[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 51 (Thursday, March 26, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2047-S2048]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Kirk):
  S. 870. A bill to require rulemaking by the Administrator of the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency to address considerations in 
evaluating the need for public and individual disaster assistance, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am proud to introduce today a bill to 
try to bring some transparency and fairness into FEMA's disaster 
declaration process. It is the Fairness in Federal Disaster 
Declarations Act.
  The inspiration for the bill was a tragic one. On February 29, 2012, 
leap day, a category F-4 tornado tore through southeastern Illinois, 
causing damage in 11 Illinois counties and causing major damage in the 
small towns of Harrisburg and Ridgway. Eight people in Harrisburg, 
alone, died in the event and 15 people were killed in total. Winds 
reached 175-miles per hour. It is not too much of a stretch to say 
these two small towns were almost wiped off the map.
  Requests for Federal assistance after a disaster are made by the 
Governor of each State. The state emergency management agency typically 
does a preliminary damage assessment and then the Governor decides 
whether State resources are adequate to absorb the costs of clean up 
and recovery. In the case of the Harrisburg and Ridgway tornado, the 
Governor's request for federal emergency designation for Individual 
Assistance was denied, as was the State's appeal of that decision. With 
that denial, individuals whose homes or properties were damaged were 
precluded from direct federal help.
  I asked FEMA why it denied the Governor's request--which was 
supported by my colleague Senator Kirk and me, along with the entire 
Illinois delegation--and we were told it was because the disaster did 
not meet or exceed the State's per capita. In other words, because 
Illinois is a highly populous state, it is presumed it can absorb the 
costs of cleanup and recovery from disasters up to a certain level. 
FEMA said the deadly tornado event did not exceed the state's presumed 
capacity.
  Currently, FEMA multiplies the number of people in a state by $1.35 
to determine a threshold of the amount of damage a state would have to 
have incurred to be considered for Assistance. In Illinois, that figure 
is about $18 million. Well, Harrisburg, Ridgway, and the surrounding 
communities had about $5.5 million in Public Assistance damages. $5.5 
million is a lot of loss, particularly in a rural area--but not enough 
to qualify for Federal assistance under FEMA' s rules.
  From 2002 to 2015, Illinois was denied federal disaster assistance 
seven times. Texas was denied thirteen times--for damage caused by 
everything from

[[Page S2048]]

wildfires to tropical storms. Florida was denied Federal disaster 
assistance eight times during that 13-year period, and California, New 
Jersey, and New York were each denied four times. FEMA's formula does 
not work for large, populous states, particularly those with a 
concentrated urban area, like Illinois.
  Although the ultimate decision whether to award Federal assistance is 
made by the President, by statute, under the Stafford Act, FEMA is 
required to consider six factors when determining whether assistance is 
warranted. After the Harrisburg and Ridgway tornado, we pushed FEMA a 
little harder and asked what else, in addition to the per capita, was 
considered in the denial. After all, 15-people died in the event and 
the damage was startling. We were told that specifics of FEMA's 
analysis is not public and wouldn't be disclosed.
  Illinois ran into the same issue in November 2013 when, once again, 
tornadoes swept through the State. This time six people were killed and 
whole neighborhoods were nearly destroyed. The Cities of Washington, 
Gifford, and New Minden, Illinois, experienced the worst tornado damage 
I have ever seen. Public infrastructure was decimated, but because 
Illinois did not meet one of FEMA's criteria, we were denied Federal 
Public Assistance. These events inspired my colleague, Senator Kirk, 
and me to introduce a bill to try to build in a bit more transparency 
and fairness into FEMA's process.
  The Fairness in Federal Disaster Declaration seeks to improve the 
disaster analysis by assigning a value to each of the factors FEMA must 
consider when determining whether Federal disaster assistance will be 
made available. When it comes to Individual Assistance--funding to help 
people repair and rebuild their homes--the breakdown would be as 
follows:
  Concentration damages--the density of damage in an individual 
community--would be considered 20 percent, Trauma--the loss of life and 
injuries and the disruption of normal community functions--would be 20 
percent of the analysis, Special Populations--including the age income 
of the residents, the amount of home ownership, etc.--would comprise 20 
percent, Voluntary agency assistance--a consideration of what the 
volunteer and charitable groups are providing--would make up 5 percent, 
the amount of Insurance coverage--20 percent, and the average amount of 
individual assistance by State, which includes the per capita 
analysis--would make up 5 percent of the analysis.
  The bill also would add a seventh consideration to FEMA's metrics--
the economics of the area, which will receive 10 percent consideration. 
This includes factors such as the local assessable tax base, the median 
income as it compares to that of the state, and the poverty rate as it 
compares to that of the state.
  For Federal Public Assistance, the breakdown would be similar, with a 
greater emphasis placed on the Localized Impacts of the disaster, which 
would warrant 40 percent of the analysis.
  It is reasonable that FEMA should take into consideration the size of 
the state requesting assistance, but as the regulations stand, large 
states are being penalized. Assigning values to the factors will help 
ensure that the damage to the specific community weighs more than the 
state's population. Illinois is a relatively large State, 
geographically, and has a concentrated urban area. The State--
particularly downstate--is being punished for this fact.
  If the Cities of Washington and Gifford, and Harrisburg and Ridgway, 
do not qualify under FEMA's current criteria for federal assistance, 
something is wrong. This legislation is necessary because the way FEMA 
evaluates whether to declare an area a Federal disaster is not working. 
It is done behind closed doors and it works against states with large 
populations.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 870

