Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.
Creates a pilot Mudslide Recovery Grant Program, to be jointly run by the Interior Secretary and the DHS Secretary (through FEMA), providing competitive grants to repair damage from mudslides that occur after wildland fires. Eligible applicants include States, Tribes, state/tribal forestry agencies, local governments, fire departments, and nonprofit organizations (including homeowner associations).
Funding adequacy: liberals see it as useful but small; conservatives see unnecessary federal spending.
Narrow, low‑cost disaster mitigation bills typically clear the House with bipartisan support.
Creates a pilot Mudslide Recovery Grant Program, to be jointly run by the Interior Secretary and the DHS Secretary (through FEMA), providing competitive grants to repair damage from mudslides that occur after wildland fires.
Eligible applicants include States, Tribes, state/tribal forestry agencies, local governments, fire departments, and nonprofit organizations (including homeowner associations).
The program must be established within 180 days of enactment and is authorized $5,000,000 annually for fiscal years 2026–2032.
Small, targeted, noncontroversial grant program with modest funding authorization; main barrier is appropriation and potential program overlap questions.
How solid the drafting looks.
Funding adequacy: liberals see it as useful but small; conservatives see unnecessary federal spending.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Funding adequacy: liberals see it as useful but small; conservatives see unnecessary federal spending.
Likely supportive because the bill funds community resilience and post-fire recovery, including Tribal and nonprofit inclusion.
May view the pilot as a useful start but critique the funding level and demand equity, climate adaptation, and strong community prioritization.
Generally favorable to a modest, time-limited pilot that tests targeted mitigation approaches.
Will want clarity on coordination with existing FEMA programs, measurable outcomes, and oversight to avoid duplication and ensure cost-effectiveness.
Cautiously skeptical: the goal of mudslide mitigation is acceptable, but the creation of a new federal grant program raises concerns about federal overreach, duplication, and stewardship of taxpayer dollars.
Some conservatives may prefer state-led or private solutions.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Small, targeted, noncontroversial grant program with modest funding authorization; main barrier is appropriation and potential program overlap questions.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Funding adequacy: liberals see it as useful but small; conservatives see unnecessary federal spending.
Small, targeted, noncontroversial grant program with modest funding authorization; main barrier is appropriation and potential program over…
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Mudslide Recovery Act.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.