RESTORING AMERICA: AMERICA’S AFFORDABILITY CRISIS IS A HOUSING SHORTAGE. WE CAN FIX IT IN THREE STEPS

Communities have had to divert funds from schools, roads, and public safety just to recover from previous storms. This reactive approach has resulted in states being underprepared to guard against the impacts of future natural disasters, as they are often forced to redirect funds from other policy priorities. 

When disasters are not properly planned and accounted for in advance, negative effects on state and local budgets are inevitable. When a disaster hits, state and local governments often have to redirect funds toward emergency response, debris removal, and infrastructure repair. Because budgets are finite, this can crowd out spending on affordable housing development. Over time, it can slow new construction and reduce support for vulnerable renters and homeowners. Research has shown that deprioritizing preparedness has a direct impact on housing affordability, showing rent increases of up to 6% in some cases. 

Homes better protected from climate risks are more insurable. By lowering the need and cost of rebuilding, targeted resilience investments can help keep housing more affordable.

A proactive approach to disaster policy is essential to break this costly cycle of rebuilding, and it has yielded positive outcomes. Data clearly show that every $1 invested in pre-disaster mitigation saves up to $13 in federal spending.

Take the Bee Branch Watershed Flood Mitigation project in Dubuque, Iowa, for example, where one of the state’s oldest and most flood-prone towns needed a long-term solution to address its flooding. By investing in resilient infrastructure and providing grant opportunities for hazard mitigation, the program has prevented over $11.6 million in property damage from storms. With a total cost of $249 million, the Bee Branch Creek project is estimated to prevent $582 million in damages over the next century. The project will likely save more than double its cost in avoided damages. Other states are also stepping up their resilience efforts, as seen in the Strengthen Alabama Homes program and Arizona’s Extreme Heat Preparedness Plan.

Recovery costs ultimately affect taxpayers and homeowners while weakening state and local governments’ fiscal stability. When infrastructure fails during extreme weather events, the consequences spill onto housing markets, small businesses, and community stability.

In Hurricane Helene-ravaged communities in North Carolina, for example, multiple counties have had to tap into emergency funds to meet their obligations. The nature of funding mechanisms makes it so that carrying too little cash or too much debt could also hinder future access to disaster relief funds. This means that local governments will need to raise taxes or cut services to deal with the next incident, neither of which benefits residents’ pocketbooks or quality of life.   

The consequences of natural disasters have become a nationwide challenge. In California, after last year’s Los Angeles wildfires, 7 in 10 residents who were forced to leave still have not returned, as the cost of recovery continues to balloon.

This often results in “disaster borrowing,” which redirects resources from mitigation, further undermining community resilience against future catastrophes.

With state budgets already under pressure and Federal Emergency Management Agency reform likely to shift more of the financial burden away from the federal government, the path ahead is clear. States must prepare to take on greater fiscal responsibility for their own recovery. Without efforts to address potential shortcomings, the only options are either increased taxes or reduced public services, both of which place additional strain on people already working to get by.

Research from the Chamber of Commerce finds that every $1 communities fail to invest in resilience today can result in over $22 in lost economic activity in the wake of a disaster. In some cases, this figure can rise to over $30. These losses translate into fewer jobs, weaker economies, and strained budgets that ultimately affect taxpayers and local households. According to the same report, pre-disaster investment in hurricane-prone areas can prevent the loss of more than 70,000 jobs. 

Recognizing these realities, groups like the SmarterSafer Coalition have urged policymakers to prioritize funding for pre-disaster mitigation and resiliency, including hazard mitigation initiatives such as FEMA’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program. As the number of billion-dollar disasters grows, better data, stronger infrastructure, and improved disaster planning can help communities reduce long-term costs and protect taxpayers. 

EDITORIAL: THE DEMOCRATS’ EMPTY AFFORDABILITY PROMISES

Congress and the White House need to prioritize policies that focus on disaster mitigation and resilience before disasters strike, reducing long-term costs for taxpayers and communities alike.

At a time when affordability is shaping decisions in households and governments alike, investing in mitigation is one of the most practical ways to protect taxpayers, strengthen communities, and keep local economies financially resilient. 

Chris Brown is the executive director of the SmarterSafer Coalition, which brings together a wide range of environmental groups, consumer and tax advocates, insurance professionals, and housing stakeholders in support of environmentally responsible, fiscally sound approaches to natural catastrophe policy that promote public safety.