim'' 2021
wildfire season.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``The 2021 Hurricane Report,'' CoreLogic, June 1, 2021, https:/
/www.corelogic.com/insights/storm-surge-
report.aspx?WT.mc_id=crlg_210527_MTXQB.
\2\ Nicole Karlis, ``Wildfire researchers have a `grim' forecast
for 2021's fire season, say it could be worse than 2020,'' Salon, April
14, 2021, https://www.salon.com/2021/04/14/wildfire-researchers-have-a-
grim-forecast-for-2021s-fire-season-say-it-could-be-worse-than-2020/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These and other climate-worsened extremes do not only bring
significant economic damage. They also cost lives, undermine public
health, and threaten National security. Climate-fueled impacts cause
cascading failures of infrastructure. As the Nation witnessed during
Superstorm Sandy in 2012, the failure of the electric grid can pull
down critical systems like transportation, communication, and
wastewater treatment systems. Without sustained power, hospitals
evacuated over 6,000 patients down darkened stairwells. Researchers
have identified climate change as the cause of $8 billion of the
estimated $70 billion in damages caused by the storm.\3\ According to
the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) 2020 report,
disaster losses across the country are growing about 6 percent a year,
costing an average of $100 billion.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Andrea Thompson, ``Climate Change Added $8 Billion to Hurricane
Sandy's Damage,'' Scientific American, May 18, 2021, https://
www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-added-8-billion-to-
hurricane-sandys-damage1/.
\4\ Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council, A Roadmap to Resilience
Incentivization, ed. K. A. Porter and J.Q. Yuan (Washington, DC:
National Institute of Building Sciences, 2020), https://www.nibs.org/
files/pdfs/NIBS_MMC_RoadmapResilience_082020.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
America is not doing enough to prepare for the heightened threats
posed by climate change. NIBS estimates that America's resilience
investment gap exceeds $520 billion. The Center for Climate Integrity
and Resilient Analytics calculates that $400 billion is needed for
coastal protection in 22 States.\5\ To safeguard homeland security, the
United States needs to better prepare itself for the new, harmful
extremes that accompany rising temperatures. It needs to get smarter
about risk reduction and resilience to future climate-worsened
disasters. The Department of Homeland Security can and should play a
central role in that effort.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Study: U.S. Costal Communities Face More Than $400 Billion in
Seawall Costs by 2040,'' Institute for Governance & Sustainable
Development, June 20, 2019, https://www.igsd.org/study-u-s-costal-
communities-face-more-than-400-billion-in-seawall-costs-by-2040/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
dhs work on climate change preparedness during the obama administration
In 2009, President Obama issued an Executive Order requiring
Federal agencies to develop adaptation plans.\6\ As senior counselor to
DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, I was responsible for developing DHS's
first-ever adaptation plan. To embark on this important effort, I
assembled a task force from across DHS's almost 2 dozen agencies
tasking them with answering a basic question, ``Should the Department
of Homeland Security in 2009, with all of its other responsibilities,
care about the impacts of climate change?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ E.O. 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and
Economic Performance, signed on October 5, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During a multi-month effort, the task force met with dozens of
scientists, planners, and security experts, including those from the
Department of Defense, NOAA, and NASA. As our work progressed, task
force members realized that climate change would have profound effects
on virtually all the systems humans have come to rely upon, both
natural and human-built. As we learned about the projected hurricanes,
wildfires, and droughts that could pummel America in the near future,
causing catastrophic, permanent harm, the task force had its answer:
DHS should care deeply about climate change.
To satisfy President Obama's order, DHS published the DHS Climate
Change Adaptation Roadmap in 2012.\7\ The Roadmap states that climate
change ``must be accounted for in Departmental policy, strategy, plans,
business processes, programs, institutional practices, and operations
in order to best position the Department for success over the long term
. . . Understanding how major strategic drivers such as climate change
may evolve is at the crux of effectively and decisively managing risks
to the Nation's security.'' It warned that climate change could
directly and indirectly impact core homeland security missions and
identified 4 strategic objectives:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap (Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, 2012), https://www.dhs.gov/sites/
default/files/publications/Appendix%20A%20DHS%-
20FY2012%20Climate%20Change%20Adaptation%20Plan_0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Manage climate risks for cross-cutting or other key homeland
security issues.
2. Protect and ensure the resilience of critical infrastructure and
key resources to potential impacts of climate change.
3. Ensure the Nation's resilience to more frequent or extreme
weather events and natural disasters.
4. Contribute to safety, stability, security, and environmental
protection in the Arctic.
In 2013, President Obama issued additional guidance regarding
climate change, prompting DHS to create its Climate Action Plan.\8\ The
Plan again warned that climate change would impact DHS's missions. For
example, with regard to preventing terrorism, the Plan foretold that
more extreme weather could provide opportunities for militant groups to
extend influence when foreign governments lacked the ability to provide
aid. The Plan predicted increased pressures on our borders from
climate-induced migration, including migrants from Central America. It
apprised that climate change could curtail DHS's ability to safeguard
lawful trade and travel as well as impede the Department's efforts to
stop smuggling and trafficking. It also recognized that higher
temperatures and more intense storms could damage and disrupt
``telecommunications and power systems, creating challenges for
telecommunications infrastructure, emergency communications, and
cybersecurity.'' The Plan forecast that climate change could challenge
continuity of operations, delivery of emergency services, and response
capabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ DHS Climate Action Plan (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, 2013), https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
publications/DHS%20Climate%20Action%20Plan.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the Trump administration, the Department slowed its climate-
related activities to a trickle at best. It omitted the words ``climate
change'' from its core documents, including FEMA's 2018-2022 Strategic
Plan and the 2019 National Preparedness Report.\9\ Unfortunately, the
change in policy did not mean that climate change impacts lessened. The
lull in planning activities has come at a cost. DHS will need to act
with alacrity to fulfill its mission of protecting the Nation from the
harmful effects of rising temperatures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Alice Hill, ``What will it take for FEMA to take climate change
seriously?,'' the Hill, August 21, 2020, https://thehill.com/opinion/
energy-environment/513012-what-will-it-take-for-fema-to-take-climate-
change-seriously.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the close to a decade since DHS first embarked on adaptation
planning, many of the events that the Department predicted have come to
pass. Time after time, the Department and the Nation have struggled to
handle climate-fueled extremes, be it a record-breaking hurricane
season in the Atlantic, wildfires in the west, temperature extremes in
the south, or melting permafrost in the Arctic. As the climate changes,
bringing new, unprecedented weather and sea-level rise, DHS has an
important role to play in ensuring that not only that it can fulfill
its missions effectively under the new conditions, but also that it can
assist its partners in State, local, and Tribal governments, as well as
the private sector, to prepare and respond.
Both the Roadmap and the Plan created under the Obama
administration should serve as guiding documents for DHS's continued
planning. Since many of the recommendations have still not been
implemented, these strategic documents provide solid ground for DHS to
recommence its climate preparedness efforts.
dhs as part of the national effort to prepare for climate change
DHS has an essential part to perform when it comes to climate
change. Perhaps of all the Federal agencies, it has the deepest reach
and most consistent contact with State, local, and Tribal governments,
other Federal agencies, as well as the private sector. It operates in
every State and territory and is frequently asked to help people after
disasters have driven them from their homes and caused physical harm.
Its responsibilities for protecting our borders, coastal areas and
inland waterways, critical infrastructure, and emergency response make
it a very big cog in the wheel of climate preparedness. But, as the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) has repeatedly stressed, the
Federal Government will need ``a cohesive, strategic approach with
strong leadership and the authority to manage risks across the entire
range of related Federal activities.''\10\ The GAO has correctly noted
that a Government-wide strategy would allow for a more comprehensive
approach, including the ability to prioritize investments that address
the country's highest climate risks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ J. Alfredo Gomez, ``Limiting the Federal Government's Fiscal
Exposure by Better Managing Climate Change Risks,'' Government
Accountability Office, https://www.gao.gov/highrisk/limiting-Federal-
governments-fiscal-exposure-better-managing-climate-change-risks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The failure to develop a National adaptation plan has made the
United States an outlier among developed nations. The Netherlands, one
of the most climate-prepared nations in the world, has had a national
adaptation plan since 2007. China has had a national plan since 2013
and Russia since 2019. Canada is in the process of drafting its
plan.\11\ Without such an approach, individual agency efforts risk
falling short of meeting the mark to effectively reduce the Nation's
climate risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Chris Field and Alice Hill, ``Climate adaptation: The gaping
hole in American environmental policy,'' the Hill, April 15, 2021,
https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/548527-climate-
adaptation-the-gaping-hole-in-american-environmental.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS should therefore work with the White House and other agencies
to develop the Nation's first climate adaptation plan. In the absence
of a National strategy, DHS efforts may include gaping holes that leave
the Nation even more vulnerable to climate change, for example, by
failing to prioritize investments to help people relocate to safer
areas.
Even in the absence of a National adaptation plan, however, there
is much that the Department can do to improve its climate risk
reduction efforts. These include improving risk communication,
prioritizing risk reduction, planning for climate-driven displacement
and migration, improving emergency response for concurrent and
consecutive disasters, closing the environmental justice gap, and
preparing for changes in the Arctic.
improve risk communication
DHS already creates the Nation's flood maps, but if a homeowner, a
business owner, or a Government planner wants to identify future
climate risks that could affect them in significant ways, there is no
single place offered by the Federal Government to obtain that
information. The United States lacks comprehensive risk-mapping that is
sufficiently down-scaled to inform Americans regarding future climate
risk. Without such information, developers and city planners continue
to oversee new development in areas that are at great risk of future
damage from climate impacts. Families rent and buy homes destined to
burn. The Federal Government should compile risk information in an easy
to understand, interactive, visual format that allows people to
determine projected risks for their homes and/or places of business.
DHS, in conjunction with the science agencies, should undertake
responsibility for that work. Better, more easily available risk
information could drive more-informed decision making across the
Nation. That information could then inform outreach and planning
efforts by the Department.
In addition to providing improved, downscaled risk information, DHS
should deploy its capabilities to assist the Federal Government writ
large as well as State, local, and Tribal governments, in addition to
the private sector, to plan for climate risk. Three areas hold
particular promise.
Development of common climate risk scenarios.--The Federal
Government has yet to establish a set of climate scenarios with
which it conducts planning. DHS should, in conjunction with the
Federal science agencies, develop climate change scenarios for
use across the Government and in planning with State, local,
and Tribal governments, and the private sector. Use of common
scenarios will help increase awareness and understanding of the
risks and the range of possible mitigation solutions.
Development of planning exercises.--DHS should develop
planning exercises, including table-top exercises, based on the
scenarios to help the Federal Government, communities, and
regions understand and plan for their climate risks. To the
extent possible, these exercises should include advanced model
projections that reflect downscaled impacts. At the conclusion
of each exercise, DHS should help coordinate outreach with
other Federal agencies to assist participants in accessing
Federal programs to close identified gaps. During the Obama
administration, FEMA's exercise division developed a pilot
project offering exercises based on scenarios to several
communities to assist their planning efforts. Norfolk,
Virginia, credits the pilot offered in that region with
contributing to its robust climate planning efforts.
Conduct Federal Government-wide exercises.--DHS should offer
Federal Government-wide exercises on climate change based on
the scenarios. These exercises would serve as an educational
tool, base-line setting mechanism, avenue for identifying gaps,
and opportunity to build relationships across agencies. DHS
should collaborate with other Federal agencies to identify
programs that would proactively address any vulnerabilities
identified in the exercise.
prioritize risk reduction
The Federal Government currently funds large portions of disaster
recovery. Many decisions that affect the amount of damage disasters
cause, namely land use and building practices, rest almost entirely in
the hands of State and local governments. This means that local
decision makers can choose to build and develop in risky ways knowing
that the Federal Government will likely foot the recovery bill. DHS
should explore ways to improve State and local land use and building
choices with a focus on reducing risks. In other words, it should
develop policies to decrease the moral hazard created by Federal
disaster practices.
Promote Stronger Building Codes
Research from the National Institute of Building Science has
determined that every $1 spent complying with disaster-resistant
building codes can avert $11 in damages.\12\ FEMA estimates that adding
features to protect against natural disasters adds little to the cost
of construction--an average of 1 to 2 percent of the total cost of
building.\13\ Despite the risk-reduction benefits of stronger building
codes, 65 percent of cities and towns have failed to adopt modern
disaster-resistant codes. Moreover, even if these jurisdictions have
adopted the most recent model codes, those codes may not reflect the
future risk of climate change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ ``National Institute of Building Sciences Issues Interim
Report on the Value of Mitigation,'' National Institute of Building
Sciences, January 8, 2019, https://www.nibs.org/news/national-
institute-building-sciences-issues-interim-report-value-mitigation.
\13\ Protecting Communities and Saving Money: The Case for Adopting
Building Codes (Washington, DC: FEMA, 2020), https://www.fema.gov/
sites/default/files/2020-11/fema_building-codes-save_brochure.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS should work with the model building code organizations to
inform development of model building codes that account for future
climate risk. While the model code organizations work to develop new
codes, the Department should work, in collaboration with the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), to develop Federal risk
management standards for damaging climate risks, including wildfire and
heat, for any construction that uses Federal taxpayer funding. The
Department's prior role in developing the Federal Flood Risk Management
Standard should inform this process. Creation and adoption of such
standards for climate-worsened hazards could lead to substantial
savings for the Federal Government in averted damage and lives saved.
Focus on Critical Infrastructure
Climate change impacts can cause cascading failures of
infrastructure that lead to physical and financial harm. As the
February cold spell in Texas, rolling black-outs in California, and
extended outages in the wake of storms show, once power is lost, other
critical infrastructure systems also tend to fail--from transportation
to communications to public health. Failures of interconnected
infrastructure can quickly turn cataclysmic. These events can prove
particularly damaging given the poor state of the Nation's
infrastructure, which according to the American Society of Civil
Engineer's 2021 report card only deserves a C-.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ ``2021 Report Card for America's Infrastructure,'' American
Society of Civil Engineers, March 3, 2021, https://
infrastructurereportcard.org/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through its National Risk Management Center (NRMC), DHS should
amplify efforts to assist vital infrastructure owners and operators in
understanding their climate risk and what they can do to reduce that
risk. Modelling of critical failure points for interconnected
infrastructure could inform climate scenarios and exercises offered by
DHS. DHS should also expand its Regional Resiliency Assessment Program
to include a strong focus on climate threats. The Department should
recruit and train Protective Security Advisors to provide expert
climate risk advice and support State, local, and private-sector owners
and operators of critical infrastructure with preparing for escalating
threats.
