Fixing Emergency Management for Americans Act Targets Delays That Drive Up Disaster Recovery Costs
By Sable Riley
When disaster hits, the first tally is personal.
For some families, the damage is measured in hours without power or by spoiled food in the refrigerator. For others, it’s floodwaters rushing through living rooms, wildfires that turn homes into ash or nights spent waiting for news that never comes.
After any storm or wildfire invariably comes the long, hard work of recovery: clearing roads, rebuilding homes and repairing the systems communities rely on every day. Restoring electricity is crucial. How quickly this happens—and at what cost—depends heavily on what happens next.
Between a Rock
A major ice storm in January 2024 caused nearly $2 million in infrastructure damage to Blachly-Lane Electric Cooperative, which serves more than 2,800 members near Eugene, Oregon. The co-op restored power, quickly filed paperwork for federal reimbursement of repair costs and then waited.
“Frankly, it was just whether or not we were going to get paid and when,” General Manager Jeff Jones says.
Blachly-Lane took out a short-term loan to cover repairs. Reimbursement eventually arrived in late 2025, nearly 2 years after the storm, after interest costs had already accumulated.
“That’s just what we had to do to keep the lights on,” Jeff says. “It felt like being between a rock and a hard place.”
That lag time—and uncertainty that comes with it—is 1 of the main targets of the Fixing Emergency Management for Americans Act of 2025, a sweeping, bipartisan bill introduced July 23, 2025, as H.R. 4669.
If passed, it would overhaul how FEMA delivers disaster assistance, including modernizing internal systems, cutting red tape, and moving money faster after major disasters. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved it in September, but the full House hasn’t voted on it as of early 2026.
The Cost of Waiting
If a storm wipes out infrastructure, utilities must rebuild. When federal assistance is delayed, utilities often borrow to front the costs. Those costs ultimately land on local ratepayers.
Scott Coe, general manager of Lane Electric Cooperative, which serves about 10,000 members near Eugene, says it places a disproportionate burden on members.
“I don’t think it’s fair for our members to bear the sole cost of repairing after those climate-change events wipe out the infrastructure that serves them,” he says, pointing to more frequent winter storms and growing wildfire risk.
Lane Electric still awaits about $4 million tied to the devastating 2020 Holiday Farm Fire, which caused more than $4.5 million in infrastructure damage and burned down about 700 member homes and businesses.
To cover costs, Lane Electric took on debt and paid interest—about $250,000 a year, Scott says, with total interest now exceeding $1 million. FEMA is expected to reimburse those expenses eventually, but delays are expensive for members expected to absorb the financial hit when federal funding stalls.
What Changes
Utility groups say FEMA’s Public Assistance program is a critical backstop after disasters. The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association supports H.R. 4669, arguing reimbursement delays can stretch years and force rural electric utilities to carry high, unpredictable costs.
1 widely supported change would require FEMA to move more quickly to obligate funds for eligible emergency work once cost eligibility is established. The bill would also make FEMA an independent, cabinet-level agency rather than keeping it within the Department of Homeland Security.
For utilities, another practical shift could matter just as much as reimbursement speed. Utilities have long argued that “build it back exactly the way it was” rules lock systems into old vulnerabilities. The proposal would allow communities to rebuild stronger—hardening lines, relocating equipment, and improving resilience rather than recreating the same failure points.
Predictability is the point, Scott says. It helps utilities plan more confidently and avoid making recovery decisions with 1 eye on interest rates in the loan market.
A Paperwork Problem
Utility leaders describe FEMA’s process as increasingly complex.
Blachly-Lane has about 20 employees. “None are FEMA experts,” Jeff says, noting smaller organizations either pull staff away from core work or hire outside help to navigate changing grant requirements and documentation.
Scott describes another drain: staff time spent resubmitting the same documents again and again as FEMA personnel assigned to a claim rotate.
“That rotation... results in us submitting the same documentation multiple times a year, up to 6 times in a year,” Scott says. “It’s amazing.”
The bill’s supporters say reforms would reduce duplication, standardize assistance applications through a unified, web-based system, and make the entire process more transparent for organizations and individuals seeking help.
The National Backdrop
The FEMA debate isn’t confined to rural utilities; it has become a political lightning rod. Last year, President Donald Trump publicly floated possibly restructuring the agency.
That spotlight, which shines more intensely with every major disaster, seems to have forced rare bipartisan agreement that the system needs fixing.
“These natural disasters are bipartisan,” Scott says. “Unfortunately, all Americans are being impacted by that, so that lends itself to a solution.”
What Happens Next
The FEMA Act must still pass the full House and Senate before the president can sign it into law.
For utilities—and consumers who rely on them—faster reimbursements can mean lower interest costs, less anxiety, better use of resources and less pressure to raise rates during already devastating times. More rebuilding flexibility can mean a grid better prepared for whatever comes next.
As Jeff puts it, the goal isn’t to end FEMA. “We want to fix it,” he says. “They’re an important partner, and they could be better.”