Wildfire Smoke Emergency Declaration Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Harder, Josh [D-CA-9]
- Committees
- Small Business Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 10, 2026
Bottom line
The bill establishes a new federal emergency declaration and funding mechanism specifically for wildfire smoke events, providing direct aid to communities and businesses while allowing for off-budget federal spending.
What it actually does
This bill authorizes the President to declare a 'smoke emergency' in states affected by significant wildland fire smoke, enabling the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other federal agencies to provide assistance such as grants, equipment, smoke shelters, air purifiers, and additional air monitoring sites. It also authorizes the Small Business Administration (SBA) to provide grants to small businesses that lose significant revenue due to such emergencies. Furthermore, the bill amends federal budget law to allow appropriations for smoke emergency assistance to be designated as emergency spending, exempting them from statutory spending caps.
Proponents argue
Supporters would argue this bill provides a crucial and timely federal response mechanism to the growing public health and economic threat posed by wildfire smoke, enabling proactive measures and direct aid to communities and businesses that are increasingly impacted by these events.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that this bill could lead to an expansion of federal emergency spending without sufficient oversight, potentially creating a new category of 'emergency' that could be overused, or that it might divert resources from direct wildfire suppression efforts.
The bill is very short and easy to read, allowing for quick comprehension of its core provisions.
Section 2(a)
Presidential Authority to Declare Smoke Emergency
This provision grants the President the authority to declare a 'smoke emergency' in any state where there is, or is anticipated to be, a significant decrease in air quality due to wildland fire smoke. This declaration can be made upon request from a state's Governor or other appropriate agency, triggering federal assistance.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this is a necessary tool to address a distinct and growing threat to public health and safety, allowing for a targeted federal response beyond traditional fire emergencies.
Critics contend
Some might argue that existing emergency declarations (e.g., for natural disasters) could already cover the impacts of wildfire smoke, making a separate declaration potentially redundant or an unnecessary expansion of federal power.
Tradeoffs
Balances the need for a specific federal response to smoke impacts against concerns about expanding the scope of presidential emergency powers.
Section 2(c)
Provision of Smoke Emergency Assistance
Following a presidential smoke emergency declaration, this provision authorizes the President, acting through FEMA and other federal agencies, to provide various forms of assistance. This includes grants, equipment, supplies, personnel, and resources specifically for establishing smoke shelters, distributing air purifiers, and setting up additional air monitoring sites in affected states and communities.
Section 2(d)
Small Business Administration Grants for Revenue Loss
This provision authorizes the Administrator of the Small Business Administration (SBA) to provide grants to small business concerns that experience a significant loss of revenue due to wildland fire smoke. These grants would be available in areas where the President has declared a smoke emergency, aiming to mitigate the economic impact of prolonged smoke events on local economies.
Section 3
Emergency Spending Designation for Smoke Emergency Assistance
This section amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to allow appropriations designated by Congress as 'smoke emergency assistance' to be treated as an emergency spending adjustment. This means such appropriations would not be subject to statutory spending caps, similar to other emergency declarations like natural disasters, providing budgetary flexibility for response efforts.
Amends Section 251(b)(2) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(b)(2)) to add 'Smoke emergency assistance' as a category for emergency spending adjustments, meaning appropriations for this purpose would not count against discretionary spending caps.
Section 3
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for modifying existing statutes. The technical phrasing is necessary for legal precision in budget law, rather than an attempt to obscure the provision.
Case for: Supporters argue this ensures that critical funding for smoke emergencies can be provided quickly and effectively without requiring cuts to other essential programs, reflecting the unpredictable and urgent nature of these events.
Case against: Opponents contend that expanding categories for emergency spending adjustments can weaken fiscal discipline, allowing Congress to bypass spending limits and potentially contribute to increased national debt.
Estimated impact: Could allow for significant federal spending (potentially billions annually) outside of regular budget caps, depending on the scale and frequency of smoke emergencies and congressional appropriations.