Improve Cost-Benefit Analysis
DHS should work with the Office of Management and Budget to adjust
the cost-benefit analysis of projects. Existing cost-benefit analysis
may not accurately account for the benefits of resilience measures that
will protect against climate impacts in the future nor may it consider
that some communities lack the economic wherewithal to meet traditional
cost-benefit analysis.\15\ Adjusting the cost-benefit analysis would
lower the hurdle for investments in added resilience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ David Espinoza, Jeremy Morris, and Alice Hill, ``Time is not
Money, Risk is! A step toward a sustainable and equitable financial
analysis practice,'' The Solutions Journal, December 1, 2020, https://
www.thesolutionsjournal.com/2020/12/01/time-is-not-money-risk-is-a-
step-towards-a-sustainable-and-equitable-financial-analysis-practice/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Address Land-Use Choices
One of the hardest issues facing the Nation with regard to climate
impacts is that as a result of rising temperatures some land may become
uninhabitable. To the extent the Department's programs provide support
for new development in at-risk areas, it may be inadvertently exposing
people and property to greater harm. DHS should determine how it can
improve local land-use decisions through incentives or withdrawal of
Federal investment. For example, the Department should consider whether
it should condition grant funding on more ambitious efforts to reduce
development in areas vulnerable to climate impacts.
plan for climate-driven displacement and migration
Increased migration, both within the United States and globally,
will affect homeland security. According to a report from the Internal
Displacement Monitoring Centre, the number of new people forced to move
within their own countries by climate disasters--like storms and
floods--rose to the highest in at least a decade in 2020, even in the
midst of a pandemic. Extreme weather events caused over 30 million
people, equal to 75 percent of those uprooted within their borders, to
migrate domestically.\16\ Displacements can occur as a result of slow-
moving events like droughts that desiccate crops or acute events like
floods and wildfires. Every year, Americans are also displaced from
their homes by climate-worsened events like the flooding that resulted
from extreme precipitation in Houston in 2017 or the wildfires in
California that same year. DHS needs to prepare for those that will
migrate to our borders as well as for those displaced inside our
borders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Vicente Anzellin et al., Global Report on Internal
Displacement (Geneva: Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, 2020)
https://www.internal-displacement.org/global-report/grid- 2020/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The crush of Central American migrants at our Southern Border has
provided a vivid illustration of the challenge that migration poses.
When I served as senior counselor to the Secretary at DHS, I oversaw
the first surge of migrant children from Central America's Northern
Triangle, the countries of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. In
2009, DHS apprehended approximately 20,000 children at our Southern
Border. More than 80 percent were Mexican. But over the next 2 years,
the number of children encountered at the border grew dramatically, and
the number of children from the Northern Triangle surpassed the number
from Mexico. Sixteen thousand child migrants from the Northern Triangle
were apprehended in 2011, 25,000 in 2012, 38,000 in 2013, and 70,000 in
2014. In 2019, 85 percent of the nearly 70,000 children at the border
came from the Northern Triangle. The influx has strained the Federal
Government beyond capacity. The number of unattended children arriving
at the southern U.S. border surged to a record high this spring amid
the on-going immigration crisis. In March 2021, Homeland Security
Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas announced that the United States was ``on
pace to encounter more individuals on the Southwest Border than we have
in the last 20 years,'' and in April, the number of detentions at the
border reached the highest level in over 2 decades. The DHS Office of
Inspector General (OIG) recently concluded that, in light of past large
influxes of migrants, if the Department ``does not develop a DHS-wide
framework for surges and address day-to-day fragmentation, [it] will
face the same challenges in future surges.''\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Office of Inspector General, DHS' Fragmented Approach to
Immigration Enforcement and Poor Planning Resulted in Extended Migrant
Detention During the 2019 Surge (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, 2021), https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
assets/2021-03/OIG-21-29-Mar21.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reasons these children travel to the United States are many,
but among them are climate change. Northern Triangle countries are
highly vulnerable to climate-worsened events, including greater
temperature extremes, altered rain patterns, droughts, and bigger
storms. The region depends on agriculture and in particular, coffee
cultivation, which is susceptible to damage from drought, heavy
rainfall, and higher temperatures. In 2020, 2 back-to-back Category 4
hurricanes further battered the region, leaving many people homeless
and robbing them of their livelihoods.
DHS should, as identified in its Obama-era climate adaptation
plans, ``Coordinate a Departmental review of the effects of climate
change on mass migration.'' That review should examine how climate
affects migration and displacement. In addition, DHS should address the
OIG recommendations aimed at ending DHS's fragmented approach to
migration and improving planning.
To fulfill its mission, DHS also needs to understand how changing
conditions could affect transnational crime, including terrorism.
During extreme events, organized crime and extremists have been known
to take advantage of a failed government response to expand their
territory and increase recruitment. The pandemic has shown us how this
can work. Drug cartels in Mexico provided essential supplies to
populations struggling with the spread of the coronavirus, making daily
home deliveries to disadvantaged areas. The head of the Cartel of the
South was quoted saying, ``If we protect [local populations], they'll
protect us as well.''\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Falko Ernst, ``Mexican criminal groups see Covid-19 crisis as
opportunity to gain more power,'' the Guardian, April 20, 2020, https:/
/www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/20/mexico-criminal-groups-covid-19-
crisis-opportunity-gain-power.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS should also focus on developing frameworks to assist local,
State, and Tribal governments cope with internally displaced Americans.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) conducted a review of
Federal efforts that provide support to communities displaced by
climate change and concluded that little support exists.\19\ This means
that when displacements occur, they risk becoming chaotic. That is what
occurred in the wake of the 2018 Camp Fire that killed over 80 people
and obliterated almost 14,000 residences. As a result of the fire,
16,000 people moved virtually overnight to nearby locations. The city
of Chico, which had a population of 110,000, added 19,000 people,
straining the city's ability to absorb the influx. To help local
communities avoid negative repercussions like increased real estate
prices, over-crowded schools, and unplanned urbanization, DHS, in
coordination with other agencies, should assist the Nation by
identifying areas for future relocation and help those receiving
communities to prepare. DHS should develop modelling capabilities to
help communities understand where displacements may occur and assist
interested communities to determine how they can plan better.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ J. Alfredo Gomez et al., A Climate Migration Pilot Program
Could Enhance the Nation's Resilience and Reduce Federal Fiscal
Exposure (Washington, DC: Government Accountability Office, 2020),
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-20-488.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
improve emergency preparedness for concurrent and consecutive disasters
DHS should plan for and acquire the capabilities to respond with
ever-greater frequency to disasters worsened by climate change. With
climate change, disasters may occur in multiple locations concurrently
or close-in-time. DHS needs to make sure that it has the capabilities
to respond. That means ensuring it has adequate personnel and resources
to effectively manage consecutive and successive extremes. DHS should
evaluate its emergency capabilities in light of increased disaster
frequency with particular attention to surge capacity, the ability to
respond to multiple locations simultaneously, and the delivery of
mental health services in the immediate wake of a disaster. It should
improve its modelling of complex events to inform its staffing,
response, and resource needs. It should also conduct research on the
efficacy of early warning systems and promote Nation-wide best
practices to drive the Nation to an easy-to-understand uniform system.
Variations in warning systems can lead to unnecessary confusion and
cause people to fail to heed messages to take shelter.
close the environmental justice gap
DHS should continue to close the environmental justice gap,
including bolstering efforts to evaluate the benefits of investments in
light of their impacts on people rather than solely economic return. It
should expand work to consider and address the disproportionate impact
of climate-fueled disasters on disadvantaged communities, people with
disabilities, older people, and children.
The Department should review disaster aid programs with the goal of
removing barriers to access for low-income and disadvantaged
communities. The application requirements of FEMA's competitive grant
programs can impose barriers to some communities who lack the planning
resources, staff, and expertise to navigate the process. FEMA records
reveal that that the new Building Resilient Infrastructure and
Communities (BRIC) program has failed to attract applications from many
poor communities with fewer than 3,000 residents even though the
program will cover 90 percent of the project costs for those
communities.\20\ For some communities, the BRIC cost share of 10
percent may prove too high a hurdle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Thomas Frank, ``FEMA climate grants pose challenge for poor
communities,'' E&E News, June 1, 2021, https://www.eenews.net/stories/
1063733777.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
prepare for changes in the arctic
Last, DHS should continue to prepare for changes in the Arctic as
eco-tourism, damage to infrastructure from melting permafrost, resource
competition, and global security tensions escalate with the opening of
the Arctic Ocean for navigation.
conclusion
With its enormous responsibilities, reach across all sectors of
society, and deep capabilities, DHS should play a pivotal role in
improving the Nation's preparedness for climate risk. The Department,
of course, should start by making sure that it can continue to fulfill
its missions in the face of changing conditions. But it needs to move
quickly beyond looking inward to find ways to lend significant
assistance to State, local, and Tribal governments, as well as the
private sector, to understand, prepare for, and respond to climate
risk. Fortunately, the Obama administration has given the agency a
strong head start.
The risks, however, are mounting. There is no time to waste. For
DHS to keep the United States safe, it needs to adopt and implement a
robust strategy for tackling climate change.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. I look
forward to answering any questions you may have.
Mrs. Demings. At this time, I would like to recognize Mr.
Curtis Brown to summarize his statement for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF CURTIS BROWN, STATE COORDINATOR AND CO-FOUNDER,
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, COMMONWEALTH OF
VIRGINIA, ON BEHALF OF THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT AND INSTITUTE FOR DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION IN
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Mr. Brown. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Demings, Ranking
Member Cammack, and Members of the subcommittee. My name is
Curtis Brown. I serve as State coordinator of emergency
management in the Commonwealth of Virginia. I am also co-
founder of the Institute for Diversity and Inclusion in
Emergency Management.
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the rising threat
of climate change to the homeland from the perspective of an
emergency manager, with a keen focus on the disproportionate
impact of disasters on marginalized and frontline communities.
Emergency managers all over the country have witnessed
first-hand the consequences of climate change. We are
responsible for working with communities to prepare for,
mitigate against, respond to, and recover from disasters. The
last decade has demonstrated the reality of the challenges we
face with climate change. More frequent and devastating
disasters that have stretched our limited resources and
disproportionately impacted marginalized communities.
In addition to coordinating the response to COVID-19 over
the last year, emergency managers and communities were faced
with major wildfires out West, a historically busy Atlantic
hurricane season, heat waves, and more frequent flooding events
across the country. These frequent disasters, both big and
small, negatively impact marginalized individuals and
communities in numerous ways.
Research and data confirms that people of color, people
with disabilities, women, low-income individuals in communities
suffer greater disaster losses. This is demonstrated in higher
risks of death, injury, physical and mental, economic loss and
poverty, abuse, and other lasting impacts.
Systemic and structural racism, environmental injustices,
and other inequitable and discriminatory policies and programs
are the root cause for creating and enhancing the vulnerability
faced by at-risk and marginalized individuals and communities.
The threat of climate change requires bold action from the
Federal Government, leadership, resources to support emergency
managers and ensure that we prioritize those most at risk. That
is why I commend President Biden for recently announcing the
dedication of $1 billion for the Pre-Disaster Mitigation
Program, with the bulk portions specifically focused on
supporting marginalized communities.
Executive Orders focus on advancing racial equity and
supporting underserved communities and tackling climate change
through a comprehensive whole-of-Government strategy is the
support State and locals need. All levels of Government sectors
have responsibilities to respond to the threat of climate
change and support at-risk communities.
In Virginia, Governor Northam's administration has taken
significant steps to address the challenge of climate change
and further equity. We have initiated comprehensive adaptation
planning efforts, ensured cross-agency and -sector
collaboration, and prioritized marginalized communities.
Last year, Virginia was 1 of 5 States to submit over $200
million in projects for the 2020 BRIC Pre-Disaster Mitigation
Grant Program. Forty percent of our grant projects submitted
were from local governments with the highest vulnerability in
high-risk populations according to an equity analysis we
conducted. We look forward to furthering our equitable
mitigation efforts here in 2021 with the additional BRIC
funding.
I appreciate FEMA Administrator Criswell's leadership in
prioritizing diversity and equity inclusion and responding to
the climate crisis that will go a long way with furthering
FEMA's efforts and also support the entire emergency management
enterprise. A recently-released Request for Information from
FEMA is intended to solicit input on how to integrate equity
from FEMA within FEMA programs and regulations and policies.
These are all welcome steps that will hopefully further
disaster equity, but integrating equity in emergency management
will not be easy or a quick fix. It requires a long-term
sustainable commitment, resources, and a willingness to support
innovation to solve complex and deeply-rooted inequities in
programs and policies.
Emergency managers need to be trained on how to integrate
equity. Disaster equity leaders should be leveraged. We will
need to empower marginalized communities and front-line
organizations and support and--and add support and support
efforts to increase diversity within the emergency management
profession.
Simply put, doing things the same way will result in the
same inequities we have seen as disasters increase. By taking
these courageous steps and others, we will be better prepared
to meet one of the greatest challenges of the 2lst Century.
Thank you, Chairwoman Demings, and I look forward to
offering recommendations and answering questions from the
subcommittee.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Brown follows:]
Prepared Statement of Curtis Brown
Tuesday, June 8, 2021
Good afternoon Committee Chairman Thompson, Committee Ranking
Member Katko, Subcommittee Chairwoman Demings, Subcommittee Ranking
Member Cammack, and Members of the subcommittee. My name is Curtis
Brown, and I serve in Governor Ralph Northam's administration as State
coordinator of emergency management at the Virginia Department of
Emergency (VDEM). Additionally, I am the co-founder of the Institute
for Diversity and Inclusion in Emergency Management (I-DIEM). I-DIEM's
mission is to serve as a resource and an advocate for the value of
diversity and inclusion in emergency management (EM). I-DIEM serves as
the conduit for research on diversity and inclusion (D&I), social
equity, and the practical application of equitable EM practices to
improve outcomes and build resilience.
It is pleasure to provide testimony before the subcommittee. As a
former professional staff member working on Chairman Thompson's staff,
I understand the critical oversight role of the House Committee on
Homeland Security. It was truly one of the highlights of my career to
staff this subcommittee and support the Legislative branch's important
responsibility of influencing a range of emergency management and
homeland security issues to support the American people. The
perspective gained in that role has been useful in serving within a
State emergency management agency.
The decision to hold today's hearing is an acknowledgment of the
serious need to focus attention on the threat of climate change on the
homeland, in particular on our most vulnerable communities. The Biden
administration, Congress, Department of Homeland Security, Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), State, local, non-profit, and
private-sector partners must all work together to respond to this
threat. Thank you for your service and all the efforts of the
Congressional staffers who do the hard work in the background.
I appreciate the opportunity to participate in this panel to
provide the perspective of an emergency manager and as an advocate for
disaster equity. Emergency managers must deal with the consequences of
climate change. Across the country, emergency managers are responsible
for preparing communities for, mitigating against, responding to, and
recovery from disasters. These critical responsibilities help to save
lives and reduce the negative short- and long-term impacts on people
and communities. The repeated impacts of climate change on the homeland
require additional emergency management resources, especially at the
State and local levels. This includes, but is not limited to increased
numbers of personnel, enhanced capabilities, funding to support
mitigation and adaptation, and the prioritization of marginalized
communities that are most at risk of climate change impacts.
climate change and global warming impacts
Climate change is real and its impacts are being experienced
annually. As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change states,
``Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system in
unequivocal.'' Additionally, scientific research and data confirms that
the cause of warming trends is related to human activity. This
scientific data affirms the need for courageous efforts from across the
globe to address the climate crisis. It is possibly the most pressing
issue for the rest of the 21st Century and the impacts are being
experienced now.
