Based on your readings thus far from the text and your own research discuss the Stafford Act, the
Disaster Mitigation Act, and the National Flood Insurance Act. What are the benefits and
drawbacks if any of? Discuss the role of federalism in emergency management.
The Stafford Act (1988)
The Stafford Act is a Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act that was created in
1988 and named after Senator Robert Theodore Stafford of Vermont born in 1913 and died in
2006. The act gives the federal government the authority to assist states during emergencies and
it is a major legislation under which FEMA operates and provides a framework for continued
disaster relief. Due to how disasters negatively affect communities and individuals, the president
has the authority to issue a major presidential disaster or an emergency that initiates the
provisions under the Stafford Act. The president declares emergencies if incidents can cause
consequences for the nation and lives are at stake however a major disaster declaration can only
be declared if states request it (Islam & Jeffery, 2016, p.39). The funds that are used to aid states
affected by disasters are readily available and approved by Congress, but FEMA determines
whether to issue the declaration after a state has activated its emergency response plan and
requested help. FEMA coordinates the financial, logistic, and technical resources (Islam &
Jeffery, 2016, p. 38). The Stafford Act also provides a temporary waiver of Medicare and
Medicaid requirements and offers funds in the form of grants, low-cost loans, and housing
assistance to individuals affected by a disaster. In addition, Stafford Act provides reimbursements
to states that offered mutual aid to states affected by disaster (Islam &Jeffery, 2016, p.40).
The Disaster Mitigation Act (2000)
The Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) was signed into law in October 2000. It amended the
(Stafford Act) by creating the framework for the state, local, tribal, and territorial governments to
be part of hazard mitigation planning and to receive certain types of non-emergency disaster
assistance (FEMA, 2022). Before that, only states jurisdictions were required to have mitigation
plans in place, however in the DMA, jurisdictions (state, local, tribal, etc. governments) can
obtain funding from the Hazard Grant Program when there is an approved mitigation planning
and mitigation activities are based on identified risk before a disaster hits (Islam & Jeffery,
2016). The DMA provides the legal requirements through which all jurisdictions can access non-
emergency disaster assistance, including funding for mitigation projects from the federal
government. Some of the legal basis for developing these mitigation plans include public input
and inputs from neighboring jurisdictions in the mitigation plan for local governments (Islam &
Jeffery, 2016). Again, the mitigation plan must factor in a planning process, risk assessment, and
mitigation strategy and a mitigation plan review every three years to maintain its effectiveness.
According to Islam & Jeffery (2016, p.41), studies have proven that one of the cost-effective
mitigation plans implemented through the DMA is flood mitigation.
National Flood Insurance Act (1968).
The National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) was passed by Congress in 1968 because of
the frequent flooding of the Mississippi River and widespread damages from Hurricane Betsy in
1965 (Islam & Jeffery, 2016). Private insurance companies were reluctant to cover flood
damages before the NFIA (Islam & Jeffery, 2016). The act made insurance available for the first
time through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The National Flood Insurance
Reform Act of 1994 revised the federal flood insurance statutes to increase compliance with food
insurance requirements and participation in the NFIP to give additional income to the National
Flood Insurance Fund and to decrease the financial burden on the government.
The role of Federalism in emergency management.
Federalism is a system of government where sovereign power is divided between the
national government (federal) and some other local (state) governments (Victor, 2021). The core
ideals of federalism allow the United States to thrive by allowing each state’s self-governance to
tackle societal issues from its own unique angle. Federalism is a great check on the power of
larger states and prevents their views from entirely dominating those of smaller states in national
policies however during emergencies, federalism is not entirely effective - it creates a double-
edged sword with fatal consequences (Smoriarty, 2020). Scarvo et al. (2007) assert that
intergovernmental approaches to disaster management in the US are bombarded with
shortcomings. Crisis management in federalism is characterized by intergovernmental dynamics
such as a “top-down approach” where the national government takes control of the entire
recovery effort or disaster management due to the state and local government's unwillingness or
inability to tackle the serious crisis, or a “confusion approach” where there is little or no
coordination to the various efforts of governments to fully address the crisis and a “share
-governance approach” where the system work from the bottom-up (Scarvo et al., 2007). Events
like 9/11 and hurricane Katrina saw mixed approaches where the national government
mishandled emergency management due to a lack of coordination with the local governments.
Another instance is the covid -19 pandemic. The Covid-19 pandemic is an unprecedented
international event and the biggest public health crisis in the modern world that prompted
unparallel responses by the federal or national government and other states and local
governments in the USA. The country suffered some of the highest hits around the globe
(Chattopadhyay et al., 2021). Because federalism gives power to both the federal government
and the states there was no cohesiveness or collaboration. Each state chooses its response plan
with some of the states not even issuing a lockdown (Smoriarty, 2020).
The Bible says in Ecclesiastes 4: 9-12 that “two are better than one because they have a
good reward for their toil. For if they fall, one will lift his fellow. But woe to him who is alone
when he falls and has not another to lift him up! Again, if two lie together, they keep warm, but
how can one keep warm alone? And though a man might prevail against one who is alone, two
will withstand him—a threefold cord is not quickly broken. The verse elaborates on the need for
all levels of government to work together during emergencies. Working together will yield better
mitigation plans which will facilitate better response plans and recovery which in turn can save
lives and properties.
References
Chattopadhyay, R., Knüpling, F., Chebenova, D., Whittington, L., & Gonzalez, P.
(2021). Federalism and the Response to COVID-19: A Comparative Analysis. Taylor & Francis.
FEMA. (2022, May 24). Regulations and Guidance. FEMA.Gov.
https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/risk-management/hazard-mitigation-
planning/regulations-guidance
Islam, T., & Jeffrey, R. (2016). Hazard Mitigation in Emergency Management (1st ed.).
Butterworth-Heinemann
Smoriarty. (2020, August 16). Federalism and its effects in crisis management. – Politics in the
Era of Global Pandemic. SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY POLITICAL SCIENCE AND LEGAL
STUDIES DEPARTMENT. https://sites.suffolk.edu/pandemicpolitics/2020/08/16/federalism-
and-its-effects-in-crisis-management/
Scavo, C., Kearney, R. C., & Kilroy, R. J. (2007). Challenges to Federalism: Homeland Security
and Disaster Response. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 38(1), 81–110.
https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjm029
Victor, J. N. (2021, January 29). US Federalism: Definition and Background. Wondrium Daily.
https://www.wondriumdaily.com/us-federalism-definition-and-background/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
