HR-3347-119
Referred to the Subcommittee on Emergency Management and Technology.
Sponsored by Clay Higgins (R-LA)
What it does
This bill would abolish the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) two years after enactment and transfer its legal functions to the President. It would replace FEMA with a block grant program administered by the Treasury Department, under which each state would receive annual funding for disaster preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. States would be required to submit annual emergency management plans for Treasury approval and post-year reports on how funds were used. The block grant program would automatically terminate four years after Treasury issues its allocation formula rule.
Who benefits
State governments, which would gain direct control over disaster funding and management decisions with fewer federal mandates. State emergency management agencies, which would have more flexibility in how they allocate resources. Smaller or lower-risk states that may receive proportionally more funding under a formula that accounts for population and economic need. Local governments and tribal authorities that coordinate directly with states rather than a federal agency. Taxpayers in states that argue they currently subsidize disaster-prone states under the current FEMA model.
Who is hurt
Disaster survivors in states with weaker emergency management capacity, who may receive less consistent or less expert assistance than under a federal system. Residents of high-frequency disaster states (e.g., hurricane-prone Gulf Coast, earthquake-prone Pacific Coast) if the formula does not fully account for catastrophic but infrequent events. FEMA employees, whose jobs would be eliminated or restructured. Tribal nations, which currently have a direct federal relationship with FEMA and would be subordinated to state coordination. Territories and the District of Columbia, which are included in the grant program but may have less political leverage with Treasury than states. Nonprofit and voluntary organizations that partner with FEMA under existing frameworks, which would need to renegotiate relationships with 50+ state agencies.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that FEMA's centralized model has produced well-documented failures — including slow responses to Hurricane Katrina (2005) and Hurricane Maria (2017) — and that states are better positioned to understand and respond to their own unique disaster risks. They contend that block grants would eliminate bureaucratic delays, reduce administrative overhead, and allow states to pre-position resources and tailor plans to local conditions rather than waiting for federal declarations. They further argue that the current system creates a moral hazard by encouraging states to underfund their own preparedness in anticipation of federal bailouts.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that catastrophic disasters routinely exceed any single state's financial and logistical capacity, and that block grants — which terminate after four years — cannot provide the surge funding needed for events like Hurricane Katrina or the 2011 Joplin tornado. They contend that FEMA's national coordination infrastructure, including its logistics networks, trained personnel, and mutual aid frameworks, cannot be replicated at the state level with a fixed annual grant. They further argue that the bill's duplication-of-benefits clause and plan-approval requirement could delay or deny funding to states in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, precisely when speed is most critical.
Constitutional context
Congress has broad authority to appropriate funds for disaster relief under the Spending Clause (Art. I, §8) and the General Welfare Clause. The transfer of all FEMA functions to the President raises questions under the Appointments Clause and the Take Care Clause (Art. II, §3), as it is unclear whether the President can personally exercise all statutory functions previously delegated to a confirmed agency head without further congressional direction or delegation.
Checks and balances
The Executive branch gains authority, as FEMA's functions transfer directly to the President and Treasury gains new grant administration power; Congress retains oversight through annual audit reports to four committees and controls total appropriations levels, but the bill does not specify a funding amount, leaving the program's scale to future appropriations.
Historical precedent
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, established in 1974, is a direct precedent for replacing categorical federal programs with flexible state block grants, though it has not been applied to emergency management at this scale.