Climate change has resulted in more frequent and impactful
disasters including droughts, wildfires, hurricanes, and flooding
events. The last several years have been non-stop with multiple, and in
some cases, simultaneous disasters. The attention over the last year
was rightfully focused on the on-going response to the unprecedented
deadly impacts of COVID-19. 2020 also represented a historic year for
extreme weather events. Wildfires ravaged communities in California,
hurricanes battered the Gulf and Southeast, flooding events are
becoming more frequent and deadly disaster has continued to rise.
According to the Fourth National Climate Assessment, U.S. coastal
flooding has doubled in the last few decades.
In Virginia, we have seen a significant increase of events
requiring the issuance of State of Emergency Declarations. State and
local government public safety officials work closely with impacted
communities. For major events, impacting larger regions or multiple
States, full engagement of the emergency management enterprise (FEMA,
State, local, non-profit, and private) is required. The National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reports that the 2020
hurricane season experienced 29 named storms in the Atlantic season
breaking the record for the highest number of tropical/subtropical
storms in a single year. This year, 2021, is also anticipated to be an
above-normal season with a likely range of 13 to 20 named storms, of
which 6 to 10 could become hurricanes. The increase in extreme weather
and natural disasters has a profound impact that threatens public
health and safety, natural resources, and our communities. It also
affects the economic well-being of the Commonwealth, including the
port, military installations, and critical infrastructure. It is clear
the impacts of climate change have stretched already limited resources
within State and local emergency management agencies. Last year, 22
extreme weather events resulted in losses of over $1 billion each.
the need for equity: disproportionate impacts on marginalized
communities
Climate change impacts are being experienced across the country,
but are disproportionately felt by marginalized communities. Numerous
natural disasters have indiscriminately impacted large swaths of the
United States over the last decade. Communities of color and other
underserved or underrepresented populations are disproportionately
impacted by extreme weather and other emergencies due to inadequate
infrastructure, limited financial resources, and poor environmental
conditions. The factors contributing to increased vulnerabilities
within communities of color during disasters have been caused by
decades of institutional racism, divestment, environmental injustices,
and other discriminatory policies that contribute to widening
inequities.
Marginalized communities suffer greater loss of life, physical
injuries, economic loss, and mental health after disasters. Disaster
planning efforts fail to fully consider our most vulnerable populations
such as communities of color, women, low-income individuals, people
with access and functional needs, and other underserved individuals. A
review of past and present inequities helps explain the myriad issues
underlying these negative outcomes. Historical and existing
exclusionary and discriminatory practices increase the risks and
impacts of disasters on specific individuals and communities which
heightens vulnerability. Disasters act as ``shocks'' to communities,
amplifying and exacerbating the existing inequities experienced by
those lacking resources.
Several studies have highlighted inequities in disaster impacts
related to heat waves, hurricanes, flooding, and other extreme weather
events. The disaster inequities are not solely due to weather itself
but the systems, policies, and programs are also inequitable. FEMA,
other Federal agencies, and policy makers need to intentionally and
dramatically change policies and programs to prioritize those most
vulnerable and ensure equity is a primary performance measure. By doing
so, we can begin to equitably support communities that are on the front
line of climate change threat. The Fourth National Climate Assessment
echoed the need to prioritize marginalized communities and promote
equitable mitigation and adaptation practices.
``Prioritizing adaptation actions for populations that face higher
risks from climate change, including low-income and marginalized
communities, may prove more equitable and lead, for instance, to
improved infrastructure in their communities and increased focus on
efforts to promote community resilience that can improve their capacity
to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters.'' (Fourth
National Climate Assessment, Volume II Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation
in the United States, Page 55).
virginia efforts to address climate change and integrating equity
Governor Northam's administration and the Commonwealth of Virginia
have taken significant steps to address the challenge of climate
change. Utilizing a ``whole-of-Government approach,'' Virginia has
taken bold actions to support our communities, to ensure a continued
thriving economy, and to protect critical infrastructure. Virginia is
leading the way in combating this rapidly-evolving threat. The
secretary of natural resources advises the Governor on natural
resources issues and works to advance top environmental priorities. The
Commonwealth also has a special advisor to the Governor for coastal
adaptation and protection. This role addresses the effects of sea-level
rise and land subsidence along Virginia's coast, and spans across
numerous Commonwealth agencies to ensure a consistent and streamlined
effort. Virginia continues to introduce policies focused on slowing
climate change and its impacts, mitigation, and adaptation.
An innovative, science-based approach uses cost-effective, nature-
based, and equitable strategies to protect our people, communities,
infrastructure, and economy. The guidelines and planning of one of the
most groundbreaking, comprehensive actions to champion coastal
resilience are enshrined in:
Executive Order 24: Also known as the Master Planning
Framework (Framework), the Framework was initiated to lead the
Commonwealth in making the coast more resilient to the impacts
of climate change and sea-level rise. It details the core
principles of Virginia's approach to coastal adaptation and
protection and calls for implementation of Virginia's first
Master Plan by the end of this year 2021.
Executive Order 71: Establishing the Virginia Coastal
Resilience Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) which will create
and implement a Coastal Resilience Master Plan. TAC has
representatives of State agencies, coastal planning districts
and regional commissions, and academic advisors, among others
who facilitate the coordination and the development of the
Master Plan.
Executive Directive 13: Integral in the Virginia Coastal
Zone Management (CZM) Program's support of the Coastal
Resilience Master Planning Framework, and
The Virginia Coastal Policy Center (VCPC) at William & Mary
Law School assists in support of the Framework, working with
State offices and agencies. VCPC also works with scientists,
local and State political figures, community leaders, the
military, and others to integrate the latest science with legal
and policy analysis to solve coastal resource management
issues. In 2015, Virginia successfully competed and was awarded
$120.5 million from the National Disaster Resilience
Competition (NDRC) grant through the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development awarded to the Virginia Department of
Housing and Community Development in 2017. The grant serves to
implement innovative solutions to combat sea-level rise in the
Hampton Roads area. $5.25 million portion of the grant award
established the Nation's first-of-its-kind resilience
innovation hub (RISE), a city of Norfolk, VA-based nonprofit
incubating resilience-building solutions for coastal
communities.
integrating equity in emergency management
Due to the disproportionate impact on marginalized communities,
Virginia is intentionally focused on embedding equity into emergency
management by taking full advantage of one of FEMA's resilience funding
opportunities through the Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) Grants
programs; specifically, the grant program known as Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC). Since 2017, Virginia Department
of Emergency Management (VDEM) has made an intentional effort to
utilize the HMA funding opportunity to benefit Virginia's most
vulnerable communities. Purposefully holistic solutions to flooding
issues have led to larger, more comprehensive projects. In 2020, we
revised our grant priorities to reduce inequities that were
unintentionally embedded within the scoring criteria. Fortunately, the
BRIC priorities as announced by FEMA encompassed many of the key
priorities on which Virginia had already been focused.
VDEM partnered with the Virginia Health Equity Leadership Task
Force to support and empower local governments by performing an equity
analysis of localities across the Commonwealth. As part of the Hazard
Mitigation Equity Analysis, a vulnerability score for Virginia
households was developed and used to identify Virginia's most
vulnerable populations across the Commonwealth in the event of an
environmental disaster. Population vulnerability was determined by
several factors including:
1. Communities of color
2. Elevated health risk
3. Low income
4. No. of people in the household
5. No. of children in the household
6. Lack of English in the primary language
7. Unemployment risk
8. Age (older adults)
9. Mobile homes
10. Lack of vehicle access.
The equity analysis encompassed population vulnerability plus
hazard risk (which accounts for households within a flood or hurricane
zone) plus past mitigation projects. Upon identifying the top 40
localities with the highest average of household vulnerability in a
flood or hurricane zone, VDEM will host 13 subregional hazard
mitigation workshops focused on equity throughout the summer. The 13
subregional workshops will provide local governments with an
opportunity to share their knowledge on flood risk in vulnerable
communities and further explore how the Commonwealth can provide
support through technical assistance in scoping relevant projects. Last
year, Virginia was 1 of 5 States to submit over $200 million in
projects for the 2020 BRIC Grant Program. Thirteen of the 33 projects
submitted by Virginia were from localities with the highest
vulnerability according to the equity analysis. The Commonwealth is
dedicated to equitably leveraging BRIC and other mitigation funding to
support our most at-risk communities.
biden administration efforts
President Biden's recent announcement of allocating $1 billion in
2021 BRIC funding for communities, States, and Tribal governments to
support pre-disaster mitigation efforts is a great step in the right
direction. There are numerous Biden administration priorities and
investments to support climate resilience. As I've presented, the
threat of climate change to the homeland is significant and stretches
the limited capabilities and resources of State and local emergency
management agencies. Support from the Federal Government is needed in
order to mitigate and adapt to climate change. The Biden
administration's commitment and focus on equity are the bold steps
needed to face this threat head-on. FEMA Administrator Criswell has
prioritized diversity, equity, and inclusion and the agency has
released a Request for Information to identify ways to integrate
equity. These are welcomed steps that will hopefully further disaster
equity. But integrating equity in emergency management will not be a
quick fix and requires a long-term, sustainable commitment and
willingness to support innovation to solve complex and deeply-rooted
inequitable programs. I encourage FEMA to leverage disaster equity
leaders, empower marginalized communities and front-line organizations,
and support efforts to diversify the emergency management enterprise to
mirror the Nation's diverse communities.
conclusion
The threat of climate change presents a great challenge to the
Nation. Marginalized communities are most at-risk for disaster impacts
and should be empowered and prioritized in all our efforts. Policy
makers and emergency officials must be willing to take bold and
equitable steps to respond to climate change and make investments in
mitigation and adaptation. Doing so will help us better prepare for the
years ahead which will continue to test us. For marginalized
communities, equitable investments will save lives and improve disaster
outcomes by focusing resources where they are needed most. Thank you
for this opportunity to discuss these important topics and I look
forward to answering the Members' questions.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much, Mr. Brown, for your
testimony.
At this time, the Chair now recognizes Pamela Williams to
summarize your statement for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF PAMELA S. WILLIAMS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
BUILDSTRONG COALITION
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Chairwoman Demings and Ranking
Member Cammack and the distinguished Members, of this
committee.
It is an honor for me to join you today to discuss cost
mitigation and how it intersects with climate adaptation and
homeland security, and this conversation must serve as a core
component of the National conversation of resilient
infrastructure in communities.
The BuildStrong Coalition was actually formed a decade ago
and is made up of an extremely diverse group dedicated to
building a more resilient Nation. We represent firefighters,
emergency responders, emergency managers, insurers, architects,
contractors, manufacturers, as well as consumer organizations
and code specialists.
Like you, the coalition recognizes that the increase in the
frequency and severity of natural catastrophes in this country
clearly illustrate the need for investments in the resilience
of structures, the ones in which we live and work and then, of
course, the critical lifeline infrastructure that support our
daily lives.
In 2018, Congress did take several key steps in recognition
of the unsustainable impacts of disasters by passing the
Disaster Recovery Reform Act, or DRRA. The true game changer,
as we discussed, was the creation of an additional set-aside of
6 percent in spending for the purpose of funding greater
investments in mitigation before a disaster occurs.
FEMA has taken that authority and last year launched the
BRIC program, and certainly we applaud FEMA for their
unprecedented efforts in developing and implementing this
transformational program. But in its inaugural year, FEMA
offered $500 million through BRIC, but they received almost
$3.6 billion in requested projects.
FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell has stated that one of
her top priorities is to build a new culture of disaster
resilience. But we know that the resilience needs in this
country far exceed the resources available, and new funding
alone is not going to solve a problem of this magnitude.
So the friends and alliances of the BuildStrong Coalition
have developed the following policy recommendations that we
will share with you.
First, increase the funding for resilience before the next
disaster, climate impact, or catastrophic failure. Mitigation
saves lives, property, and taxpayer money. Mitigation also
saves the environment, and we know it is the smart use of
Federal resources and will save taxpayer dollars, anywhere from
$4 to $11 for every dollar invested. But, again, the resources
are woefully inadequate.
Second, we need to create incentives for building stronger
and tie existing Federal funding streams to the adoption and
enforcement of strong modern building codes. Disaster resilient
and sustainable construction and the use of stronger building
codes has proven to save lives, reduce damage of natural
disasters, and protect the environment. Adopting building codes
is the single most effective thing that we can do to save lives
and property.
Third, promote the hardening of lifeline infrastructure.
Lifeline infrastructure provides indispensable services that
enable continuous operations of critical businesses and
Government functions and, without the prompt restoration, would
risk health, safety, and economic security, key elements to
homeland security.
We also need to incentivize investments through tax
benefits. We need to make it easier for individuals,
businesses, and Government to invest in resiliency. We need to
ensure the use of resilient American-made products in the
construction and retrofit of our key lifeline infrastructure.
Finally, and maybe most importantly, we need to build
capacity. We must ensure that States, locals, Tribal
governments, regional entities are given the tools and
resources that they need to increase capacity and capability to
even identify risks and hazards and mitigate those risks before
the next crisis occurs.
For this country to be successful in enhancing our
resiliency, we must focus on capacity building at all levels of
government and then turn to considerations of sustainability,
adaptability, and creative financial instruments that can be
leveraged to drive socially responsible investments and
resilience.
This is also going to involve simplifying and streamlining
programs, and this committee is going to need to focus on
effective grants management and oversight so that we can
leverage these investments systematically and systemically for
National resilience.
As we launch into the 2021 hurricane season, we are very
excited to join thought leaders like you to identify
opportunities for policy changes. We must invest in these
Federal resources so that we ultimately save lives and
livelihoods.
Thank you, ma'am.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Williams follows:]
Prepared Statement of Pamela S. Williams
Tuesday, June 8, 2021
Chairwoman Demings, Ranking Member Cammack, and distinguished
Members of the committee, I would like to thank you for holding this
important hearing today regarding the risks and effects of climate
change on homeland security, particularly how disasters impact our
communities, our homes, and lifeline infrastructure.
I am Pamela Williams, the executive director of the BuildStrong
Coalition, and it is an honor for me to join the distinguished panel of
witnesses today to discuss how disaster mitigation intersects with
climate adaptation and homeland security and must serve as a core
component of the National conversation on resilient infrastructure and
communities. Investments in mitigation and resilient construction,
particularly before the next major storm, not only drives down disaster
costs and losses, but also builds resilience in our citizens,
neighborhoods, regions, and across the United States.
background and introduction
My journey began over 20 years ago, aiding the city of Des Moines,
Iowa in recovery from the devastating 1993 Midwest floods. During my
career, I have served at the Federal, State, and local levels, dealing
with disaster policy. I have helped local governments adopt and enforce
codes and standards as they attempted to rebuild from catastrophe,
guided States toward prioritizing disaster preparedness and mitigation
efforts, and worked in the trenches with the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) addressing the consequences of this country's
most catastrophic disasters. I was honored to serve the House Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure for 5 years, particularly as
Members developed the legislative response to the unprecedented 2017
disaster season. I have a deep appreciation for the emergency
management profession, the challenges in driving responsible disaster
policy, and the tremendous, tireless efforts put forth every day by
FEMA, all levels of government, and our private-sector partners in
trying to get to a better answer on disasters.
Today, it is my privilege to serve as the executive director of the
BuildStrong Coalition and to testify before you today on its behalf.
The BuildStrong Coalition, formed in 2011 to respond to an increasing
number of severe disasters, is made up of a diverse group of members
representing firefighters, emergency responders, emergency managers,
insurers, engineers, architects, contractors, and manufacturers, as
well as consumer organizations, code specialists, and many others
committed to building a more disaster-resilient Nation. The BuildStrong
Coalition has been a partner with Congress in its work to investigate
causes of, and devise the solutions to, the rising cost of disasters in
the United States. We have been honored to help identify opportunities
for policy changes that promote mitigation and the smart investment of
Federal resources to address our country's increasing number of severe
and costly weather events, including informing several provisions of
the landmark Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018.
In the face of growing climate risk, we must be focused on what
legislative changes and policy initiatives are needed to appropriately
incentivize smart mitigation and resilience activities and practices,
while also removing the challenges and obstacles that may stand in the
way or hinder the progress of disaster resilience. We implore the
committee to use this hearing to shape the resilience conversation
across this country--in order to create a Resilient America.
This committee stands poised to increase disaster resilience in the
United States and ensure that resilience remains at the forefront of
the infrastructure, COVID-19 recovery, and disaster assistance reform
conversations. The committee must seize the opportunity to influence
the overall National resilience strategy and establish the framework
for the next chapter in increasing disaster resilience in the United
States. This committee must fill the leadership role in addressing
climate impacts by incentivizing and providing resources to facilitate
smart, climate-conscious behaviors and mitigation and removing the
moral hazards and policy impediments inhibiting decision makers from
creating resilient systems and communities.
BuildStrong is excited to join Congressional leaders like you as we
identify opportunities for policy changes that promote disaster
resilience and the smart investment of Federal resources to address our
country's vulnerable homes and communities, aging infrastructure, and
the increasing number of severe and costly weather events. Together, we
can help save the lives and property of our citizens.
drra and bric: transforming disaster recovery and mitigation
The increase in the frequency and severity of natural catastrophes
in the United States clearly illustrates the need for our country to
invest in the resilience of the structures in which we live and work
and the lifeline infrastructure that supports the essential aspects of
our everyday lives. According to Munich Re, hurricanes, wildfires, and
other disasters across the United States caused $95 billion in damage
last year, the fourth-highest cost on record.\1\ In 2020, North
Atlantic hurricane season records were broken with 30 named storms
forming, and 12 making landfall. It was the most active wildfire year
on record across the west with nearly 10.3 million acres consumed. And
according to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in
2020, there were 22 weather and climate disaster events with losses
exceeding $1 billion each across the United States--shattering the
previous annual record of 16 events that occurred in 2011 and 2017--
which included tropical cyclones, severe storms, drought, wildfire
event, and a derecho.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Record hurricane season and major wildfires--The natural
disaster figures for 2020,'' Munich Re, January 7, 2021. https://
www.munichre.com/en/company/media-relations/media-information-and-
corporate-news/media-information/2021/2020-natural-disasters-
balance.html. Accessed June 4, 2021.
\2\ Smith, Adam B., ``2020 U.S. billion-dollar weather and climate
disasters in historical context,'' National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), January 8, 2021. https://www.climate.gov/news-
features/blogs/beyond-data/2020-us-billion-dollar-weather-and-climate-
disasters-historical. Accessed June 4, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2018, Congress took several key steps in recognition of
unsustainable impacts of disasters by passing the bipartisan Disaster
Recovery Reform Act of 2018 (DRRA). These changes to disaster law and
policy support and incentivize States and localities to adopt enhanced
mitigation measures to protect lives and taxpayer dollars, remove some
of the moral hazards that increase risk, and transform disaster
resilience in this country. This legislation provides FEMA, in
particular, more tools to help impacted communities recover smarter and
stronger and end the cycle of build, damage, rebuild.
The true game changer in DRRA is the creation of an additional set-
aside of 6 percent annual disaster spending for the purpose of funding
greater investment in mitigation before a disaster. This change
represents a significant increase in reliable funding for grants for
State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments and communities that
will enable them to better plan and execute cost-effective risk
mitigation projects. With the enactment of the DRRA, FEMA was given the
opportunity and the challenge to create a new, permanent mechanism to
provide substantial funding for cost-effective, risk-reducing pre-
disaster mitigation projects.
FEMA took these new and expanded authorities and in 2020 launched
the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Grant
Program. We applaud FEMA for their unprecedented efforts in developing
and implementing this transformational program. FEMA has endeavored to
be transparent and to engage stakeholders throughout the process.
Thanks to this leadership, BRIC is now a Nation-wide, pre-disaster
mitigation grant program that will impact both public infrastructure
and individual preparedness by increasing residential resilience
through structural retrofits and smart building techniques.
In its inaugural year, FEMA offered $500 million through the BRIC
program. In its first year of funding, during a global pandemic when
emergency managers were overwhelmed and strapped for resources, FEMA
received almost $3.6 billion in requested projects. While we look
forward to the award announcements later this summer, FEMA and the
administration have already announced a funding increase to $1 billion
for fiscal year 2021. It will be critical for FEMA to provide the
official Notice of Funding Availability as soon as possible to give
States and sub-applicants as much lead time and guidance as possible.
We will have much to learn from the initial round of BRIC awards, what
is working and what is not working, what is discouraging communities
from applying, what aspects of the program ignore issues of equality
and fairness, and where improvements can be made.
FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell has stated that one of her top
priorities is to build a new culture of disaster resilience. But we
know that the infrastructure and residential needs of the Nation far
exceed the resources available. And new funding alone cannot solve a
problem of this magnitude. Investments must be deployed wisely and in a
manner that realizes its full benefit.
recommendations
The BuildStrong Coalition has developed the following policy
recommendations and principles, supported by data and science, that are
critical to driving resilience across the homeland.
I. Secure More Resources for Mitigation
Increase the funding for retrofits and investments in resilience
before the next disaster, climate impact, or catastrophic failure.
Mitigation saves lives, property, and taxpayer money. Mitigation
also saves the environment. But the Federal resources to help build
State and local capacity and fund risk-reducing, cost-effective
mitigation projects that harden critical lifeline infrastructure and
help individuals invest in residential resilience are woefully
inadequate. FEMA and other Federal agencies need more tools to help
impacted communities recover smarter and stronger and end the cycle of
build, damage, rebuild. For example, while doubling the amount of funds
available under FEMA's BRIC program represents a historical increase in
resources available for pre-disaster mitigation and resilience
projects, the fact that FEMA received almost $3.6 billion in project
applications illustrates the scope of the need for far greater
investment in resilience.
And we know that this is a smart use of Federal resources that will
save taxpayer dollars. Federal funding that promotes better land use,
modern science applied to home construction, and increased mitigation
measures can dramatically reduce the devastation brought by these
disasters. Based on the findings of the National Institute of Building
Sciences (NIBS):
Adopting Model Building Codes Saves $11 per $1 Invested
Federal Mitigation Grants Save $6 per $1 Invested
Exceeding Codes Save $4 per $1 Invested
Mitigating Infrastructure Saves $4 per $1 Invested
II. Create Resilient Homes and Communities Through Strong Building
Codes
Create incentives for building stronger and tie existing Federal
funding streams to the adoption and enforcement of strong, modern
building codes, in order to better protect homes, families, and
communities.
Individuals and communities are kept safe in times of disasters
through the strength of their homes and the infrastructure that
provides critical resources and services in affected areas. This is
particularly prevalent as we learn lessons from COVID-19 and begin to
understand how to increase resilience to wildfires. Disaster-resilient
and sustainable construction and the use of stronger building codes
have been proven to save lives, reduce the damage of natural disasters,
and protect the environment. In fact, one of the most cost-effective
ways communities can guard against disasters is to adopt and enforce
hazard-resistant building codes. Unfortunately, only a handful of
States have adopted the most modern building codes, and many lack the
resources to adequately implement codes. To help correct this paradigm
at the Federal level involves creating incentives that encourage State
and local governments to adopt modern building codes, while
simultaneously equipping communities with the tools and resources
needed to carry out meaningful enforcement regimes.
In November 2020, FEMA completed a landmark building code study
which concluded that modern building codes lead to major reductions in
property losses from natural disasters. This study showed that over a
20-year period cities and counties with modern building codes would
avoid at least $32 billion in losses from natural disasters, when
compared to jurisdictions without modern building codes.\3\ Adopting
building codes is the single most effective thing we can do to save
lives and protect property into the future. Further, the additional
cost of construction features that allow buildings to survive natural
disasters are not expensive and on average are less than 2 percent of
total construction costs.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``Protecting Communities and Saving Money: The Case for
Adopting Building Codes,'' Federal Emergency Management Agency,
November 2020. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-11/
fema_building-codes-save_brochure.pdf. Accessed June 4, 2021.
\4\ NIBS, ``Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves: 2019 Report,'' 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the return on investment and the level of resilience these
investments help communities achieve, Federal programs need to drive
the adoption and enforcement of building codes, provide resources to
help communities, and make the critical link between program
requirements and smart decisions.
III. Resilient Lifeline Infrastructure
Require investments in lifeline infrastructure and those resources
should be directed at risk-reducing, cost effective investments to
promote the hardening of lifeline infrastructure and disaster-resilient
construction and the adoption and implementation of risk-reducing
standards.
Disaster-resilient and sustainable construction and infrastructure
is important to reduce the damage of natural disasters and protect the
environment. Lifeline infrastructure refers to electric power, water
and wastewater systems, natural gas and liquid fuel, telecommunication,
and transportation. Disruptions in these systems due to disasters
threaten lives and impede community recovery. Lifelines provide
indispensable services that enable the continuous operation of critical
business and Government functions, and without prompt restoration would
risk health, safety, and economic security. Focusing on these lifelines
allow decision makers to better identify key risks and facilities and
more readily target projects that can help protect or restore critical
functions during a disaster. By investing in the resilience of these
systems, we can reduce, if not eliminate, the impact of disasters,
allowing key infrastructure to be restored and reducing the duration
and cost of recovery.
Through the application of the highest building codes, standards,
and technologies to these systems and ensuring access to resources to
invest in mitigation by owners of infrastructure, we can ensure system-
wide increases in resilience in key lifeline infrastructure. This not
only involves applying the highest codes and standards, but also
leveraging resources to support and incentivize the adoption and
enforcement of building codes and professional standards. This includes
standards that strengthen and harden infrastructure, including the
Nation's electric grid, against all hazards including wind, wildfire,
flood, seismic, and ice. Disaster recovery and mitigation projects
should also incorporate smart technologies to improve monitoring and
distribution for lifeline infrastructure and require the use of
resilient materials standards for lifeline infrastructure.
Tremendous strides have been made in disaster resilience policy,
with the passage of DRRA, but there is must more to be done and the
progress we have made must be protected. As the leaders in disaster
policy, you must remain steadfast and ensure that infrastructure, COVID
recovery, and other disaster-related legislation continues to leverage
the investment of Federal resources in a smart way to increase
resiliency.
IV. Incentivize Investments in Resilience
Incentivize investments in resilience through tax benefits, grant
conditions, and easing administrative burdens.
In addition to more resources for mitigation and communities, both
public and private entities need incentives to drive their investments
in mitigation. Whether by supporting the creation of Federal tax
incentives that reward resilient behavior, the development of
mitigation tax breaks, or other incentives, individuals and businesses
will find it easier to invest in resiliency, including undertaking
activities like retrofitting homes, if these resources are available.
This would also foster private-sector investment in mitigation through
new financing opportunities. Targeted tax incentives and removing tax
penalties will encourage resilient construction techniques to withstand
damage from strong winds or flooding and prevent losses from wildfires
and seismic events. Through these investments, homeowners and
communities ultimately save money through tax savings and avoided
recovery costs and losses in the next disaster.
The tax code and financial instruments can also be leveraged to
drive creative financing and solutions that target underserved
populations. By leveraging existing, publicly available data, like
FEMA's National Risk Index,\5\ both community leaders and private
investors can come together to analyze key risk factors, including
social vulnerability, to help prioritize communities and projects for
resources and technical assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Federal Emergency Management Agency, ``National Risk Index for
Natural Hazards (NRI),'' https://www.fema.gov/floodmaps/products-tools/
national-risk-index. Accessed June 4, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Use Resilient American Products
Ensure the use of resilient, American-made products in the
construction and retrofit of lifeline infrastructure.
Now more than ever, we need to support American jobs and American
products. An investment in resilience across American communities must
include long-term, non-emergency construction projects, including the
hardening of lifeline infrastructure, that maximize the use of
American-made goods, products, and materials. These efforts create jobs
and fuel the economic engines in our communities.
VI. Build Capacity
Ensure that State, local, Tribal, and regional entities are given
the tools and resources to increase capacity and capability to identify
risks and hazards and mitigate those risks before the crisis occurs.
For this country to be successful in enhancing our resiliency, we
must focus on capacity building for State and local governments and
turn to considerations of sustainability, adaptability, and creative
financial instruments that can be leveraged to drive socially
responsible investments in resilience. State, local, and Tribal
governments must increase their ability to mitigate against all
hazards. Accordingly, they must increase their ability to identify
hazards and successfully implement these funds to accomplish selected
risk-reducing projects. Every level of government must understand how
funding, programs, and resources can be applied and leveraged to make
homes, businesses, and communities less vulnerable to severe weather.
They need help connecting the dots between resources and brick and
mortar programs that can strengthen the build environment for the
future. We all have a role to play to help increase engagement and
education efforts on mitigation planning, program requirements, and
opportunity awareness.
Building capacity also involves simplifying and streamlining
Federal programs to make the resources more accessible and equitable to
the communities most at risk. As resources are increased and spent,
FEMA, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and this committee,
will need to focus on effective grants management and oversight,
including oversight by the DHS inspector general, and how to leverage
them to invest systemically and systematically in national resilience,
even across agencies.
