Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fema Grants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appropriations members press DHS over FEMA grant freezes and BRIC cancellation
Summary
Members on the House Appropriations subcommittee demanded evidence and legal justification after DHS froze or reassessed FEMA grant obligations, including the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program, and asked whether the department plans to reorganize or reduce FEMA's role.
House appropriators pressed Department of Homeland Security leadership about the department's decision to freeze or reevaluate FEMA-administered grants, including the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program, and sought evidence of the specific "waste, fraud or abuse" cited by the administration.
Ranking Member of the Appropriations Committee (gentlelady from Connecticut) told the subcommittee she had seen no evidence that BRIC or other FEMA programs met GAO's definition of waste and asked for the legal authority behind the cancellations. She said the committee needed documentation because many communities rely on FEMA grants to fund mitigation and recovery projects.
Secretary Noem responded that the administration had asked for a review of FEMA grant obligations and that the president "has indicated he wants to eliminate FEMA as it exists today and to have states have more control over their emergency management response." Noem also said she has asked FEMA and other components to return to mission and to ensure funds are being spent appropriately, and she offered to follow up with the committee in writing on specific questions.
Why it matters: Members from both parties emphasized that FEMA grants fund disaster mitigation, hazard‑reduction and recovery work nationwide, and that abrupt cancellations or freezes could delay local projects and increase costs for communities facing disasters.
Key details: Committee members noted that BRIC had bipartisan support and that research indicates mitigation investments can save multiple dollars for every federal dollar spent. Ranking members asked for evidence of abuse and the statutory or regulatory authority DHS relied on to pause obligations; Noem said those reviews were ongoing and offered to provide documentation.
Next steps: The committee requested written follow-ups and supporting material showing the legal basis and examples, along with lists of grants or projects affected. Members warned that appropriations law vests Congress with the power of the purse and asked for transparent documentation of any executive actions affecting appropriations.
