In a perfect democracy, at least 50% of people would support every decision.

The U.S. falls short of this goal.

Activate to continue

Spoken For.
House vote: H.R. 219 // January 14, 2013Needed two-thirds to pass

Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013

Sponsor: Jeff Denham (R-CA)

Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to authorize the President, acting through the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to approve public assistance projects for major disasters or emergencies under alternative procedures with the goal of: (1) reducing the costs to the federal government of providing such assistance; (2) increasing flexibility in the administration of assistance; (3) expediting the provision of assistance to a state, tribal or local government, or owner or operator of a private nonprofit facility; and (4) providing financial incentives and disincentives for the timely and cost-effective completion of projects. Requires such alternative procedures, with respect to grants for facility repair, restoration, or replacement, to allow: (1) such grants to be made on the basis of fixed estimates if the state, tribal, or local government or the owner or operator of the private nonprofit facility agrees to be responsible for any actual costs that exceed the estimate; (2) a grantee to elect to receive an in-lieu contribution, without reduction, on the basis of estimates of the cost to repair, restore, reconstruct, or replace a facility and management expenses; (3) consolidating state, local, or tribal facilities as a single project; and (4) the Administrator to permit a grantee, when completed project costs are less than the estimated costs, to use excess funds for activities that reduce the risk of future damage, hardship, or suffering from a major disaster and for other activities to improve future public assistance operations or planning. Requires such alternative procedures, with respect to grants for debris removal, to allow: (1) such grants to be made on the basis of fixed estimates to provide financial incentives and disincentives for the timely or cost-effective completion if the grantee agrees to be responsible for any actual costs that exceed the estimate; (2) use of a sliding scale for determining the federal share for removal of debris and wreckage based on the time it takes to complete; (3) use of program income from recycled debris without offset to the grant amount; (4) reimbursement of wages for grantee employees and extra hires performing or administering debris and wreckage removal; (5) incentives to a state, local, or tribal government to have a debris management plan approved by the Administrator and to have pre-qualified contractors before the date of declaration of the major disaster; and (6) the Administrator to permit a grantee, when actual project costs are less than estimated costs, to use the excess funds for debris management planning, acquisition of debris management equipment for current or future use, and other activities to improve future debris removal operations.

Emergency Management Topic assigned by the Congressional Research Service.

Who won, and how much of the country was behind them

Won the vote · Yea

403 votes, representing 224,280,350 people92.7%of U.S. adults

Lost the vote · Nay

0 votes, representing 0 people0.0%of U.S. adults

The dotted gap is 7.3% of U.S. adults whose member did not vote, voted “present,” or whose seat was vacant.

Share of U.S. adults represented, the House
SideOutcomeVotesShare of U.S. adults
YeaWon40392.7%
NayLost00.0%
Not represented on this questionNo position taken07.3%