Further, regulatory controls must be loosened to facilitate and
encourage public-private partnerships. Governments must work with the
private sector to increase community and National resilience. The
private sector owns the vast majority of the Nation's critical lifeline
infrastructure and key--roughly 85 percent.\6\ The private sector is
currently conducting high-level work throughout the resilience and
mitigation arena and there is tremendous opportunity to utilize
expertise and industry knowledge, take advantage of existing programs,
identify best practices, and incorporate lessons learned from the
private sector. By leveraging the private sector and encouraging and
facilitating public-private partnerships, we can maximize available
resources for the benefit of the entire country. Community leaders need
to be connected with partners that can catalyze financial resources and
human capital. Organizations like BuildStrong, the Institute for
Business and Home Safety, and the International Code Council, among
others, are serving as force multipliers, helping build capacity for
investments in resilience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Government Accountability Office, The Department of Homeland
Security's (DHS) Critical Infrastructure Protection Cost-Benefit
Report, June 26, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
conclusion
As the 2021 Atlantic Hurricane Season gets under way, we are once
again reminded that time is of the essence to ensure that we do
everything we can to continue to incentivize and facilitate mitigation
throughout this country. And in the face of climate risk, the
BuildStrong Coalition will continue to work to create and enact
policies, as the Coalition has done for the past decade, that have a
real impact on helping individuals, businesses, and communities prepare
for, and survive disasters.
Chairwoman Demings and Ranking Member Cammack, thank you for
convening this hearing and raising these important issues. I look
forward to answering any questions you may have.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much, Ms. Williams.
Thank you to all of your witnesses for your testimony.
I will remind the subcommittee that we will each have 5
minutes to question the panel.
I will now recognize myself for questions.
While the impacts of the climate crisis will vary depending
on the specific U.S. region, in my home State of Florida,
policy makers must grapple with the challenge of a longer and
more intensified hurricane season. Additionally, as I am sure
you all know, sea level rise continues to impact our coastal
communities, contributing to flooding and erosion hazards, salt
water intrusion, and changes to coastal ecosystems.
Mr. Nye, please comment on the climate challenges in States
like Florida and elaborate, if you will, on the impacts you
expect the climate crisis to have on other regions of the
United States.
Mr. Nye. Thank you very much.
So, in Florida, we have a problem where water is coming
over the shore. As everybody--as the ocean gets warmer, it gets
bigger. This is what causes sea level rise. The water is coming
over the shore at places like Cape Canaveral, for example, and
then water is also coming up through the limestone. So there is
an irony, when you talk about diversity and equity, where
people wanted to live near the shore in Miami Beach and Miami,
2 closely-related but separate cities, but then, as sea level
rise comes over the top and up through the limestone, people
want to live on higher ground. So the areas that used to be for
lower--favored by lower-income people are now being gentrified,
and this is evidence of climate change, and it is difficult to
get insurance in some places where you park your car because
salt water gets in the wheel wells. So this is only going to
get worse. We have got to stop putting greenhouse gases in the
air, and we have got to come up with new ways to provide
electricity that is renewable and reliable to everybody.
The co-Chair--the Ranking Member made reference to you
never know what broadband you are going to get. Well, let's
make it so that the broadband is always good for everybody.
When neighborhoods are healthy for working, then people work
more and stay healthier. But we need big changes, everybody.
I just reflect all the time on my parents who were both in
World War II. My father was a prisoner of war for almost 4
years. My mother was one of the code girls working to decrypt
German submarine radio traffic. Everybody in the country was
involved in solving this global problem. Everybody was on it.
So----
Mrs. Demings. Mr. Nye, you know what I loved so much about
what you just said, though, everybody cared about it. This was
not a Republican issue, a Democratic issue. Everybody in the
country cared about this issue, and I think it is so critical
to us getting to where we need to.
I want to go quickly to Mr. Brown. You know, you talked
about your perspective as an emergency manager. You are there
on the ground. What are some of the on-the-ground emergency
preparedness and response improvements you have seen at the
local level since President Biden took office?
Mr. Brown. You know, I think the conversation around
climate change and the realness of the threat and the need to
prepare has increased, and I think there is a greater focus on
the mitigation and the pre-disaster mitigation.
The additional funding, we have leaned forward and started
to plan and work with our less-resourced communities to support
them in developing their grant projects. We anticipate that
grant being released later this year. There are limited
resource communities, both urban and rural, that we have to
provide some additional resources to. They have a part-time
emergency manager or one-person shop. These are very vulnerable
communities that we need to support.
So, as these grant dollars are released, I hope that we can
really talk about building capacity amongst emergency managers
across the country. We should not have any part-time or one-
shop emergency management offices. These are full-time
responsibilities related to preparedness, mitigation, response,
and recovery.
By broadening the field and the capacity also in emergency
management, we can also build a diverse work force that we need
so we have people from the community who understand the
community needs and are able to respond more effectively.
Mrs. Demings. Mr. Brown, thank you so much.
I am going to at this time recognize the Ranking Member,
Mrs. Cammack, for her questions.
Mrs. Cammack. Thank you, Chairwoman Demings, and thank you
again to all of our witnesses here today and to our colleagues
who have joined us.
So this question is for all of our witnesses. Like so many
of the challenges that we face, borders and countries all share
similar challenges. So I am going to pose this question to you
all, starting with Mr. Brown.
According to a recent media report, China now accounts for
27 percent of total global greenhouse gas emissions, which is
now more than all other developed countries combined. Now, to
me, this just seems like one more reason to add to the list of
why China poses an increasing threat to our homeland security.
I am concerned when it comes to climate change, climate change
issues, that Beijing will benefit the most if we hamper
American innovation via new regulations and efforts to stifle
innovation.
So to what extent do you see China's climate impacts as a
concern to the United States' homeland security?
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Ranking Member.
I think that this is a global challenge that requires every
country, every State and local government to rise up to the
challenge and become energy efficient. We have started to
pursue looking at changing our fleet to promote energy
efficiency. That is occurring across the State government as
well, and so every policy change to promote energy efficiency
and, as Mr. Nye mentioned, change the human impacts related to
greenhouse gases would be appreciated and help to minimize the
threat of climate change.
Again, emergency managers are consequent managers. We deal
with the impacts of climate change and----
Mrs. Cammack. Mr. Brown, I hate to reclaim my time here,
but I asked specifically about China. I understand the States'
perspective.
With that, I am going to have to turn on over to Mr. Bill
Nye.
Mr. Nye, could you comment on China's climate impacts as a
concern to United States homeland security?
Mr. Nye. Well, as we say, everything every single one of us
does affects everyone in the world because we all share the
air. So, as people in China try to reach the level of service
that we have in transportation and energy use here in the
States and the Western World, they are going to use more and
more energy, and what we want is for China and places in the
developing world everywhere to skip the greenhouse-gas-
intensive step and go to more energy-efficient, more renewably-
produced energy systems and retrogrades everywhere.
So this--you know, as a guy, I was born in the States. I am
from the United States. I want the United States to be the
world leader in this. Look around you. Almost everything that
you are touching and using right now is manufactured in another
country. This is the up and on the downsize of globalization.
But as those other countries go into more manufacturing-
intensive economies, they are going to produce more greenhouse
gases.
So what we want to do is lead. Yes, I understand your--very
much understand your concern about competition from China, and
so on. But this idea that if you give something to somebody, it
means you have taken it from somebody else, this zero-sum idea,
is not going to work in the long run because we all have only
one atmosphere. So let's be leaders.
I will advocate again for wind, solar, geothermal energy,
heat storage, and I would like us to take some risks and invest
in fusion technologies. This could, as I like to say, change
the world.
Mrs. Cammack. Now, Mr. Nye, before--and thank you for your
comments. Before I jump to Ms. Williams, just quick yes or no--
--
Mrs. Demings. The gentlewoman's time--I am sorry. Please,
you have 47 seconds.
Mrs. Cammack. I was going to say don't short me, don't
short me, Chairwoman Demings.
Mr. Nye, do you consider China to be a developing country?
Mr. Nye. No. It is in between. It is--it is not easy to
categorize it as one thing or the other. When you go there,
there are extraordinary cities with cranes on every block and
then the rural areas where people don't have clean water----
Mrs. Cammack. I need to turn it over to Ms. Williams for
the remaining 20 seconds that I have got. Thank you.
Ms. Williams, same question to you with regard to China's
climate impacts as it relates to homeland security.
Ms. Williams. Well, I think we have very much established
that increasing risks that are driving climate impacts and
disaster impacts are a tremendous threat to our homeland, and
we need to look at this globally. I think Mr. Nye and Mr. Brown
highlighted the fact that this is a global conversation that
the United States has an opportunity to lead, but we don't even
talk about climate adaptation using the same language that
other countries use. Adaptation, mitigation have different
means here and there, and we need to make sure that we are
leading by example but that we are also engaged in the
conversation using the same terms, a same common understanding
of what we are trying to accomplish so that we can tackle those
that are the greatest offenders at driving these risks and
impacts.
Mrs. Cammack. Thank you.
Mrs. Demings. The Chair thanks Ms. Williams for her
response and thanks the Ranking Member for her line of
questions.
At this time, the Chair will also recognize other Members
for questions they may wish to ask the witnesses. In accordance
with the guidelines laid out by the Chairman and Ranking
Member, I will recognize Members in order of seniority,
alternating between Majority and Minority. Members are also
reminded to unmute themselves when recognized for questioning.
The Chair now recognizes for 5 minutes the gentlewoman from
Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you so much, Madam Chair, and thank
you to both of you, the Ranking Member and as well the Chair,
for this particular very important hearing.
If I am reminded, the reason why this is extremely
important is because we are aware that, despite the pressing
need to address the risks proposed by climate change, the Trump
administration disregarding these challenges increased the
likelihood that Americans would experience these risks
unfortunately.
Very grateful that we are beginning to turn the corner with
the Biden administration and the American Jobs Plan and the
administration's budget proposal, which has aggressively looked
to rectify President Trump's failures and directly address the
challenges that are so very important.
I want to pose a question to Mr. Nye, and I thank you for
recounting the history that suggests, in the work of your
parents, that when there is a crisis, we all pull together. Let
me put on the record, of course, what I experienced in 2017 and
what I recently experienced as the beginning of 2021.
2017, 21 trillion gallons of rainfall fell on Texas,
Louisiana. Most of it was in the Houston Metroplex. I watched
constituents of mine, a family of 6, wash away not in an ocean,
not in a river, but in a bayou that flowed over into the main
streets. Harris County covers 1,778 square miles, and 41,500
square miles of land mass were impacted by Hurricane Harvey.
That I might say was a catastrophic climate crisis.
Then, again, in 2021, unbeknownst to us came a--when I say
``unbeknownst,'' unexpected--unbeknownst came a freeze here in
Texas with a grid that did not work which saw about a hundred
people die.
So, if I might, Mr. Nye, taking those 2 catastrophic
incidences, quite different, one coming in the summer months
unexpectedly, still trying to overcome, one coming in what is
supposed to be winter, but we in Houston don't really know it
that way, but life was lost, could you explain the scientific
relationship between greenhouse gases and larger-scale climate
events such as what I have just represented to you and for
America to understand that the loss of life can continue to
grow and grow under these natural--or maybe I should say
unnatural disasters that have come about through the harshness
of climate change and the inattentiveness that we have had over
the decades?
Mr. Nye.
Mr. Nye. Thank you very much.
So the problem fundamentally, as the world gets warmer, the
ocean gets warmer. The ocean then drives these storms. So it
is--as the water vapor goes up in the sky and condenses back to
liquid and rains, the circulation is driven harder and harder,
and so climate models--and the word ``model'' refers to
computer programs--will try to predict the fluid mechanics, the
way the air and water move around, the storms are getting
bigger, and they are moving more slowly so they are dropping
more water in places like Houston.
Then the other subtle problem, or once was a subtle
problem, is the jet stream; the circulation in the Northern
Hemisphere gets pushed up and down as the world's climate
becomes less stable as these storms move around. That caused
this cold snap in Texas.
Then, you know, I used to work in the oil field, and I have
a sense of the prideful nature of Texans. I understand you have
your own electrical grid, but it wasn't well-enough secured
against the weather.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Absolutely.
Mr. Nye. So straightforward things were not done for years
through, what my understanding, through free market ideas that
this stuff would take care of itself, that any electrical
grid--any electrical supplier would, of course, would, of
course, invest in the necessary things to make sure things were
safe. But apparently that is not what happened, and it was a
catastrophe. This is what I talk all the time; we need all the
regulations we need but no more, but we do need regulations.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Can I quickly go to Mr. Brown for just a
second? Thank you very much, Mr. Nye.
When these disasters occur--you are the State coordinator
of Emergency Management Services. I imagine you deal with a lot
of first responders, police, EMS, firefighters. Can you explain
how, when these disasters occur, you put real human beings in
the line of danger as they have to rescue persons, provide the
first line of defense for saving people? Could you just give us
that information?
Mrs. Demings. The gentlewoman's time has expired, but the
witness may answer the question. Thank you.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you. I apologize, I cannot see the
clock, but I thank you for your courtesy. Thank you so much.
Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown. Thanks, Congresswoman. Thanks, Chairwoman.
Yes, we help to coordinate all the first responders who put
their lives on the line. When it comes to search and rescue,
swift water rescue for the flooding events, they are right
there to support our communities. Again, the capacity has been
stretched using the grants that have been provided from the
Federal Government. More is needed because of the higher
frequency of these disasters, and they are occurring back to
back, even overlapping. As I mentioned, as we responded to
COVID-19, we are still responding to all of these other events
as well.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you so very much.
I yield.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you. The gentlewoman's time has
expired.
The Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Iowa, Ms.
Miller-Meeks, for 5 minutes.
I believe you are on mute.
There--no, OK. Yes, one more time.
You are--I think you are--there we go.
Mrs. Miller-Meeks. OK. Thank you so much, Chair Demings and
Ranking Member Cammack and all of our panelists.
With the rise in extreme weather events, it is worth noting
that, according to FEMA, roughly 40 percent of small businesses
hit by natural disasters never reopen, and I have certainly
seen this within our State of Iowa.
Further, 90 percent of smaller companies fail within a year
unless they can resume operations within 5 days. This is
obviously devastating to the livelihoods of so many of my
constituents, many of whom are small business owners and are
facing severe catastrophic threats all year around, from
flooding, to tornadoes, and to the derecho that we had last
year. We know that increased pre-disaster mitigation activities
and strong modern construction standards are the best line of
defense in the face of catastrophes and will ultimately save
taxpayer dollars while protecting lives.
On that note, Ms. Williams, can you talk about the
importance of Congress working to create incentives that
encourage business owners, homeowners, and communities to build
more resiliently?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, ma'am.
I think the first question that these companies and
businesses need to answer is, what are the risks that I face?
The lack of knowledge of risk across this country is
tremendous, not--you can't attack a risk that you aren't aware
of. So I think that that is the first line of defense, is
helping coming together as a community to identify risks and
hazards as a system, not as an individual structure or an
individual piece of infrastructure, but systemically, and that
is how we build community resilience.