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Fairness in Federal Disaster 
     Declarations Act of 2015''.

     SEC. 2. REGULATORY ACTION REQUIRED.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 120 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency (in this Act referred to as the 
     ``Administrator'' and ``FEMA'', respectively) shall amend the 
     rules of the Administrator under section 206.48 of title 44, 
     Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect on the date of 
     enactment of this Act, in accordance with the provisions of 
     this Act.
       (b) New Criteria Required.--The amended rules issued under 
     subsection (a) shall provide for the following:
       (1) Public assistance program.--Such rules shall provide 
     that, with respect to the evaluation of the need for public 
     assistance--
       (A) specific weighted valuations shall be assigned to each 
     criterion, as follows--
       (i) estimated cost of the assistance, 10 percent;
       (ii) localized impacts, 40 percent;
       (iii) insurance coverage in force, 10 percent;
       (iv) hazard mitigation, 10 percent;
       (v) recent multiple disasters, 10 percent;
       (vi) programs of other Federal assistance, 10 percent; and
       (vii) economic circumstances described in subparagraph (B), 
     10 percent; and
       (B) FEMA shall consider the economic circumstances of--
       (i) the local economy of the affected area, including 
     factors such as the local assessable tax base and local sales 
     tax, the median income as it compares to that of the State, 
     and the poverty rate as it compares to that of the State; and
       (ii) the economy of the State, including factors such as 
     the unemployment rate of the State, as compared to the 
     national unemployment rate.
       (2) Individual assistance program.--Such rules shall 
     provide that, with respect to the evaluation of the severity, 
     magnitude, and impact of the disaster and the evaluation of 
     the need for assistance to individuals--
       (A) specific weighted valuations shall be assigned to each 
     criterion, as follows--
       (i) concentration of damages, 20 percent;
       (ii) trauma, 20 percent;
       (iii) special populations, 20 percent;
       (iv) voluntary agency assistance, 10 percent;
       (v) insurance, 20 percent;
       (vi) average amount of individual assistance by State, 5 
     percent; and
       (vii) economic considerations described in subparagraph 
     (B), 5 percent; and
       (B) FEMA shall consider the economic circumstances of the 
     affected area, including factors such as the local assessable 
     tax base and local sales tax, the median income as it 
     compares to that of the State, and the poverty rate as it 
     compares to that of the State.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amended rules issued under 
     subsection (a) shall apply to any disaster for which a 
     Governor requested a major disaster declaration under the 
     Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) and was denied on or after 
     January 1, 2012.
                                 ______