Congress Tackles Public Health Preparedness for World Cup and Other Major Events

July 03, 2026 | Catherine Jones

Amid U.S. preparations for hosting the 2026 FIFA World Cup and the 2028 Summer Olympics, Congress has increasingly turned its attention to preparedness. Recent hearings have examined how federal, state, and local agencies coordinate with one another — and with public health departments — to ensure the nation is ready to respond to emergencies during major events.

Preparedness Hearings and Task Force

In February, against the backdrop of the 76-day partial shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security, the House Homeland Security Committee held a hearing, “Before the Whistle: Assessing Information Sharing and Security Collaboration Ahead of Major Events.” It examined coordination among federal agencies, host cities, Canada and Mexico, state governments, law enforcement, and emergency management officials. Meanwhile, a joint Senate Appropriations hearing in April, “A Review of Preparations for the FIFA World Cup 2026,” analyzed interagency coordination and federal funding.

While much of the discussion focused on physical security, aerial security and counter-drone technology, transportation, emergency management, and public safety, both hearings underscored a broader lesson: Preparedness cannot be built overnight. In the same vein, the Trump Administration formally launched its World Cup preparations in 2025 through Executive Order 14234, which established a White House task force to coordinate efforts across federal agencies. Although the order does not specifically include HHS as a standing member of the task force housed within the Department of Homeland Security, it allows HHS to participate as needed, particularly on matters related to public health preparedness.

Public Health’s Invisible Shield

Large international gatherings bring increased risks for infectious disease outbreaks, foodborne illness, mass casualty incidents, extreme weather events, and other public health emergencies. State and territorial health agencies, working in partnership with federal agencies (e.g., CDC and the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR)), are responsible for monitoring public health threats, coordinating response efforts, supporting health care systems, communicating with the public, and working alongside emergency management and community partners to keep residents and visitors safe.

These critical responsibilities often go unnoticed because preparedness functions as what many public health leaders describe as an “invisible shield.” When preparedness systems are working…

• Outbreaks are detected and contained before they spread.
• Emergency operations centers function seamlessly across jurisdictions.
• Health care systems can effectively coordinate a surge in patient care.
• Communities receive timely, accurate information as events unfold.
• Medical countermeasures are distributed efficiently.
• Post-crisis, national stockpiles are replenished and after-action reviews inform future response efforts.

When preparedness systems are weakened, however, that invisible shield becomes visible. The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the consequences of decades of underinvestment in public health infrastructure. Today’s ongoing threats — including measles outbreaks, the emergence of New World screwworm, hantavirus infections linked to cruise travel, ongoing Ebola outbreaks in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda, and increasingly severe heat events — reinforce the importance of strong preparedness capabilities at CDC and ASPR. Addressing these challenges, both nationally and internationally, requires a trained workforce, modern and interoperable data systems, laboratory capacity, disease surveillance, emergency response plans, and sustained investments that enable public health agencies to prepare and run exercise drills before crises occur.

Tracking Federal Funding Lines for Public Health Preparedness

If the two aforementioned congressional hearings were held today, they might place even greater emphasis on public health threats. Some of the current public health concerns had not yet materialized when lawmakers first examined World Cup preparedness in the spring. Yet, evolving risks raise an important question: When outbreaks or other public health emergencies occur, do public health agencies have a sufficient seat at the table?

As Congress considers the nation’s preparedness needs, the FY27 House LHSS appropriations bill reflects differing approaches to key public health preparedness investments. The Senate’s FY27 Labor-HHS appropriations bill has not yet been released.

• CDC’s Public Health Emergency Preparedness cooperative agreements received $735 million in FY26, were proposed at $350 million in the President’s FY27 budget, and would receive $750 million under the FY27 House bill — a $15 million increase over FY26.
• The FY27 House bill would reduce the Hospital Preparedness Program — funded through Health Care Readiness and Recovery within ASPR — to $70 million, a $237 million decrease from FY26. The President’s budget proposed $30 million for this funding line.
• The Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant, funded at $160 million in FY26, was proposed for elimination in both the President’s budget and the FY27 House bill.

Conclusion

Public health preparedness cannot be turned on in the middle of a crisis. It depends on sustained federal and state investments over many years in workforce, systems, partnerships, and continuous planning and drills. As appropriations discussions continue, policymakers have an opportunity to strengthen the systems that protect communities every day and ensure the nation can safely host major international events. Investments in programs such as those outlined help ensure that states, territories, and local communities remain ready for whatever comes next.

Reviewed by Danny Staley, MS, Senior Vice President, Public Health Practice & Programs, and Jeffrey Ekoma, MS, Vice President, Government Affairs.