Insurance is a key aspect of this. Individuals and
businesses are not aware of the lack of coverage that they are
facing in the wake of a disaster, and the Federal Government is
not going to provide the resources to make them whole. So we
spend a tremendous amount of time trying to educate people on
how to cover their risks in a very meaningful way. But as you
noted, the most important thing that people can do is identify
that risk, draw down that risk through investments in pre-
disaster mitigation, and we will change the trajectory of the
risk profile across this country.
Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you.
As I stated, as one who represents a Midwestern State that
runs along the Mississippi River, my district does not border
the Missouri, but I also have the Missouri, we had flooding
there, and then we had the derecho this past year, I have a
deep understanding of the massive loss caused by flooding and
other natural disasters.
Because of this, I also know of the endless cycle of
destruction where homes are built over and over again in the
same subpar standards that often help lead to their destruction
and have put communities, lives, and taxpayer dollars at risk.
Ms. Williams, again, can you talk about the power of strong
construction in the face of catastrophes, how you in the
insurance industry help to mitigate that risk and identify that
risk, and any examples you have, based on research performed by
the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety, which you
mentioned in your testimony, where the use of more modern
building standards are proven to help homes withstand extreme
climate events? What policies can we be working to create in
Congress that will better shield communities like mine in Iowa
from severe disasters?
Ms. Williams. Thank you again. We have some very exciting
things happening across this country as States are leading the
way in helping individual homeowners invest in strengthening
their homes. I know Mr. Brown probably has some comments on
this too, as he has been keenly focused on underserved
communities and how we can help strengthen their homes.
If COVID taught us anything, it is the importance of
housing as infrastructure. So our friends at IBHS have done a
tremendous job, not only identifying those retrofits of the
existing housing stock that need investments for roof tiedowns,
for cripple wall stabilization, and for wildfire mitigation
techniques that can significantly impact the risk posed to a
homeowner.
We are working with States across the country to help put
resources in the hands of homeowners to draw down their risk
and invest in their homes.
So I think Congress helping certainly remove, as Ms. Hill
said, the moral hazard of not doing the right thing and not
investing in your homes, I think, is one of the most important
things that Congressional leaders can do.
As I mentioned in my testimony, tax incentives can also
play a tremendous role for those that have the resources to be
able to invest, to just get them over the hump to do the right
thing before a disaster and not when we are worried about
recovering from catastrophe.
Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you. Then I just wanted to make a
mention to Mr. Nye--or Dr. Nye. Thank you so much. We found
during the pandemic that there are regulations we no longer
need. So, as important as regulation is--and safety--it is also
important to realize when regulation is not needed, and I
appreciate your comments on fusion and nuclear power as also an
upcoming power source, so thank you.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much. The gentlewoman's time has
expired.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr.
Payne, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Payne. Well, thank you, Madam Chairwoman. That was
quick. I didn't even get a chance to recognize myself, but it
is a real honor and privilege to be here once again, and thank
you for this timely, timely hearing that we are having today.
Mr. Brown, as we continue to combat the effects of climate
change, I would like to know how historically disadvantaged
people, and specifically people of color, could benefit from
the new green technology, additional infrastructure spending,
and private-sector innovation.
What are the steps that the Federal Government can take to
deliver equitable relief to disadvantaged communities as we
respond to climate crisis and extreme weather events?
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Congressman.
I really think we need to be intentional in terms of
getting resources to the communities that we know are on the
front line of these disaster impacts.
We have a lot of great innovative tools, we have data, we
have Census information, and we have the lived experiences of
the communities in marginalized communities. Now we need to
connect the dots and make sure that the resources, the BRIC
program priority on marginalized communities actually get to
these communities to reduce the impacts of climate change.
We know that these communities are more at risk because of
systemic and structural issues from the racism and
discrimination from the past, such as redlining. There was a
good study that was done from some Virginia professors that
looked at the heat impacts within housing projects because of
redlining.
We need to be able to promote natural mitigation efforts
and directly target those communities, and that is what we have
done here in Virginia, prioritizing the communities that need
the resources the most.
Mr. Payne. Thank you. You know, it is clear we have seen
that situation before. So we can remember the faces of Katrina
and what most of those folks looked like that were stuck in
that terrible situation.
Let's see. Mr. Nye and Ms. Hill, vulnerable communities
that were severely impacted by coronavirus remain vulnerable to
other types of hazards such as those brought on by climate
crisis. Please share a few ways in which the Federal Government
can help poor and disadvantaged communities minimize those
risks.
Ms. Hill and then Mr. Nye.
Ms. Hill. Thank you. The Federal Government has a critical
role to play in assisting disadvantaged communities. One of the
key ways is let's look at first the emergency response. We need
to have better early warning systems in the United States.
We could have 2 adjoining communities that have a very
confusing system, and that would affect the ability of people
to seek shelter in advance of event.
We also know that, unfortunately, many Americans don't have
ready cash to evacuate easily, quickly from their communities.
This was front and center with Katrina. We need to make sure
that we build plans so that Americans can seek shelter
immediately and have ready cash--perhaps just send them cash
immediately--so they are out of their homes and headed toward
safety.
We also need to look at the cost-benefit analysis of how we
build infrastructure. Our infrastructure tends to favor
wealthier communities than it does those who may be in most
need and for whom it is most meaningful to have protective
infrastructure. So that is changing the cost-benefit analysis.
Finally, the last----
Mr. Payne. Thank you.
Ms. Hill. Oh, thank you.
Mr. Payne. Mr. Nye.
Mr. Nye. Well, I understand this idea that you want better
evacuation routes, better early warning, and so on, but we need
big ideas to protect everybody. For example, in redlined areas,
apparently there are fewer--not apparently--there are fewer
trees. So, if you want to stay cool in the summer, you actually
have to spend more money on air conditioning. It is a subtle
thing, but it is a real problem.
What we want to do is to have access to good food, access
to good schools, and access to good health care for everybody,
and that means providing all 3 of those things, and especially
the internet to everybody in every community.
Because when you don't have access to the internet, you are
not included in our economy. You are not included in
opportunities for jobs or saving money on purchases. So we want
that for everybody: Clean water, renewable electricity, access
to the internet for everybody. That takes investment.
I will just say again, this idea of being resilient is a
fine idea, but just everyone on my side of this, be very
cautious of that word because it has been used as a substitute
for addressing the problem of putting too much greenhouse gas--
too many greenhouse gases in the air.
Mr. Payne. Thank you, and I yield back.
Mrs. Demings. The gentleman's time has expired.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York, Mr.
Garbarino, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Garbarino. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman.
My first question is for Ms. Williams. Specifically, the
Biden administration recently announced that a billion in
funding would be made available in fiscal year 2021 for the
Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grant
Program.
In response to that announcement, you say that the new
resources in BRIC have made it even more imperative we continue
to work around the Nation to prepare States and communities as
they apply for funds.
Going back to fiscal year 2020, what challenges did
communities face when applying for BRIC funds, and how can FEMA
ensure that communities are better equipped to apply for funds
and grants in the future?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, sir. Certainly we are continuing
to learn lessons from the 2020 iteration of BRIC. Those
announced awards probably will not go out until July or August
from FEMA.
But as a community, emergency managers and State leaders
alike are really taking a look at what were the obstacles that
needed to overcome, what communities were not engaged in this
conversation.
I am excited to say that every State, save 1, across the
country, submitted applications for BRIC. FEMA did take an
unprecedented step to try to inform folks of what would be
required, the new requirements, standard criteria, under which
BRIC would be awarded.
But there was so, so much more we need to do, and that is
really where we need to leverage our private-sector partners,
our intergovernmental partners, to help build that capacity.
One of the things that I think FEMA can do that will make
the greatest impact as we go into 2021 is get out that Notice
of Funding Availability. We need to know what we are dealing
with, the criteria under which we are applying for these
programs so that we can prioritize that.
As Mr. Brown said, we can identify those communities that
are falling through the gaps and get them additional technical
assistance. Last year, FEMA only targeted 10 communities for
special technical assistance, where they actually deployed FEMA
personnel to help leverage and increase that capability to
apply for BRIC.
We need to see more of that as we target these communities
that we really are seeing underserved in these mitigation
resources.
Mr. Garbarino. Thank you. I appreciate it.
Mr. Brown, would you add anything in additional to what
FEMA should be doing with this new round of funding, or did Ms.
Williams hit everything?
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Congressman.
I think Ms. Williams hit everything. I go back to that
technical assistance part of it. There is a designation for
distressed communities that I don't think really
comprehensively looks at all of the communities that need
support.
So we need to be more expansive in terms of how we provide
technical assistance and really guide folks through the whole
mitigation grant development process and also the management of
it as well.
These communities, again, are strapped and stressed with
the consistent impacts of disasters and need a little bit more
support.
Mr. Garbarino. Great. I appreciate that.
My next question is for Mr. Nye. As the Republican co-chair
for the Climate Solutions Caucus in Congress, I would love to
actually work with all of you and find out some ideas
legislatively that you think we could add on and the caucus can
get behind.
But, Mr. Nye, your testimony mentions that to thwart
climate change, larger actions need to take place, but
preparedness and mitigation for extreme weather events begin at
the individual, local level.
How should communities prepare for the unpredictability of
future weather systems, and what mitigation techniques can best
prepare a community so they are not overwhelmed by response and
recovery efforts?
Mr. Nye. That is a great question. We have an interstate
highway system. You ask people to get on the road, I guess. But
what we want to do is not have the storms be so severe to begin
with. You know, this idea that--like for example, in the case
of a fire, if you have a house that is fire-proof, you still
have to leave. You can't be there during the fire, and when you
get back, there is nothing left.
So what we want to do is address these problems in a much
bigger way at the same time as we address them on local levels.
As you all know, all politics is local, but still the Federal
Government has an enormous role in making sure that everybody
is looked out for.
I think everybody agrees with these broad ideas, but when
it is time to get going, that is when we have to, I believe, we
have to invest. I really encourage everybody to just stop and
take a moment and understand the difference between getting a
loan, getting into debt, versus spending money you don't have.
They are 2 different big ideas, and I think it is time for the
Government to invest in a big way.
Mr. Garbarino. I appreciate that, and thank you very much.
I yield back.
Mrs. Demings. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr.
Green, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Green. Thank you ever so much, Madam Chair. I thank the
Ranking Member, and, of course, I thank the Chair of the full
committee for all of his endeavors in this area.
Mr. Nye made a salient point. He indicated that we must
invest, and I completely, totally, and absolutely agree. But I
do have a question for each of the witnesses because there is
something fundamental that we have to embrace before we can
invest, and it is this.
You have to acknowledge that the problem exists. We have a
good many people who are opinion-makers and opinion-shapers who
will not acknowledge that the problem exists.
If you acknowledge that it exists, then you do something
about it. If you decline to acknowledge that it exists, then
you have no reason to do anything about a problem that doesn't
exist.
So let's start with Ms. Williams--and you will each have
approximately 1 minute, and I will let you know when your time
is up--tell me, what would you say to my contemporaries, my
colleagues, the opinion-makers and opinion-shapers, who have
refused to acknowledge that the problem exists?
What would you say to cause them to conclude that, yes, we
have the problem, and, yes, we must invest?
Ms. Williams.
Ms. Williams. All we need to do is turn to facts and
science. We have seen a tremendous uptick in the severity and
frequency of these climate impacts and of disaster impacts.
I am excited to say that IBHS has led the way for the
insurance industry even issuing a statement on the importance
of adaptation, and the science that has supported the movement
across the industry and the sector, that we have to do
something about it. This----
Mr. Green. Ms. Williams, let me intercede for a second and
do this for you. I am going to give you a little bit of
additional time because of what you said.
What do you say to people who have their own set of facts?
They conclude that what you say is not necessarily what the
facts reveal. What do you say to them?
Ms. Williams. I have experience here. I was with your staff
and Ms. Jackson Lee's staff even in the wake of Hurricane Ike.
Let's just look at over the last 8 years what we have
experienced in the increase in just what Texas has experienced.
My experience is wholly different. Science supports that
experience that these disasters are being driven by climate
change and that they are increasing, and that if we don't do
anything about it, we cannot sustain this trajectory.
Mr. Green. Let me move on to Mr. Brown. Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Congressman.
Again, as an emergency manager dealing with the
consequences of the impacts of climate change, we believe in
the science and the data in Virginia. We have seen the
consequences of more frequent flooding events, hurricanes. It
was our busiest hurricane season as it was last year with the
Atlantic hurricane season. Mudslides out in Southwest Virginia
and in the mountains.
We have seen the impacts of more and more of these
disasters, tornadoes, et cetera. We have had more State of
emergency declarations in the last 5 years than we have----
Mr. Green. I have to intercede.
Ms. Hill, please.
Ms. Hill. Yes. Well, I draw on my background for this. I
was a judge for 13 years on the Los Angeles Superior Court. In
that capacity, I heard evidence, guided jury trials, based on
scientific evidence. The science is clear here, beyond any
standard of proof in any courtroom, and that is why you are
seeing courts across the United States accept that climate
change is occurring.
The question for all of us, as this panel is very focused
on, is, what do we do about it? So, going forward, we need to
focus on what the science has told us and the choices that are
ahead.
Mr. Green. Thank you, Your Highness.
Mr. Nye, please.
Mr. Nye. Well, as you may know, I first was--I fought this
for 30 years, trying to get people to accept the science of
climate change. I offered 4 bets to 2 notorious climate
deniers. I offered them $10,000 that 2016 would be the hottest
year on record, 2010-2020 would be the hottest decade on
record.
Neither one of them would take either of the bets. I had
$40,000 right there. They wouldn't take the bets because I
think they are scared. We are all frightened. This thing is
overwhelming.
If you don't believe me, look, there have been these
studies lately, world-wide, people are having fewer and fewer
children. That is because women and men are a little reticent
to bring a kid into the world where the world is on fire. So,
everybody, we are in this together. We have got to fight this
fight together. I am scared too, so let's get to work. Clean
water, renewable energy, access to the internet for everybody,
and we can change the world.
Mr. Green. Mr. Nye, let me just close with this. Clear and
convincing evidence does exist, but there are some people who
decline to accept clear and convincing evidence, evidence
beyond a reasonable doubt.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much. The gentleman's time has
expired.
The Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from New Jersey,
Mrs. Watson Coleman, for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you
to all of our witnesses who presented today. Your information
has been very enlightening to me.
I am really interested in exploring this whole issue of
modern, disaster-resilient codes in municipalities, and I am
wondering, what are the kind of incentives or support that the
Federal Government needs to engage in and provide that would
help these municipalities update their codes?
Or what is stopping them from doing that? I will start with
you, Ms. Williams.
Ms. Williams. Thank you, ma'am.
As I stated, the single most important thing we can do is
get people in modern--not only adopted but enforced building
codes, and the Federal Government does have a tremendous role
that can be played. Certainly with the passage of DERA, making
eligible activities related to the adoption and enforcement of
building codes eligible for mitigation assistance was a key
step, providing these Federal resources to help communities.
