Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Requires OMB, with Treasury and covered federal agencies, to create a public subpage on the FFATA website for disaster assistance transparency. Covered agencies must post quarterly, machine-readable data on disaster funding totals, obligations, and detailed project-level information.
Transparency benefits versus added federal administrative burden
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear administrative requirement to create a FFATA-hosted subpage and obligates covered agencies to publish specified quarterly, machine-readable disaster-assistance data, with identified responsible entities and basic definitions.
Requires OMB, with Treasury and covered federal agencies, to create a public subpage on the FFATA website for disaster assistance transparency.
Covered agencies must post quarterly, machine-readable data on disaster funding totals, obligations, and detailed project-level information.
Agencies must issue guidance and OMB may contract with a private entity to develop the subpage.
Low-controversy, technocratic transparency measure with modest administrative burdens increases prospects, though implementation costs and Senate process pose risks.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear administrative requirement to create a FFATA-hosted subpage and obligates covered agencies to publish specified quarterly, machine-readable disaster-assistance data, with identified responsible entities and basic definitions.
Transparency benefits versus added federal administrative burden
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Transparency benefits versus added federal administrative burden
Generally supportive because the bill expands transparency about where federal disaster dollars go.
Views it as strengthening accountability, aiding equitable recovery, and enabling public and research scrutiny.
May seek stronger enforcement, accessibility, and protections for marginalized communities in the data.
Supportive of increased transparency but pragmatic about implementation costs and duplication.
Sees value in accountability but wants clear standards, funding, and coordination with existing reporting systems.
Would favor a phased rollout and measurable compliance mechanisms.
Mixed to somewhat opposed: supports accountability in principle but worries about new federal mandates and burdens.
Concerned about expanded bureaucracy, data sensitivity, duplication, and potential political misuse of detailed reporting.
Would seek limits on scope and protections for recipients.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Low-controversy, technocratic transparency measure with modest administrative burdens increases prospects, though implementation costs and Senate process pose risks.
The House fast-tracked this bill — skipping normal debate — and it passed with a two-thirds majority. It now moves to the Senate.
Suspending the rules allows the House to bypass normal debate procedures and pass a bill immediately with a two-thirds vote.
Transparency benefits versus added federal administrative burden
Low-controversy, technocratic transparency measure with modest administrative burdens increases prospects, though implementation costs and…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear administrative requirement to create a FFATA-hosted subpage and obligates covered agencies to publish specified quarterly, machine-readable disast…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.