Deep Dive: Natural Disaster Response, Planning, and Spending

No area of federal spending so directly mirrors the escalating climate change crisis than disaster spending. On a cost-adjusted basis, billion-dollar disasters in the U.S. have increased from on average 2.9 per year at an average cost of $17.8 billion in the 1980s to 16.2 disasters per year at an average annual cost of $121.4 billion from 2016-2020.

Federal floodplain policy and management has enabled unwise development that ironically contributes to catastrophic events.

From both a human and taxpayer perspective, mitigation and resilience are better ways to spend tax dollars than just responding to disasters. Federal agencies engaging in disaster response should use recovery efforts to “pre-spond” to inevitable future disasters.

The goal must be risk management and mitigation strategies that enable communities, infrastructure, and industries to become more resilient, face less risk, and better adapt to and mitigate future costs and damages of climate change.

Read more:

‘Presponding’ to disasters saves lives and money: An op-ed in Newsday on the importance of thinking ahead to save lives and protect property by creating more resilient communities that can withstand the onslaught of intense hurricanes and other natural disasters.
Hurricane Lessons (Re)Learned: A weekly wastebasket on why every dollar spent post-disaster must prespond to future disasters and make those communities and people safer.
Budget Watchdog, All Federal — Ep. 28: Why Disaster Dollars Are Different: A podcast episode on the role the federal government plays in ensuring communities have their own plans in place that are tailored to the risks and opportunities every disaster presents.
Climate Disclosures are Good for Taxpayers: A weekly wastebasket on the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)’s proposed requiring climate-related disclosures and why it will benefit taxpayers and the climate.
Updated: Why Disaster Spending? Taxpayers Already Created a Generous Safety Net for Agriculture: An analysis of federally funded agricultural disaster programs.
Reconciliation and Budgeting Disasters: A weekly wastebasket on disaster spending in the FY22 reconciliation and infrastructure bills.
Budget Watchdog, All Federal — Episode 7: Wading Through Federal Disaster Policy and Programs: A podcast episode about the National Flood Insurance Program and the Community Development Block Grant – Disaster Recovery program.
TCS Testimony to Committee on Financial Services: A Congressional testimony to the Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on House, Community Development and Insurance hearing “Built to Last: Examining Housing Resilience in the Face of Climate Change.”
Better Budgeting, Better Disaster Preparation: A Weekly wastebasket on mitigating natural disaster risk through better planning and building decisions.

Deep Dive: Natural Disaster Response, Planning, and Spending

Federal floodplain policy and management has enabled unwise development that ironically contributes to catastrophic events.

What FEMA’s dwindling funds mean for the next disaster

Disasters Compel the Nation to Improve

When the Forecast Isn’t the Only Storm Brewing

From both a human and taxpayer perspective, mitigation and resilience are better ways to spend tax dollars than just responding to disasters. Federal agencies engaging in disaster response should use recovery efforts to “pre-spond” to inevitable future disasters.

The goal must be risk management and mitigation strategies that enable communities, infrastructure, and industries to become more resilient, face less risk, and better adapt to and mitigate future costs and damages of climate change.

SUPPORT TAXPAYERS FOR COMMON SENSE