H.R. 437 (119th)Bill Overview

SNOW Act of 2025

Emergency Management|Emergency Management
Cosponsors
Support
Democratic
Introduced
Jan 15, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

Amends the Stafford Act to expand federal disaster assistance for winter storms, define winter storms, allow hazard mitigation funds to buy snow-removal equipment, create a waiver process to relax snowfall and statewide damage thresholds for disaster declarations under certain conditions, and raise the minimum federal cost share to 75 percent (90 percent in rural or disadvantaged areas) for several assistance programs.

Why people may split

Role of federal government versus state/local responsibility

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill effects substantive statutory changes to the Stafford Act by expanding winter-storm-related assistance, defining 'winter storm', creating a waiver pathway for threshold requirements, and increasing federal cost shares for rural or disadvantaged areas while integrating those changes into existing statutory sections.

Amends the Stafford Act to expand federal disaster assistance for winter storms, define winter storms, allow hazard mitigation funds to buy snow-removal equipment, create a waiver process to relax snowfall and statewide damage thresholds for disaster declarations under certain conditions, and raise the minimum federal cost share to 75 percent (90 percent in rural or disadvantaged areas) for several assistance programs.

Passage55/100

Technocratic, narrow disaster-relief bill has bipartisan potential but adds federal cost and waiver powers that raise legislative scrutiny.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill effects substantive statutory changes to the Stafford Act by expanding winter-storm-related assistance, defining 'winter storm', creating a waiver pathway for threshold requirements, and increasing federal cost shares for rural or disadvantaged areas while integrating those changes into existing statutory sections.

Contention65/100

Role of federal government versus state/local responsibility

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Local governmentsFederal agencies · Local governments

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Local governmentsIncreases federal funding share for disaster response, reducing local fiscal burdens in qualifying areas.
  • Potential benefitEnables hazard mitigation purchases like snow removal equipment, potentially reducing future winter storm damage.
  • Potential benefitAllows faster or more frequent major disaster declarations for qualifying winter storms via waiver provisions.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesRaises Federal spending exposure through higher cost‑share minimums and expanded program eligibility.
  • Local governmentsCould reduce state or local incentives to invest in mitigation if federal coverage becomes more generous.
  • Potential burdenRequires FEMA rulemaking and new administrative processes, increasing regulatory and implementation burden.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Role of federal government versus state/local responsibility
Progressive85%

Likely supportive because the bill increases federal aid to low‑income and rural communities, improves resilience, and explicitly allows mitigation equipment purchases.

It targets assistance to disadvantaged areas and broadens eligibility for winter‑storm impacts.

Leans supportive
Centrist70%

Will view the bill as a practical, incremental improvement to disaster response for winter storms but will want clear rules, cost estimates, and guardrails against misuse.

Generally favorable if oversight and fiscal controls are added.

Leans supportive
Conservative30%

Skeptical because it expands federal authority, raises federal cost shares, and creates waiver pathways that may reduce state responsibility.

Might accept targeted disaster help but opposes expanding long‑term federal roles.

Likely resistant
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood55/100

Technocratic, narrow disaster-relief bill has bipartisan potential but adds federal cost and waiver powers that raise legislative scrutiny.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • Estimated budgetary cost and CBO score not included
  • Level of bipartisan support in relevant committees
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Role of federal government versus state/local responsibility

Technocratic, narrow disaster-relief bill has bipartisan potential but adds federal cost and waiver powers that raise legislative scrutiny.

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill effects substantive statutory changes to the Stafford Act by expanding winter-storm-related assistance, defining 'winter storm', creating a waiver pathway for thresho…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis