The Stafford Act and the presidential declaration process works like hand in glove you might say to provide assistance to states when a disaster happens. Congress debated the issue of the Stewart Mckinney-Robert Stafford Act before passing. (Haddow 2013, p. 9). Haddow (2013) noted that “In the United States, a presidential disaster declaration is what makes available the range of resources available to the affected local and state governments as established through the Stafford Act.” (p. 192). For the president to be able to assist there has to be guidance that addresses authority and procedural requirements for the federal government to provide assistance at the tribal, state or local level.  Sylves (2014) noted that “the Stafford Act reauthorizes the President to issue major disaster and emergency declarations, sets broad eligibility criteria, and specifies the type of assistance the President may authorize.” (p. 72). The president has the freedom to interpret narrowly or broadly what is declared a major disaster on a case by case basis. (Sylves 2014, p. 99). Haddow (2013) noted that “Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (The Stafford Act) occurs about 44 times each year on average (in addition to major emergency and fire management assistance declarations which provide more limited assistance).” (p. 201). “There is over 30 federal department that works within the NRF structure with the ability to assist local and state officials.” (Haddow 2013, p. 191). While it can be asked if stats over-use the emergency program, the facts are the president has to approve these actions. States may take full advantage of the resources available to help limit the direct cost and impact to state budget and local economy.  Sylves (2014) noted that “The Stafford Act does not prescribe exact criteria to guide FEMA recommendations or the president’s decision.” (p. 109). Events and disasters have created requirements to make changes to the Stafford Act. Haddow (2013) noted that “In February of 2001, the Preparedness Against Domestic Terrorism Act of 2001 was passed, which amended the Stafford Act to include acts of terrorism within its definition of “major disaster,” which formalized how the federal disaster support in terrorism incidents would take place.” (p. 329). The 2001 change also noted that the Director of FEMA was to implement the federal emergency preparedness plans and made the FEMA Director responsible for establishing the President’s Council on Domestic Preparedness to limit or eliminate duplication of preparedness within the federal terrorism preparedness program. (Sylves 2014, p. 329).  The Stafford Act is not without critics. The concern that approval of disaster relief would become more politically generated to influence elections or to stay in office. Sylves (2014) pointed out that “For Reeves, “the Stafford Act transformed the disaster declaration process into a highly political exercise.” (p. 121). You do not predict when a disaster i.

1. The Stafford Act and the presidential declaration process works
like hand in glove you might say to provide assistance to states
when a disaster happens. Congress debated the issue of the
Stewart Mckinney-Robert Stafford Act before passing. (Haddow
2013, p. 9). Haddow (2013) noted that “In the United States, a
presidential disaster declaration is what makes available the
range of resources available to the affected local and state
governments as established through the Stafford Act.” (p. 192).
For the president to be able to assist there has to be guidance
that addresses authority and procedural requirements for the
federal government to provide assistance at the tribal, state or
local level. Sylves (2014) noted that “the Stafford Act
reauthorizes the President to issue major disaster and
emergency declarations, sets broad eligibility criteria, and
specifies the type of assistance the President may authorize.” (p.
72). The president has the freedom to interpret narrowly or
broadly what is declared a major disaster on a case by case
basis. (Sylves 2014, p. 99). Haddow (2013) noted that “Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (The Stafford Act) occurs
about 44 times each year on average (in addition to major
emergency and fire management assistance declarations which
provide more limited assistance).” (p. 201). “There is over 30
federal department that works within the NRF structure with the
ability to assist local and state officials.” (Haddow 2013, p.
191). While it can be asked if stats over-use the emergency
program, the facts are the president has to approve these
actions. States may take full advantage of the resources
available to help limit the direct cost and impact to state budget
and local economy. Sylves (2014) noted that “The Stafford Act
does not prescribe exact criteria to guide FEMA
recommendations or the president’s decision.” (p. 109). Events
and disasters have created requirements to make changes to the
Stafford Act. Haddow (2013) noted that “In February of 2001,
the Preparedness Against Domestic Terrorism Act of 2001 was

2. passed, which amended the Stafford Act to include acts of
terrorism within its definition of “major disaster,” which
formalized how the federal disaster support in terrorism
incidents would take place.” (p. 329). The 2001 change also
noted that the Director of FEMA was to implement the federal
emergency preparedness plans and made the FEMA Director
responsible for establishing the President’s Council on
Domestic Preparedness to limit or eliminate duplication of
preparedness within the federal terrorism preparedness program.
(Sylves 2014, p. 329).
The Stafford Act is not without critics. The concern that
approval of disaster relief would become more politically
generated to influence elections or to stay in office. Sylves
(2014) pointed out that “For Reeves, “the Stafford Act
transformed the disaster declaration process into a highly
political exercise.” (p. 121). You do not predict when a disaster
is going to happen and what the results of that disaster will
bring to the communities in its path. Sylves (2014) noted that
“in general election years when incumbent presidents seek a
second term, there is statistically significant evidence that
governors of battleground states critical to the president’s
reelection calculus experience extremely low disaster
declaration request turndown rates. A possible advantage to
governors of key states.” (p. 119).
Present recovery program provides extensive program that can
aid in mitigation to limit the requirements during recovery.
Sylves (2014) A presidential declaration of major disaster or
emergency has far-reaching consequences because it opens the
door to federal assistance and aid by legitimizing the disaster
for affected populations.” (p. 100). It addition Sylves (2014)
noted that “states prepare a comprehensive state program for
pre-disaster emergency and disaster mitigation before they
could receive post-disaster declaration mitigation funds from
FEMA. (p. 289). While there are many programs, it is up to the
state to ensure they provide the requirement information to
receive the assistance. In the time of overspending each agency

3. that can help is going to reach out and ensure the states know
what they can do for them so that they are not seen as obsolete
or ineffective and liquidated to relegated to another agency.
References
Haddow G., Bullock J., Coppola P., 2013,
Introduction to Emergency Management, 5th Edition
. Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann. VitalBook file
Sylves, Richard.
Disaster Policy and Politics: Emergency Management and
Homeland Security, 2nd Edition
. CQ Press, 07/2014. VitalBook file.
Select someone(s) with a different position from your own.
Explain how and why the other person’s argument is flawed.