HR-10120-119
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Sponsored by Donald Beyer (D-VA)
What it does
This bill would establish a National Flood Impact Reduction and Resilience Program to coordinate federal efforts to reduce flood-related deaths and property loss. It creates an Interagency Coordinating Committee chaired by the Army Corps of Engineers Chief, with members from FEMA, NIST, USGS, NOAA, OSTP, and OMB, tasked with developing strategic plans, a coordinated budget, and interagency agreements, plus an Advisory Committee of at least 11 outside experts to assess program effectiveness.
Who benefits
Communities in flood-prone areas who could benefit from improved flood mapping, standards, and coordinated federal response; state and local governments and floodplain managers who would gain access to grants, technical assistance, and standardized guidance; architects, engineers, and building code organizations who would help shape new voluntary standards; academic and research institutions that may receive funding for flood-related research.
Who is hurt
Federal agencies (Army Corps, FEMA, NIST, USGS, NOAA) that would bear new administrative and coordination burdens and must redirect staff time and budget planning to program duties; taxpayers who would fund the new program's grants, research, and administrative structure; property developers or local governments that decline to adopt the voluntary standards may face reputational or market pressure without direct legal mandate.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that flood damage already costs the United States several billion dollars annually and is expected to worsen with increased precipitation and sea-level rise, making coordinated federal action necessary rather than allowing agencies to work in silos. They contend that establishing shared standards, improved flood maps, and an advisory body of outside experts would help state and local governments make better floodplain management decisions and reduce future losses of life and property.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that creating another interagency committee and advisory body risks duplicating work already done by FEMA, NOAA, and the Army Corps individually, adding bureaucratic layers without guaranteed funding or enforcement authority since the standards remain voluntary. They contend that without clear appropriations attached to this authorization, the program could become an unfunded coordination exercise that consumes agency staff time without producing measurable reductions in flood losses.
Constitutional context
Congress has broad authority under the Spending Clause and its Article I power to establish federal agencies and coordinate interstate flood management, which implicates interstate commerce given flooding's cross-border economic effects; this bill raises no significant constitutional question beyond Congress's ordinary authority to create administrative programs and committees.
Checks and balances
Congress creates and funds the program through authorization and appropriations, while the executive branch (led by the Army Corps and other named agencies) implements it; Congress retains oversight through the annual budget submission and reporting requirements built into the bill.
Historical precedent
This bill's structure closely resembles the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program and National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program, which established similar interagency coordinating committees for natural hazard mitigation.