To amend section 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to require the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures, and for other purposes.

**Analysis of HR 2907: A Threat to Efficiency and Innovation**

The proposed bill, HR 2907, is a misguided attempt to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. The main purpose of this legislation is to require the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures, which would stifle innovation and hinder efficient disaster response.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The bill's primary objective is to mandate predisaster mitigation efforts, which would lead to increased government spending and bureaucratic red tape. This approach is antithetical to my think tank's research, which has consistently shown that market-driven solutions are more effective in mitigating disaster risks.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill amends Section 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by replacing "may" with "shall," effectively making predisaster mitigation assistance mandatory. This change would lead to a significant increase in government intervention, stifling private sector innovation and competition.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties include communities vulnerable to disaster damage, insurance companies, and private sector entities involved in disaster response and mitigation efforts. However, the real stakeholders are those who stand to gain from increased government spending and regulation – namely, bureaucrats, special interest groups, and crony capitalists.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact of this bill is a significant increase in government spending, estimated to be in the billions. This would lead to a misallocation of resources, as market-driven solutions are more effective in mitigating disaster risks. Furthermore, the mandatory predisaster mitigation measures would stifle innovation and hinder efficient disaster response.

In conclusion, HR 2907 is a threat to efficiency and innovation. As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I strongly advise against this legislation. Instead, we should focus on market-driven solutions that promote private sector innovation and competition in disaster response and mitigation efforts.

**Projected Impact on My Empire**

If passed, this bill would likely lead to increased regulatory hurdles for my companies involved in disaster response and mitigation efforts. Estimated losses: $500 million - $1 billion over the next 5 years. However, with strategic lobbying and influence peddling, I am confident that we can mitigate these risks and potentially even benefit from the increased government spending.

**Recommendation**

I recommend that policymakers reject this bill and instead focus on promoting private sector innovation and competition in disaster response and mitigation efforts. By doing so, we can create a more efficient and effective system that benefits all stakeholders, including my empire.

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a bill is a proposed law that must go through the legislative process to become an actual law. This one, HR 2907, aims to amend section 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to require the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures. Remember when we learned about the importance of checks and balances in government? This bill seeks to ensure that the executive branch takes proactive steps to mitigate disasters, rather than just reacting after they occur.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill makes two key changes to existing law:

1. It amends section 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by replacing "may" with "shall" in subsections (b) and (c). This means that the President is now required, rather than just authorized, to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures. 2. The bill also cites findings that highlight the importance of predisaster mitigation, including the fact that every $1 invested in mitigation saves up to $13 in disaster recovery costs.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties and stakeholders include:

* Communities vulnerable to disasters * State and local governments * The President and the executive branch * Taxpayers (who will benefit from reduced disaster recovery costs)

**Potential Impact & Implications:** If passed, this bill could have significant implications for disaster preparedness and response. By requiring the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures, it could help reduce the impact of disasters on communities and save taxpayer dollars in the long run.

Now, I know some of you might be thinking, "But wait, isn't this just common sense?" And to that, I say... exactly! This is precisely why we covered these concepts in 8th grade civics class. It's disappointing that we need to revisit these basics as adults, but I suppose it's better late than never.

As the bill makes its way through the legislative process, it will likely face scrutiny and debate. But for now, let's just focus on understanding what this bill is trying to accomplish. Next thing you know, I'll have to explain how a filibuster works...

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and listen closely, for I have uncovered the hidden agenda behind HR 2907, a bill masquerading as a benevolent effort to provide disaster relief assistance. But don't be fooled – this is just the tip of the iceberg.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** On the surface, HR 2907 appears to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to require the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures. Sounds noble, right? However, I've dug deeper, and it's clear that this bill is actually a Trojan horse for something far more sinister.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill changes the language of Section 203 from "may" to "shall," effectively mandating the President to provide assistance for predisaster mitigation measures. But what does this really mean? It means that the government is now empowered to intervene in local communities, dictating how they prepare for and respond to disasters. This is a classic example of incrementalism – slowly eroding individual freedoms under the guise of "helping."

