SMART Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 4426
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Emergency Management
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-07-17: Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.
- Last Updated
- 2025-11-01T08:05:35Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Studying Mitigation And Reporting Transparently Act (SMART Act) aims to evaluate the benefits of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-funded programs that help prevent or reduce damage from natural disasters, such as floods or wildfires. These programs, known as hazard mitigation activities, involve actions like building stronger infrastructure or relocating at-risk structures. The legislation requires FEMA to study how effective these programs are, their long-term cost savings, and their broader strategic effects across the U.S.
Key Provisions
- Study Requirements: FEMA's Administrator must conduct a comprehensive study assessing:
- How mitigation reduces costs for disaster response and recovery (both federal and non-federal).
- Improvements in community readiness for natural hazards.
- Better access and lower costs for insurance related to hazards.
- Support for keeping essential services and infrastructure running during disasters.
- Overall long-term savings and return on investment.
- Methodology: The study includes:
- Number-based (quantitative) and descriptive (qualitative) analyses of prevented losses.
- Reviews of how mitigation affects community risk levels, insurance pricing, and coverage rates.
- Real-world examples (case studies) from different regions and disaster types.
- Analysis of how these activities lower federal disaster costs.
- Data and Consultation: Uses information from federal, state, local, and Tribal sources; independent studies; and FEMA's own records. FEMA may seek advice from the Government Accountability Office (an independent congressional watchdog), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (a federal research agency), various governments, and academic experts.
- Reporting to Congress: FEMA must submit an initial report within 18 months of the law's enactment, followed by annual reports to key House and Senate committees. Reports cover study findings, suggestions for better program design and oversight, and ideas for new laws or administrative changes.
- Public Access and Updates:
- The first study's results must be posted online in an easy-to-search format within 2 years, including summaries, data visuals (like maps), and explanations of methods and limitations (while protecting privacy and security).
- Annual studies and reports must incorporate new data and feedback, with reports made public within 60 days of submission to Congress.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
This bill does not amend or repeal any current laws. Instead, it introduces a new mandate for ongoing FEMA studies and public reporting on hazard mitigation programs, which were previously evaluated on an ad-hoc basis without a standardized, annual requirement.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: FEMA will face increased administrative workload for conducting studies, consulting experts, and producing reports, potentially leading to more efficient use of funds if recommendations are implemented. Other agencies, like those providing data, may need to share information more regularly.
- Citizens and Communities: Could result in stronger evidence for expanding effective mitigation, reducing future disaster damages and recovery costs for individuals and local areas. Improved insurance affordability and community preparedness may benefit residents in high-risk zones, such as coastal or wildfire-prone regions.
- International Relations: No direct impacts, as the focus is domestic disaster mitigation.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- FEMA and Federal Agencies: Primary implementers, responsible for studies and reporting.
- State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial Governments: Providers of data and potential beneficiaries of improved programs.
- Congressional Committees: Recipients of reports, influencing future funding and policy.
- Citizens and Communities: Especially those in disaster-vulnerable areas, who may see enhanced protection and lower costs.
- Insurers and Researchers: Affected through analyses of insurance impacts and academic consultations.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Promotes transparency by requiring public access to non-sensitive data, aligning with federal open-government laws like the Freedom of Information Act. No new enforcement powers or penalties are created.
- Constitutional: Supports congressional oversight of executive agencies (FEMA) without infringing on separation of powers, as it directs reporting without mandating specific actions.
- Political: Encourages evidence-based decision-making on disaster policy, potentially bridging partisan divides on federal spending by highlighting cost savings. It could influence budget debates in Congress, emphasizing prevention over reaction to disasters.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Bresnahan, Robert P. [R-PA-8]
Cosponsors (4)
Rep. Garamendi, John [D-CA-8], Rep. Stanton, Greg [D-AZ-4], Rep. Vindman, Eugene Simon [D-VA-7], Rep. Gillen, Laura [D-NY-4]
Recent Actions
- 2025-07-17: Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.
- 2025-07-16: Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
- 2025-07-16: Introduced in House
- 2025-07-16: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Studying Mitigation And Reporting Transparently Act — issued 2025-07-16 — PDF (5 pages)