But, again, we are still at the education stage. We need to
help communities understand what gains they will accomplish in
resiliency by adopting these codes. FEMA, last November, did a
tremendous job, did a study that showed that, over the last 20
years, in communities that have adopted building codes, $32
billion of damages are being avoided. That is huge.
Again, data, science is showing that the proof is in the
pudding. The best investments you can make are in the adoption
of building codes.
Furthermore, they found that, on average, the increased
cost of these resiliency measures in home construction is less
than 2 percent. So, again, we have a tremendous opportunity to
not only leverage education but resources, particularly at the
most underserved communities to help get them to not only
building smarter but literally retrofitting the existing
housing stock.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you.
Hey, Mr. Brown, would you like to comment on that, and do
you have any idea what we would be talking about, about the
additional resources, the amount of resources that we are
lacking here?
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Congresswoman.
You know, I think incentives and support, as Ms. Williams
mentioned, the proof is in the pudding, stronger building codes
result in better resilience. I am happy to say Virginia has
some of the strongest building codes in the country. We have
seen the impact and result of that. So, working with local
governments, providing additional resources, showing them the
data and the information----
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Yes.
Mr. Brown [continuing]. Will hopefully get them to support
enhancing their building codes.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So we already have resources that are
available to municipalities that wish to embrace these
additional--and modern and resilient building codes. Some
municipalities have not.
Do we need additional resources to help them get there? If
so, what do you think we are talking about?
Mr. Brown. I do know that the BRIC program building code
support is allowable expense, and so with that additional $500
million hopefully that will promote incentives for educating
and supporting and enhancing building codes on the local level.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So thank you.
This is a New Jersey question, and this is just sort-of a
general question having to do with, you know, findings of the
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change when
they released their report stating, in order to avoid
temperature rising 1.5 degrees Celsius, et cetera, the world
had to take drastic changes to reduce greenhouse gases in 12
years.
That was 3 years ago, and even with the writing on the
wall, we still see people who are denying, and we are also
seeing incremental steps being taken where we think we need
bold action.
In the State of New Jersey, we had a horrific storm with
Hurricane Sandy, and not only did we lose significant
properties on the coastline, but we even lost interior
properties where you found even lower-income individuals.
They are still recovering. We still need resources, and we
still need changes. What is the role of the Federal Government
in terms of bold versus incremental that will help us get
there? Dr. Nye, Ms. Williams, and Ms. Hill, I would like to
hear from you quickly on that.
Mr. Nye. Well, if you want to do something bold, let's
invest in fusion energy. I am not saying it will work, but
let's take a chance.
Then another thing that just is an accident--by that,
legislatively--the Jones Act, where you can't erect a wind
turbine off the coast of Virginia without taking your ship to
Nova Scotia to bring it back down to Hampton Roads, to erect a
wind turbine.
This is going to take--look, I am in 2 unions, I
understand. I understand what it is to work union. It is going
to take negotiation with unions, negotiation with ship
builders, it is going to take investment in building those big
ships that can erect those things.
Then if we could somehow negotiate with the shipping
industry so that we didn't burn this bunker fuel oil. This is
the dirtiest petroleum product going, and it is all over the
world, and we all rely on these ships.
If we had standards that required ships to have cleaner
emissions, and you couldn't dock your ship in the U.S. port
unless you had a clean emissions ship that was certified by the
clean emissions ship council someplace, you could change the
world.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Yes, thank you, Dr. Nye.
Mr. Nye. There are incremental steps that would have a huge
effect.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I appreciate that. I just read some
stuff about that that was very telling.
Ms. Hill, may I have some comments on----
Mrs. Demings. The gentlewoman's time----
Mrs. Watson Coleman. OK.
Mrs. Demings. The gentlewoman's time has expired. We may
have time for a second round of questions. So thank you so
much.
The Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from New York, Ms.
Clarke, for 5 minutes.
Ms. Clarke. I thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank our
Ranking Member for the very important hearing today. I want to
thank our panel of experts for providing us with some insights
and certainly your expert opinions and factual-based opinions
on what our Nation needs to do to really mitigate the damages
and address fully the climate crisis that is before us.
I want to pick up on a theme that my colleague,
Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman, just expressed during her
comments, and it is the fact that a new 2021 report from the
United Nations found the average global temperature is now
consistently 1 degree Celsius hotter than it was only about a
hundred years ago in the late 1800's, and meteorologists expect
the global temperature to continue rising to 1.5 degrees
Celsius, or warmer, by the middle of this century unless
drastic action is taken to lower global greenhouse gas
emissions, full stop.
So, Dr. Nye, can you describe some of the most dangerous
global implications of climate change on human population, such
as migration, such as drought, such as agricultural capacity,
as we move toward that pivotal 1.5 degree Celsius benchmark?
Mr. Nye. [Inaudible.]
Ms. Clarke. Dr. Nye, I think you may be muted.
Mr. Nye. Excuse me. The effects are potentially quite
large, astonishingly large. If we get these 5 storms happening
around the world at the same time, which, as some computer
models suggest, we would have to invent a Category 6 hurricane.
This would be devastating to coastal communities, people live
there, especially people of lower income live in lower
elevation neighborhoods. As the water pattern, rainfall
patterns shift from West to East with the shifting jet stream,
there will be more fires out West, and there will be less
agriculture there.
If you live in the Eastern Time Zone, as half of the United
States and Canada do, a lot of your food comes from that
agricultural area. If it is not possible to grow food there and
we continue to tap into the aquifer and drain the water, the
ancient water, that we rely on for agriculture right now, we
will run out of food.
I have colleagues at the University of Copenhagen who are
very concerned about what happens in the heartland of North
America because that is where their food is grown.
When we displace coastal populations, people who live on
the coast are going to go looking for jobs. Where are they
going to go? Where are they going to live when they get there?
What is going to happen to all the material that they left
behind, the copper pipes and wiring and all that electrical
grid equipment? What is going to happen to that?
If you like to worry about things, you are living at a
great time. If we accidentally destroy the electrical grid, we
do not have the capability right now to build new transformers.
Those of you who live in Texas remember this infamous
picture of the sparks going down the wire and the transformers
exploding. Well, we will just make new transformers. No. In
order to make transformers, you need electricity. But you can't
get electricity because you don't have a transformer.
OK. It is the kind of thing that we need to prepare for.
These are huge problems, and the sooner we get started and the
sooner we accept that we are all in it together, the sooner we
are going to get it done.
Ms. Clarke. Thank you, Dr. Nye.
Ms. Hill, could you please describe how these climate
changes will lead to, and in some instances, are already
leading to international instability such as the rise in
extremism and violence? Because I don't think we are really
talking about the global impact that we face.
Ms. Hill. Thank you. This is a very important question. We
have seen that these types of extreme events can have dramatic
impacts on National security and global security.
Because climate change affects human security, access to
fresh water, livelihoods, food, it really cuts at the heart of
the stability of people's lives. So we saw in Syria, a
migration after the worst drought in 1,200 years, millions of
people to other areas in Syria, mostly young men, highly
destabilizing for the receiving communities. Then, in addition
to many other factors, we saw migration heading toward Europe.
We have seen bad actors, terrorists, organized crime, take
advantage of extreme events to recruit and expand their
territory. During flooding in Pakistan, the Taliban used the
opportunity of the government's ineffective response to the
flooding to attempt to recruit new members within their ranks.
We see this also occurring with ISIS and other terrorist
organizations.
It is a huge vulnerability for the United States. As these
impacts cut across the globe, there will be people who are
suffering, and in their time of need, they will be highly
vulnerable to organized crime and other networks, including
extremists who want to increase their influence. So we need to
help them at home.
Mrs. Demings. The gentlewoman's time----
Ms. Clarke. Thank you, and I yield back, Madam Chair.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much.
The Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from California,
Ms. Barragan, for 5 minutes.
Ms. Barragan. Thank you, Chair Demings, for holding this
important hearing on the National security threats that climate
change poses to the security of our country and our
constituents.
Without major action by the United States and countries
around the world to reduce emissions, we are at risk of global
temperature increases of 3, 4, or even 5 degrees Celsius.
I believe that we need to make clear to the American people
that this would mean that we have to take bold action to head
off this dangerous future, something that we will start to do
with the American Jobs Plan.
We heard, Mr. Nye, you give the analogy that I really loved
about climate and our planet and a 747 airliner. That really
resonated with me, and I thought it was a great analogy, and I
want to take that analogy one step further. You know, if our
Earth were the 747, right now we have seen the 1 percent degree
Celsius warming.
We are experiencing, with only that 1 percent, significant
turbulence from that change in our climate--stronger droughts
and wildfires and hurricanes.
So, Mr. Nye, I was going to ask you, what would the state
of that 747 be, and our planet and our homeland be, if we were
to get to the 3 percent, the 4 percent, or the 5 percent
degrees Celsius of warming? I know you spoke a little bit about
this. Is there anything else that you want to add?
Mr. Nye. Well, the climate models are accurate. The
computer models have proven repeatedly to be robust. I referred
earlier to the study that Exxon kept internal in the 1970's,
and then in 1982 is the famous document or infamous document.
They were concerned with, the state-of-the-art of the
computer modeling at that time was doubling of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere, and they predicted that the poles would be
more severely affected or have greater swings in temperature
and more ice melting. That has proven to be true.
They talked in doubling the amount of carbon dioxide would
take it from, in those days, 340 parts per million to 680.
Well, my friends, we are well over in 400 parts per million. We
are at 415, world-wide.
As it gets bigger and bigger, the effects are going to get
stronger and stronger. Now, you have heard people say this, but
trust the science, everybody, it is a real thing. I like to
remind everybody who is watching----
Ms. Barragan. Thank you.
Mr. Nye [continuing]. In the United States, this is
available in table 8, clause 8, refers to the progress of
science and useful arts. This is in the Constitution. The
progress of science is in our economic interest.
So, everybody, the computer models have proven to be true.
Let's get to work, reduce greenhouse emissions, and do these
other financial and investment things that people have
discussed at this meeting.
But, first, as we have all discussed, we have to
acknowledge that we have the problem and get to work.
Ms. Barragan. Thank you so much for that.
Ms. Hill, you spoke about how climate will drive increase
in migration. On an international scale, a warming climate is
impacting migration patterns. We have to think through humane
solutions to accommodate migrants displaced by climate change.
Ms. Hill, there are many factors that contribute to
immigration, but climate change isn't discussed enough. Upwards
of 20 million people are displaced by weather-related disasters
each year. This is happening in our own backyard, driving
people from their homes and to our borders.
Could you describe how extreme weather events worsened by
climate change are causing displacement and migration that
could undermine homeland security?
Ms. Hill. Yes. We are seeing the pressure right now at our
Southern Border. We are seeing Central Americans come in
unprecedented numbers. When I was at the Department of Homeland
Security, I oversaw the first surge of unaccompanied alien
children from those countries.
We have examined the factors that are causing that drive in
migration. There are many, as you have said, but one of them is
new extremes that are affecting agriculture, drought, coffee
rust.
Then, as livelihoods are affected, it gives opportunity for
criminal gangs to expand their territory. It becomes more
dangerous for those, and we see young people on the move,
headed north, in search of a better life.
We do not have the legal framework internationally to
accommodate what we call--are commonly referred to as climate
refugees. Under our international law, there is no such thing
as a climate refugee.
So, as you so importantly point out, we need to come up
with a better system to address flows of migration that will be
driven by climate change. We are already seeing unprecedented
people on the move, just this year in terms of even in the
midst of a pandemic.
Three-quarters of--approximately 40 million people on the
move were driven by climate extremes, droughts, floods, and
other acute events that caused people to leave their homes. We
need a plan, and we don't have one yet.
Ms. Barragan. Thank you.
Mrs. Demings. The gentlewoman's time has expired. Thank you
so much. I want to thank our panel for their expertise and
their patience. As you can see, this is such a critical topic,
and this is so timely.
We do have time for another round. If you, Members, would
like to ask additional questions, please turn on your cameras,
and at this time, the Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
Texas, Mr. Green, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Green. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am grateful for the
second round, and I have a continuation of the first, but with
just a different twist. I was hoping that we would have a
second round to be quite candid with you. Here is the twist.
Let us assume that we have the legislation to do the big
bold things that you would have us do, dear friends, and let us
assume that to do these big bold things, we have to do them
without the consent of everyone.
Let's just assume that we have people who have similar
ideas willing to move forward together, and these persons who
are willing to move forward together happen to be of the same
party.
Here is a question for you. I ask this because everybody
wants bipartisan support for what we do, and as do I, by the
way. I welcome bipartisan support.
But if we get to the big things, the things that you talked
about, and we want to accomplish these big things and we don't
have the bipartisan support, do we move forward and do the big
things? Or do we wait until we can get the support that
everybody wants?
Mr. Nye, what say you?
Mr. Nye. Well, you got to work the problem from both ends.
I will say----
Mr. Green. Mr. Nye. If I may intercede, Mr. Nye. Let's take
the world that I live in and deal with it, if you don't mind.
The world that I live in, dear brother, dear friend, Mr. Nye,
whom I have great respect for--I hold you in the highest of
esteem--but the world that I live in, is one wherein we have
some who believe one thing and some who believe another. They
are guided by their beliefs to the extent that they are
directed with their votes.
So now my question is, what do I do, if I can go forward
and do these big things, but I can't do them in a bipartisan
way? What do I do?
Mr. Nye. Well, if you are asking me, you go for it. The
problem, I think, everybody should be aware of----
Mr. Green. Well, but I appreciate that. Your answer is that
we should go for it. OK. I appreciate that.
Ms. Hill, what do you say we do?
Mr. Nye. Hang on.
Mr. Green. I am going to come back to you----
Mr. Nye. That is an attention-getting opening line, sir.
Mr. Green. I understand that. I am going to have to go off.
I will come back to you.
Ms. Hill, what do we do?
Ms. Hill. I think that we should lay as much foundation as
we can for the time when we will have bipartisan support for
this----
Mr. Green. So your answer is, until we get bipartisan
support, we shouldn't go forward.
Ms. Hill. No. We should be laying the ground work----
Mr. Green. Let's assume we have laid the foundation, and we
don't have the bipartisan support. This is the world that I
live in, and we don't have the support. What do we do?
Ms. Hill. I think there is much we can do without
bipartisan support and, of course, in partnership with the
administration.
Mr. Green. So you would say go forward?
Ms. Hill. I think there are Executive actions that can be
taken--yes, we need to move forward in every area----
Mr. Green. Move forward? All right. Thank you, Ms. Hill. I
greatly appreciate it. I am so sorry about the time.
Mr. Brown, what do we do, in the world that I live in?
Mr. Brown. Congressman, I think bold action is needed.
These are life-or-death and urgent issues, and that is why I
mentioned appreciating the Executive action that the
administration has taken to provide more resources and----
Mr. Green. So is your answer go forward?
Mr. Brown. Bold action is needed, sir, to move forward.
Mr. Green. So does that mean move forward, Mr. Brown?
Unfortunately, I have been trained to ask questions to the
extent that I get an answer.