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include local governments, communities vulnerable to disaster damage, and – you guessed it – the insurance industry. Ah-ha! Now we're getting somewhere. The fact that President Trump created the BRIC program in 2019, only for it to be cancelled in 2025, raises more questions than answers. What's really going on here? Is this a case of crony capitalism, where the government is colluding with insurance companies to reap profits from disaster relief efforts?

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The implications are far-reaching and chilling. By mandating predisaster mitigation measures, the government is essentially creating a new revenue stream for itself and its corporate partners. This bill will lead to increased federal control over local communities, further eroding individual liberties and property rights. And let's not forget the $4 billion in predisaster mitigation grants that were "clawed back" from vulnerable communities – a clear example of the government's true intentions.

In conclusion, my friends, HR 2907 is not what it seems. It's a wolf in sheep's clothing, designed to further consolidate power and control over our lives. Wake up, sheeple! The truth is out there, hidden in plain sight.

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, because we've got another doozy of a bill on our hands. The "Save BRIC Act" – sounds innocent enough, right? (wink) But trust me, this is just another example of the elites in Washington trying to control every aspect of our lives.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of HR 2907 is to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to require – yes, require! – the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures. Now, on the surface, this sounds like a noble cause. Who doesn't want to save lives and property from natural disasters? But let's dig deeper.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill changes the language of section 203 of the Stafford Act from "may" to "shall," effectively mandating that the President provide predisaster mitigation assistance. This is a classic case of government overreach, folks! The feds are essentially saying, "We know better than you how to prepare for disasters." Newsflash: we don't need more bureaucracy telling us what to do!

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** This bill affects communities vulnerable to disaster damage – you know, the ones that actually need help. But let's be real, this is just a Trojan horse for more government spending and control. The real beneficiaries are the bureaucrats and special interest groups who'll be lining their pockets with taxpayer dollars.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact of this bill will be twofold. On one hand, it might – might! – save some lives and property from disasters. But on the other hand, it's just another example of the government inserting itself into our daily lives, stifling freedom and innovation. And let's not forget the $4 billion in predisaster mitigation grants that were "wrongfully cancelled" (read: wisely cut) by the previous administration. This bill is essentially a power grab to restore those funds.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But what about all the scientific research showing that every dollar invested in predisaster mitigation saves up to $13 in disaster recovery costs?" Ah, folks, that's just fancy math designed to justify more government spending. Don't be fooled! This bill is a slippery slope towards socialism and – dare I say it? – tyranny.

(Outrageous tone) So, there you have it. The "Save BRIC Act" is just another example of the elites in Washington trying to control every aspect of our lives. We must stand strong against this government overreach and protect our freedom! (wink)

**Bill Summary: HR 2907 - Save Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Act (Save BRIC Act)**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of HR 2907 is to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to require the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures. The bill aims to promote proactive actions to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of future disasters.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill makes two key changes to existing law:

1. Section 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act is amended to require (rather than allow) the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures. 2. The bill reinstates the Building Resilient Communities and Infrastructure (BRIC) program, which was created in 2019 but cancelled in 2025.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties and stakeholders include:

1. Federal government agencies responsible for disaster relief and emergency assistance 2. State and local governments vulnerable to disasters 3. Communities at risk of disaster damage 4. Private sector entities involved in infrastructure development and construction 5. Insurance companies and policyholders

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact and implications of HR 2907 are significant:

1. **Increased investment in predisaster mitigation**: By requiring the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures, the bill encourages proactive investments in disaster resilience. 2. **Reduced disaster recovery costs**: According to scientific research, every $1 invested in predisaster mitigation saves up to $13 in disaster recovery costs. 3. **Enhanced community resilience**: The reinstatement of the BRIC program and mandatory mitigation requirements can help communities vulnerable to disasters become more resilient. 4. **Potential job creation and economic benefits**: Investing in predisaster mitigation measures can create jobs and stimulate local economies.

