Congress Can't Even Get After-The-Fact Disaster Relief Right, Let Alone Preparing For Climate Crash
EDIT
Right now, however, the way the government approaches natural disasters is still extremely reactive. In 2018, for example, Congress allocated $249 million for hazard mitigation efforts aimed at preventing damage from future natural disasters, compared to nearly $7.4 billion it doled out to FEMAs disaster relief fund overall.
Additionally, although the federal government has funds set aside for reducing damage caused by natural disasters down the line, a huge chunk isnt accessible until an area has already been hit by a natural disaster, according to a September 2018 analysis by Pew Charitable Trusts. While those funds are certainly helpful, theyre basically only accessible after a major disaster has caused significant damage. If you think about the continuum of prevention, mitigation, response, and recovery, were best at response, worse at recovery, and worst at prevention, Redlener says.
The case for spending to rebuild after a disaster isnt driven by solely humanitarian aims either; theres also political incentive for lawmakers to allocate more for relief than prevention. According to a FiveThirtyEight analysis, voters reward presidents for spending on relief, but not for spending on preparedness.
The argument for spending more on mitigation, though not as self-evidently and immediately beneficial, has been proven by numerous studies: A review by National Institute of Building Sciences found that every $1 invested in preventative efforts translated to $6 saved in longer-term relief costs. Its a dynamic thats been consistent for some time, evidenced by the response to Hurricane Harvey in 2017, Voxs Ella Nilsen reported:
The United States spends about $300 billion responding to natural disasters like Hurricanes Harvey and Irma. In contrast, we only spend about $600 million on mitigation improving buildings so they wont flood when the next storm comes. This is despite the fact that mitigation has a 4-1 payback, [Larry]Larson, a [a senior policy adviser at the Association of State Floodplain Managers] said. The problem is that people often dont want to spend money upfront to protect their house or business, and then get caught up in a cycle of rebuilding.
EDIT
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/5/16/18617697/disaster-aid-senate-puerto-rico-trump-climate-change