Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.
The bill amends section 102(2) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to add algal blooms to the definition of a "major disaster." By doing so, it would make harmful algal bloom events eligible for federal disaster declarations and associated Stafford Act assistance.
Liberals emphasize public-health and environmental justice benefits
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive policy change that accomplishes a single, clear statutory amendment but provides minimal supporting detail.
The bill amends section 102(2) of the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to add algal blooms to the definition of a "major disaster." By doing so, it would make harmful algal bloom events eligible for federal disaster declarations and associated Stafford Act assistance.
The text does not appropriate funds or define implementation details; it only changes the statutory definition.
Small, technical expansion with limited controversy improves chances, but unclear fiscal impact and absence of implementing detail leave room for delay or opposition.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive policy change that accomplishes a single, clear statutory amendment but provides minimal supporting detail.
Liberals emphasize public-health and environmental justice benefits
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize public-health and environmental justice benefits
Likely supportive because it recognizes harmful algal blooms as federally actionable disasters tied to public health and environmental justice.
Views federal eligibility as a necessary step to unlock relief, cleanup, and support for affected communities, especially low-income and frontline populations.
Cautiously favorable: it pragmatically expands disaster eligibility to a plausible hazard, but needs clearer definitions and fiscal guardrails.
Would support if accompanied by objective triggers, cost-sharing rules, and oversight to limit misuse.
Likely skeptical or opposed because it expands the federal disaster definition, potentially increasing federal spending and bureaucratic reach.
Prefers state and local solutions and accountability from polluters rather than broader federal disaster authority.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Small, technical expansion with limited controversy improves chances, but unclear fiscal impact and absence of implementing detail leave room for delay or opposition.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize public-health and environmental justice benefits
Small, technical expansion with limited controversy improves chances, but unclear fiscal impact and absence of implementing detail leave ro…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive policy change that accomplishes a single, clear statutory amendment but provides minimal supporting detail.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.