Overall, HR 2907 aims to promote a proactive approach to disaster management by investing in predisaster hazard mitigation measures, which can lead to significant cost savings, enhanced community resilience, and potential economic benefits.

Let's break down this gnarly bill, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This bill, the Save BRIC Act (HR 2907), is all about gettin' proactive with disaster mitigation, man. It aims to require the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures, which basically means takin' steps before a disaster hits to reduce damage and loss of life.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends Section 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, changin' "may" to "shall" in two key places. This means the President is no longer just allowed to provide assistance for predisaster mitigation; they're now required to do so. It's like, instead of just offerin' a helping hand, the government's gotta be all in on preventin' disasters.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** This bill affects communities vulnerable to disaster damage, bro – think coastal towns, flood-prone areas, and places with crazy weather patterns. It also impacts the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which is responsible for implementin' these mitigation measures. And, of course, it's got implications for taxpayers, since investin' in predisaster mitigation can save some serious cash in the long run.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The potential impact here is huge, dude. By requirin' the President to provide assistance for predisaster mitigation, this bill could help reduce the number of disasters and the damage they cause. It's like catchin' a wave before it breaks – you can ride it out instead of gettin' wiped out.

According to the bill, every $1 invested in predisaster mitigation saves up to $13 in disaster recovery costs. That's some serious ROI, bro! And with 27 weather and climate disasters causin' over $1 billion in damages in 2024 alone, this bill could help prevent some major financial hits.

But here's the thing: this bill is also a response to the cancellation of the BRIC program in 2025, which had already allocated over $4 billion for predisaster mitigation grants. So, it's like, the government's tryin' to make up for lost time and get back on track with disaster prevention.

Anyway, that's the lowdown on HR 2907, bro. It's all about bein' proactive and savin' lives – and cash – by mitigatin' disasters before they happen.

**Bill Analysis: HR 2907 - Save BRIC Act**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Save Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Act, introduced by Reps. Stanton and Bresnahan, aims to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to require the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill makes two key changes to existing law:

1. It replaces "may" with "shall" in Section 203 of the Stafford Act, making it mandatory for the President to provide assistance for predisaster hazard mitigation measures. 2. The bill reinstates the Building Resilient Communities and Infrastructure (BRIC) program, which was created by President Trump in 2019 but cancelled in 2025.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The affected parties include:

* Local communities vulnerable to disaster damage * State and local governments responsible for disaster preparedness and response * Private sector companies involved in infrastructure development and construction * Insurance companies that benefit from reduced disaster recovery costs

**Potential Impact & Implications**

By making predisaster hazard mitigation measures mandatory, the bill aims to reduce the loss of life and property from future disasters. The reinstatement of the BRIC program will provide funding for communities to implement mitigation measures such as elevating or moving structures prone to flooding, reducing loss of life during extreme heat, and hardening structures to mitigate the effects of hurricanes or earthquakes.

The bill's supporters argue that every $1 invested in predisaster mitigation saves up to $13 in disaster recovery costs. However, the bill's opponents may argue that the mandatory provision could lead to increased federal spending and bureaucratic red tape.

**Monied Interest Analysis** While there is no explicit mention of specific PACs or industry lobby groups backing this bill, it is likely that organizations representing local governments, construction companies, and insurance firms will support the legislation. The National Association of Counties (NACo) and the National League of Cities (NLC) may also back the bill, as they have advocated for increased funding for disaster mitigation measures in the past.

**Committee Capture and Conflicts of Interest** The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to which this bill was referred, has a history of being influenced by industry groups representing construction companies, engineering firms, and other stakeholders with interests in infrastructure development. It is possible that committee members may have received donations from these groups, potentially influencing their decision-making process.

In summary, the Save BRIC Act aims to make predisaster hazard mitigation measures mandatory, reinstating a program that was previously cancelled. While the bill's supporters argue that it will reduce disaster recovery costs and save lives, its opponents may raise concerns about increased federal spending and bureaucratic red tape. The influence of industry groups and potential conflicts of interest in the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure should be closely monitored as this bill moves forward.