HR 8874: Homeland Security Capabilities Preservation Reporting Act of 2026

HR 8874 in plain English: This bill requires FEMA to submit a report to Congress every three years, instead of just once, about high-risk urban areas whose security capabilities — previously funded through Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grants — are at risk of being reduced or eliminated without more federal help. Each report must also include a proposal for FEMA to provide financial assistance for at least three consecutive years to help those areas transition to other funding sources.

Stated purpose

The bill requires FEMA to submit a report to Congress every three years — instead of just once — on urban areas that previously received Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) funding and are at risk of losing security capabilities without additional federal help. Each report must also propose at least three consecutive years of financial assistance to help those areas transition to other funding sources.

Key points

• Changes FEMA's reporting requirement on urban security capabilities from a one-time report to one every three years.
• Reports must identify urban areas at risk of losing security capabilities previously supported by UASI grants.
• Each report must propose FEMA financial assistance for at least three consecutive years to help affected cities transition to other funding.
• Targets cities that received UASI grants, which fund terrorism prevention, preparedness, protection, and response capabilities.

Arguments supporters make

• A single one-time report is not enough to track how cities are managing without UASI funds over time — repeating the report every three years keeps Congress informed as conditions change.
• Cities that lose federal terrorism-preparedness funding can face real security gaps; requiring FEMA to propose transition assistance gives those communities a path to stay protected.
• Regular reporting creates accountability and ensures the federal government does not simply walk away from urban areas after cutting their homeland security grants.

Arguments opponents make

• Requiring reports every three years adds a recurring administrative burden on FEMA without guaranteeing that Congress will actually act on the proposals or provide any new funding.
• The bill only mandates reports and proposals — it does not require FEMA to actually fund the transition, so cities may get paperwork instead of real help.
• Repeatedly spotlighting cities that lost UASI eligibility could pressure Congress to restore or expand grant spending beyond what threat assessments justify, driven by reporting cycles rather than actual risk.

Tradeoffs

Increased oversight and regular information for Congress comes at the cost of added reporting requirements on FEMA, and while the bill creates a framework for transition funding proposals, it does not guarantee money will follow — leaving a gap between the reporting mandate and actual assistance to affected cities.

Current status in Congress: Passed House.

NewsClear — neutral news & congressional tracking · Bill of the Week