Penn Undergraduate Law Journal
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs

The Roundtable


Welcome to the Roundtable, a forum for incisive commentary and analysis
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.


INTERESTED IN wRITING FOR tHE rOUNDTABLE?

Taking It for Granted: The Systemic Inequality in Federal Grant Programs for Funding Climate Infrastructure

1/5/2022

0 Comments

 
Picture
By Hailie Goldsmith
Hailie is a junior in the College of Arts and Sciences; majoring in Philosophy, Politics and Economics and minoring in Hispanic Studies

Each year, the omnipresence of the effects of climate change become harder and harder to ignore. For instance, rising temperatures worsen the day-to-day living experiences of urban residents located in urban spaces subjected to the Urban Heat Island effect—extreme heat conditions that can be attributed to an extensive amount of heat-retaining surfaces, such as roofs and streets, as well as limited green spaces [1]. Other types of extreme weather conditions leave communities devastated and looking for ways to protect their homes and health from disasters wrought by climate change. Besides the toll on human lives, extreme weather events burden U.S. taxpayers with approximately $99 billion due to damage annually [2]. In 2020 alone, 22 separate billion-dollar weather and climate-related disasters struck the United States, ranging from severe storms to wildfires [3]. On November 15th, Biden’s administration signed a $1 trillion infrastructure law, H.R. 3684, which was first introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives on November 5th [2].
The goals of the infrastructure law include prioritizing clean drinking water, implementing climate mitigation measures, advocating for environmental justice, improving transport options and systems, and protecting underserved and marginalized communities [4]. Some key provisions of the bill include $7.5 billion for a national network of electric vehicle charging stations and $6 billion for enhancing the nation’s electricity grid reliability and resilience [2]. Moreover, the bipartisan bill also contains the largest investment in public transit in history—$105 billion—and marks the largest federal investment in passenger rail since Amtrak’s creation [5].
​

Of the total $1 trillion, almost $50 billion has been allocated specifically for climate protection infrastructure programs to bolster communities’ infrastructure across the U.S. in order to safeguard against the destructive symptoms caused by a changing climate [6]. More formally announced by the White House, the law passed is titled the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act) [4]. The “Bipartisan” label demonstrates Biden’s success in gaining approval and support across the political party divide to reinvigorate and rebuild America’s infrastructure. Of the 50 billion designated for climate adaptation plans and infrastructure, it is theorized that Biden reserved at least 40% of it to fund climate-resilient infrastructure for low-income areas, rural communities, and neighborhoods that are predominantly composed of people of color [6]. 

This $50 billion will go towards protecting these communities from extreme events such as fires, floods, and droughts—all occurrences resulting from climate change and expected to worsen in severity in the coming years [7]. Also referred to as the “Justice 40 Initiative,” Biden’s revitalizing claim challenges the broader context of the historical tendency for infrastructure funding to favor wealthier, white communities [6]. There is skepticism among policy experts regarding how realistic the intended shift will be, given the imbalance in resources and property values. Additionally, $50 billion, though an impressive amount, does not reach the expected amount of money estimated by the National Climate Assessment, which predicts that “tens to hundreds of billions of dollars per year” is realistically needed for proper infrastructure guarding against climate change’s effects [7].

With regards to actually obtaining funding, the infrastructure law funnels billions of dollars into grant programs, which require competitive applications to be submitted by cities and counties to be awarded an adequate amount of funding. The distribution of funding for climate infrastructure projects relies upon which grant applications appear the most persuasive and worthy of receiving the funding. This tends to depend upon the strength of a community’s local officials and their available tools and resources, resulting in a division between affluent communities and lower-income communities [6]. In addition, the opaqueness of available grant programs also inhibits less informed local governments from attempting to obtain funding from grant programs, thereby further exacerbating a gap that forms across divisions of affluence [6]. Moreover, communities whose applications are approved are then required to pay a 25% share of the cost of the project, which presents an unaffordable roadblock for some low-income communities [6]. 

Given the inequity of access to funding for this initiative, a significant issue arises: communities that are most vulnerable to the consequences of climate change are also the least likely to be able to afford the much-needed infrastructure protections. This issue was staunchly exemplified during the summer of 2021 when the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) announced the initial list of winners of a grant program called Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC). The list was dominated by wealthy, white areas in mainly California, New Jersey, and Washington state [6]. Meanwhile, other towns with a much lower median household income desperately need grants to install flood control barriers, among other urgent infrastructural changes. The initial FEMA-selected BRIC grant recipients were selected under rules chosen by the Trump administration, so Biden’s administration revised the rules in order to explicitly grant more points to applications which intentionally aim to protect disadvantaged communities [6]. With the implementation of the Justice 40 Initiative, BRIC prioritizes aid to disadvantaged communities, which according to FEMA, “may be characterized by variables including, but not limited to: low income, high and/or persistent poverty, high unemployment and underemployment rates, racial and ethnic segregation, particularly where the segregation stems from discrimination by government entities, linguistic isolation, high housing cost burden and substandard housing,” among many other listed criteria [8]. 

There are, however, potential solutions to combat this problem. BRIC classifies “Economically Disadvantaged Rural Communities” as “a community of 3,000 or fewer individuals identified by the applicant that is economically disadvantaged, with residents having an average per capita annual income not exceeding 80 percent of the national per capita income.” These Economically Disadvantaged Rural Communities are entitled to a cost-share of up to 90 percent federal and just 10 percent non-federal. This discount would slightly ease the burden for communities that cannot afford to pay a 25 percent share of funding for projects [8]. Looking further in the future, a possible solution to the obstacles presented by competitive grant programs would be to eliminate the need for grant applications altogether and instead directly identify and provide funding to the towns and cities deemed most in need of financial assistance—those towns that are most vulnerable to the effects of climate change and also the most lacking in wealth and resources [6]. 

Bypassing the selective and unfair federal grant programs enables a more equal playing field for towns and counties across the U.S. to obtain funding for climate-adaptive infrastructure. However, this likely will not be possible due to the bureaucratic limitations of federal agencies and their lack of willingness to expend the time and effort to actively search for worthy candidates desperately in need of funding. Therefore, the status quo of grant programs might remain in place for some time, so, at least for now, Biden’s administration should focus on realizing and executing a more equitable grant-awarding process.
​
The opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions of the designated authors and do not reflect the opinions or views of the Penn Undergraduate Law Journal, our staff, or our clients.

Sources:
[1]“Why Do Cities Get So Hot?" LA County Public Health.
http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/eh/docs/climatechange/ExtremeHeat_UrbanHeatIsland.pdf
[2] DeConcini, Christina and Neuberger, Jillian. “US Infrastructure Bill Makes Headway on Climate, But More is Needed.” World Resources Institute. November 15, 2021. https://www.wri.org/insights/us-infrastructure-bill-makes-headway-climate-more-needed 
[3] Smith, Adam B. “2020 U.S. billion-dollar weather and climate disasters in historical context.” Beyond the Data. January 8, 2021.  https://www.climate.gov/disasters2020 
[4] “President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.” The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/ 
[5] “FACT SHEET: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Advances President Biden’s Climate Agenda.” The White House. August 5, 2021. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/08/05/fact-sheet-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-investment-and-jobs-act-advances-president-bidens-climate-agenda/ 
[6] Flavelle, Christopher. “Billions for Climate Protection Fuel New Debate: Who Deserves It Most.” The New York Times. December 3, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/03/climate/climate-change-infrastructure-bill.html 
[7] Davenport, Coral and Flavelle, Christopher. “Infrastructure Bill Makes First Major U.S. Investment in Climate Resilience.” The New York Times. November 10, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/06/climate/infrastructure-bill-climate.html 
[8] The Department of Homeland Security Notice of Funding Opportunity Fiscal Year 2021 Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities. FEMA. 2021. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_nofo-fiscal-year-2021-building-resilient-infrastructure.pdf 

0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.


    Categories

    All
    Akshita Tiwary
    Alana Bess
    Alana Mattei
    Albert Manfredi
    Alexander Saeedy
    Alexandra Aaron
    Alexandra Kanan
    Alice Giannini
    Alicia Augustin
    Alicia Kysar
    Ally Kalishman
    Ally Margolis
    Alya Abbassian
    Anika Prakash
    Anna Schwartz
    Ashley Kim
    Astha Pandey
    Audrey Pan
    Benjamin Ng'aru
    Brónach Rafferty
    Bryce Klehm
    Cary Holley
    Christina Gunzenhauser
    Christine Mitchell
    Christopher Brown
    Clarissa Alvarez
    Cole Borlee
    Connor Gallagher
    Dan Spinelli
    Dan Zhang
    David Katz
    Davis Berlind
    Derek Willie
    Dhilan Lavu
    Edgar Palomino
    Edna Simbi
    Ella Sohn
    Emma Davies
    Esther Lee
    Evelyn Bond
    Filzah Belal
    Frank Geng
    Gabriel Maliha
    Georgia Ray
    Graham Reynolds
    Habib Olapade
    Hailie Goldsmith
    Haley Son
    Harshit Rai
    Henry Lininger
    Hetal Doshi
    Iris Zhang
    Irtaza Ali
    Isabela Baghdady
    Ishita Chakrabarty
    Jack Burgess
    Jessica "Lulu" Lipman
    Joe Anderson
    Jonathan Lahdo
    Jonathan Stahl
    Joseph Squillaro
    Justin Yang
    Kaitlyn Rentala
    Kanishka Bhukya
    Katie Kaufman
    Kelly Liang
    Keshav Sharma
    Ketaki Gujar
    Lauren Pak
    Lavi Ben Dor
    Libby Rozbruch
    Lindsey Li
    Luis Bravo
    Lyndsey Reeve
    Madeline Decker
    Maja Cvjetanovic
    Maliha Farrooz
    Marco DiLeonardo
    Margaret Lu
    Matthew Caulfield
    Michael Keshmiri
    Mina Nur Basmaci
    Muskan Mumtaz
    Natalie Peelish
    Natasha Darlington
    Natasha Kang
    Nayeon Kim
    Nicholas Parsons
    Nicholas Williams
    Nicole Greenstein
    Nihal Sahu
    Omar Khoury
    Owen Voutsinas Klose
    Owen Voutsinas-Klose
    Pheby Liu
    Rachel Bina
    Rachel Gu
    Rachel Pomerantz
    Rebecca Heilweil
    Regina Salmons
    Sajan Srivastava
    Sandeep Suresh
    Sanjay Dureseti
    Sarah Simon
    Saranya Das Sharma
    Saranya Sharma
    Sasha Bryski
    Saxon Bryant
    Sean Foley
    Sebastian Bates
    Serena Camici
    Shahana Banerjee
    Shannon Alvino
    Shiven Sharma
    Siddarth Sethi
    Sneha Parthasarathy
    Sneha Sharma
    Sophie Lovering
    Steven Jacobson
    Suaida Firoze
    Suprateek Neogi
    Takane Shoji
    Tanner Bowen
    Taryn MacKinney
    Thomas Cribbins
    Todd Costa
    Tyler Larkworthy
    Vatsal Patel
    Vikram Balasubramanian
    Vishwajeet Deshmukh
    Wajeeha Ahmad
    Yeonhwa Lee

    Archives

    March 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    September 2022
    June 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013

Picture
Picture
​