Mr. Brown. It means move forward, sir.
Mr. Green. All right.
Ms. Williams--and Professor Nye, believe me, I am coming
back to you, Mr. Nye--Ms. Williams, what do you say?
Ms. Williams. Absolutely move forward. We laid foundation
20 years ago of things that we are accomplishing today that at
one time was not bipartisan. You must move forward. It is
imperative for us to be transformational and to act big.
Mr. Green. Thank you.
Now, Mr. Nye, I am coming back to you, and my clock is not
up, so I don't see how much time that I have left, because I
have a comment that I would like to give.
Madam Chair, can you just quickly tell me how much time----
Mrs. Demings. You have 46 seconds.
Mr. Green. OK. Well, Mr. Nye, you can have 20 of my 46.
Mr. Nye. Well, we got to make sure that the next election
is secure, and I mean it in the traditional way. If we end up
with a situation in the United States where we have Minority
rule through gerrymandering, through these extraordinary laws
that people are trying to pass, it is going to be trouble for
everybody, for the Minority especially.
I lived in Washington State for a long time. I vote in
California now. I voted mail-in for over 40 years, and look, I
am fine. Everybody, we can do this.
Mr. Green. I am got to take care of my seconds, Mr. Nye, so
I take it, you still say move forward?
Mr. Nye. Yes. My understanding, it is different in the
House of Representatives from the Senate----
Mr. Green. Let me close out with this.
Madam Chair, if I could just have just a second.
This committee does do a lot of things in a bipartisan
fashion, so I don't want you to think that these comments were
directed to the persons on this committee. But I live in a
world that is outside of the committee.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much.
The gentleman from Texas yields back, and the Chair now
recognizes the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Barragan, for 5
minutes.
Ms. Barragan. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and the
conversation is just so interesting, I had to stay on for the
second round.
Mr. Nye, I am going to start with you. I am going to let
you finish your answer that you were giving on--given that we
are limited to 5 minutes. So, Mr. Nye, is there something that
you want to conclude with on that last thought that you had?
Mr. Nye. Well, it is not in anybody's best interest to not
have everybody's vote count, and it certainly looks like people
are working to try to suppress votes. This is catastrophic,
everybody. I know everybody waves their hands about this, but I
want--we are all in this together.
When we have this situation with continual deadlock, it is
keeping us from taking action on climate change. So let's--
everybody, let everybody vote. Let's get people who accept the
science as per the Constitution, and let's move forward.
I understand; it is a frightening time. I get it, but we
are all more alike than we are different. We have more in
common than we have differences. So let's get together, and
this notion of trying to pass these enormous bills--I don't
work in your world, but if we can pass a few bills and chip
away--you know, the longest journey begins with a single step--
perhaps we can get things done.
But I just encourage everyone to realize how serious this
problem of climate change is, how it affects everyone on Earth,
and how we have got to work together to move forward.
Everything is bad when we let these climate effects affect so
many people.
Ms. Barragan. Thank you, Mr. Nye. I could not agree with
you more, and it is hard when, in Congress, you have the leader
of one party say, ``Hey, we are just going to oppose everything
the President is trying to do,'' and that makes it more
challenging to reach that bipartisanship.
But I wholeheartedly support it and do hope that we get our
friends, as we have been hearing on this very hearing, on both
on sides of the aisle, talking about climate change and the
threat to our homeland. We have got to work together.
Mr. Nye, I want to go back to something you wrote in your
testimony about building utility systems that work all the time
and robust electric grids. One resilient solution I have
strongly supported is clean energy microgrids to help keep the
lights on when there are wide-spread power outages from a
disaster.
Can you talk about how clean energy microgrids can be a
resilience and climate solution?
Mr. Nye. Oh, that is a great question. There is a wonderful
analogy. When our electrical grid was created, we developed
power plants; the bigger, the more efficient they could be.
Well, now, with solar and wind and geothermal, the smaller, in
many regards, the more efficient they are.
In the same way, we hand a phone call from one cell to
another, a mobile phone goes from cell to cell, now with the
satellite systems, we will hand the internet from constellation
member to--satellite to satellite.
We can use that same sort of technology to have distributed
power generation on the roof of every, for example, big-box
store, and then connect it with a much more sophisticated set
of software systems, so that when the power is not available
one place, it is available somewhere else.
If you want to invest in something, and I hope we all do,
let's invest in battery technologies, let's invest in heat
storage and geothermal.
As I said earlier, I have met some people that make me
think that fusion is not as strange as it used to be.
So I would like to have us invest in all those things and
have the power distributed in a much more sophisticated way
than we do now.
Ms. Barragan. Thank you, Mr. Nye.
Mr. Brown, with the 1 minute left, can I also get your
perspective on clean energy microgrids as a resilience
solution?
Mr. Brown. Yes, Congresswoman, yes. I definitely think that
is needed. You know, we saw the impacts just a couple weeks ago
on the pipeline cyber attacks. So we need to focus on building
resilience, using the best technology possible, doing things a
different way.
During disasters, you know, first responders need these
tools in order to save lives, and so we need to make those
investments.
Any Federal support to support innovation on the State
level for implementing those strategies would be definitely
supported.
Ms. Barragan. Well, thank you for that, and thank you,
again, Chairwoman, for this hearing. I think we have heard a
little bit about how it is so important we invest in our
infrastructure, our critical infrastructure, in particular, and
what it means if it goes down, and what kind of a threat that
would be for the homeland and for being a terrorist threat.
With that, Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
Mrs. Demings. The gentlewoman yields back, and thank you so
much.
You know, I really appreciate all of the participants in
this hearing. This issue is real, and people expect for us to,
No. 1, acknowledge it, not just say something but to do
something. I want to thank all of you but particularly the
gentleman from Texas--Texas and Florida but all of you.
We would rather not go it alone, but we certainly have to
be prepared to go it alone because we have to do something
about this critical issue.
I don't see any more Members on my screen at least, so I
would just like to end with 2 additional questions if I may. I
did have to step out for a minute, so if we have discussed
this, please forgive me. But, recently, Secretary Mayorkas
announced the launch of the DHS Climate Change Action Group,
and we are excited about that commitment and really the
potential for what this group can do to address this issue. So
this question goes to all of the witnesses.
What issues would you recommend the group examine to help
our Nation confront the threats posed by the climate crisis,
and what are some of the actions you recommend the Department
of Homeland Security take to respond to the climate crisis? So,
Ms. Williams, we will start with you.
Ms. Williams. Thank you, ma'am. I do think that investment
in our critical lifeline infrastructure is one of the most
important focuses that we can have with regard to climate
impacts and disaster impacts.
One of the things that does concern me is making sure that
disaster impacts and severe catastrophic weather is something
that is at the forefront of the homeland security conversation
because when our communities aren't safe, our homeland is not
safe. With those increased vulnerabilities, we must--must--
tackle that.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much.
Ms. Hill.
Ms. Hill. Yes. Well, I led the creation of the DHS Roadmap
for Climate Adaptation for President Obama. There are a number
of things that the Department could immediately do. The thing
that I would call out is the Department should be a leader in
this space. Of all our Departments across the Federal
Government, it has the broadest reach, the deepest reach, into
our State, local, Tribal leaders. Those communities, everyone
needs assistance.
Risk communication, understanding how to bolster critical
infrastructure, deal with cascading impacts of climate change,
and the DHS should step forward and lead among its fellow
Federal agencies to accomplish real resilience for the United
States, including that National resilience plan that you
mentioned, Chairwoman Demings.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much, Ms. Hill.
Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Chairwoman. I really believe the
Federal Government, and DHS in particular, can support State,
local, and Tribal Governments with additional resources and
technical assistance, streamline some of their processes to get
resources to communities that need the support the most, the
marginalized communities, the front-line communities, that are
going to continue to face the greatest impacts of climate
change as we move forward.
Mrs. Demings. Mr. Nye, you talked earlier about, you know,
looking at other countries. Yes, we need to do that, but the
United States should be a world leader on this issue. What
would your answer be to this question?
Mr. Nye. Let's be a world leader. What I am hoping is that
we will cultivate a generation of civil servants, that people
believe in and trust, and the civil servants in this case are
people that do land-use planning, people that fund the robust
electrical grid that has distributed generation sources, and
hiring the kind of engineers, coders, developers, who will
prevent a cyber attack of any kind.
They would work for the U.S. Government. They would take
pride in their work. We would trust them. They would prefer to
work for the Government rather than the private sector because
of the job satisfaction you get from that.
Mrs. Demings. Ms. Jackson Lee, I see you.
Go ahead, Mr. Nye.
Mr. Nye. When I think about my colleagues in Denmark, a
friend of mine married a Danish guy because she says she could
live the American Dream. People are right now saying that
Venezuela is a model of socialism. Maybe. But in Denmark, they
have these distributed systems. They have public health care.
They have these things. And they have huge corporations.
So, if we were to invest in--I keep bringing up fusion--if
we were to invest a hundred million in fusion companies, then
private investors would show up after the Government has showed
leadership in this. That's an example, but we can do this.
Let's go.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much.
With the time that I have left, to all of the witnesses
again, what actions specifically do you think FEMA should take
to better address the climate crisis? FEMA. We will start with
you, Mr. Nye.
Mr. Nye. Distribute--make sure that people have access to
the internet so they know what is going on in the world----
Mrs. Demings. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Mr. Brown, we are going to go to you.
Mr. Brown. Thanks, Chairwoman. There are multiple reports
that talks about the inequities in FEMA programs that need to
be eliminated to support the marginalized communities that are
on the front line. I think addressing that will be the most
urgent issue.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you.
Ms. Hill.
Ms. Hill. Review all the programs in light of the risk
placed by climate change, as well as on the disproportionate
impact on certain communities in the United States.
Mrs. Demings. Ms. Williams.
Ms. Williams. I think all of that can be also summed up in
capacity and capability for our State, local, and Tribal
Governments. If they can't be successful, it doesn't matter how
many resources we throw at it. So that capability building is
just key and crux to this issue, and FEMA is in the best
position to do that.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you so much.
The Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms.
Jackson Lee, for 5 minutes.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Madam Chair, thank you so very much, and I
wish to raise my questions with Ms. Hill, and I will try to
combine them.
Whenever we begin to talk about climate change, opponents
consistently say that mitigation efforts are too costly. I
would like your response as to whether or not there is a cost-
benefit analysis in investing in mitigation.
Then, in your experience at DHS, do you perceive, as I do,
that the climate catastrophes really impact on domestic and
National security? If you could combine those questions, and
then I have another question. Thank you so very much. Ms. Hill.
Ms. Hill. Yes. For those who say that it is too costly to
reduce our emissions, I can only respond, look at the costs we
are already incurring right now from climate impacts, and as we
have heard, these impacts will worsen over time. They are
permanent, and they will cause lasting change.
Virtually every system we have depends on a stable climate.
We no longer have a stable climate. So we will have enormous
economic costs involved. When we have economic loss, we have
threats to the National security. We are seeing those play out
already across the globe, and it will be a challenge for the
United States to respond to the number of humanitarian crises
that we will see as a result of climate events.
We can't, in any way, respond to the type of events that we
will see, in a meaningful way, unless we cut our emissions, as
we have heard here today, so--military is already busy at work
preparing itself, but there is tremendous amounts to be done.
Our military installations are not operational and
effective yet in the face of what we will see. We will need to
bolster them as well at also an enormous cost.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Well, I think we will find out--if we can
educate the American public how broad the landscape is, that
climate change impacts their very life, their very degree of
security, their very bottom-line dollar, then maybe we would be
able to be very successful in going big on the American Jobs
Plan.
But I had to deal with, believe it or not, the question of
risk-mapping in my own community, dealing with a whole series
of neighborhoods that were mapped into a high flood area,
losing their property, in terms of its worth and asking them
literally to move out.
We gathered FEMA and began to be able to reorder that map
and save their homes, got them to shore up their homes, if you
will. So I would be interested in your testimony.
You state, the United States lacked comprehensive risk-
mapping that is sufficiently down-scaled to inform Americans. I
agree with you. Would you expand on that concept, please,
because I think that is extremely important? Thank you.
Ms. Hill. Well, thank you. Well, suppose you are a
homeowner or prospective renter or you are a part-time mayor of
a small town somewhere and you want to figure out what are the
risks I am going to face, my community faces, you cannot get an
answer to that today. In the world's wealthiest Nation, you
cannot get to a property-level answer.
You might be able to get it if you have a lot of money and
could pay a consultant, but that is no way for us to operate in
the United States. Everyone should be able to determine what is
ahead and then make better decisions going forward.
That will take an enormous investment by the Federal
Government, but it is one we need to make now, and we will see
if we don't, that we will have developed in areas that are at
greatest risk in ways that are risky, and then we will have
even greater economic impacts in the future. So it is a step,
very important step, the Nation needs to take now.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Nye, just a quick question to you.
Everybody says it is the buck, it is the buck, too expensive,
and we can't go big on the American Jobs Plan, dealing with
infrastructure, climate change, job creation.
What do we say to those who want to use money, as I have
asked Ms. Hill, to be an excuse for not going big on climate
infrastructure rebuilds?
Mr. Nye. Well, try what I say to all climate change--
sometimes they call themselves extreme skeptics. What is it
about it that you think is not true? What is it about the
situation you think that makes you mistrust all the world's
scientists?
Then, in Texas, you are the perfect--in a grim way--a very
good example of the money you could save by addressing climate
change. The estimates--the latest estimates of the last
blackout were $130 billion. That certainly could have been a
fraction of that. I have seen 2 numbers, but let's say about $4
billion, as a fraction of what it will ultimately cost to deal
with that.
By the way, we are all going to pay for it. It is the
United States. We are all in this together. So what we want to
do is anticipate this, not in a disrespectful way, but you
guys, we have got to take care of this. We got to take care of
each other. So, I say all the time, this is doable, and the
longest journey starts with a single step. Let's get going.
On the social justice issue, or whatever it is called--
diversity, inclusion, equity, intersectionality--everybody,
when you have people living near you who are disadvantaged, it
affects everybody's quality of life.
Certainly it affects the disadvantaged people, people who
live at lower elevations, the flood hits them harder, they have
to move and so on. But it affects everybody because we are in
this together, and we all end up having to take care of each
other.
Now this sounds like common sense, but I understand that
your job is quite difficult because you have to do these big
negotiations. But I want everybody to embrace the idea that
taking care of each other actually saves money. We actually
come out ahead when we anticipate these problems and address
them before there is a cold snap and the grid goes down.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you all for this very good
hearing. Thank you.
Mrs. Demings. Thank you. The gentlewoman's time has
expired.
With that, I want to thank the witnesses for their valuable
testimony and, to our Members, for your questions.
The Members of the subcommittee may have additional
questions for the witnesses, and we ask that you respond
expeditiously in writing to those questions.
Without objection, the committee record shall be kept open
for 10 days.
Without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned.
Thank you all so very much. Take care. Stay safe.
[Whereupon, at 4:03 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]