It doesn't make sense. It doesn't. And, obviously, not thoughtful policy has been progressed by this House within the last few months.

We all agree that our coastal communities are more vulnerable.

I supported the intention of it, but I think it was the right move to withdraw and think a little bit more about how to properly do it.

No matter what we do with emissions, we are going to continue to see our seas rise and our coastal communities being more vulnerable.

We have got to get good at resilient living.

This is an area where we should all be working together. This isn't a fight over who is right, who is wrong.

We need to start looking at the resiliency of the tax base of these communities.

We need to make sure that we are being thoughtful and that all the policies of this Congress are continuing to move.

Our problem was we had no tools to say what these impacts looked like and then go, well, what should we be building to?

Building to the past will not keep us safe.

It has been repealed. They are studying it. They have been studying it now since 2017.

In 2012, as we were getting ready to go to New Jersey for the infamous non-hug with Governor Christie with President Obama...

How are we going to move in a direction of resiliency when we made so much progress last year with the Disaster Recovery Reform Act?

We are seeing in the 850 panhandle right now Jackson County, Marianna, and other places that their property values have decreased.

This past year we saw what some Democrats on this committee called a 'Fake Emergency' explode as over 977,000 people attempted to illegally enter the United States.

It doesn't make sense and it is contrary to what this committee has been doing.

I couldn't agree more. Last Congress we passed the Disaster Recovery Reform Act where, for the first time, we actually established a resiliency definition and standard within FEMA for how we rebuild and try to provide ample funds to do so.

I am also concerned by the partisan pre-conceptions surrounding the hearing title.