logo
Trump's plan to begin 'phasing out' FEMA after hurricane season burdens states, experts warn

Trump's plan to begin 'phasing out' FEMA after hurricane season burdens states, experts warn

SAN DIEGO (AP) — President Donald Trump's plan to begin 'phasing out' the federal agency that responds to disasters after the 2025 hurricane season is likely to put more responsibilities on states to provide services following increasingly frequent and expensive climate disasters, experts said.
'We want to wean off of FEMA and we want to bring it down to the state level,' Trump said Tuesday in an Oval Office appearance with administration officials about preparations for summer wildfires.
Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem have repeatedly signaled their desire to overhaul, if not completely eliminate, the 46-year-old Federal Emergency Management Agency. While there has been bipartisan support for reforming the agency, experts say dismantling it completely would leave gaps in crucial services and funding.
'It just causes more concern on how states should be planning for the future if the federal government's not going to be there for them,' said Michael Coen, FEMA chief of staff during the Obama and Biden administrations.
Disaster response is already locally led and state-managed, but FEMA supports by coordinating resources from federal agencies, providing direct assistance programs for households and moving money to states for repairing public infrastructure.
Trump said Tuesday he wants to 'give out less money,' and to 'give it out directly,' sidestepping FEMA programs. He said he did not know who would distribute the funds, saying they could come 'from the president's office' or DHS.
'I was left with the impression that he doesn't really understand the scale of what FEMA manages on a yearly basis with a budget of over $30 billion,' said Coen.
Dismantling FEMA, or even changing how much of the costs it shares with states in the event of a major disaster declaration, would require action from Congress, including amending the 1988 Stafford Act, which outlines FEMA's roles and responsibilities and the cost share between the feds and the states.
Declaring fewer major disasters or giving less federal support could put an untenable financial burden on states, said Sara McTarnaghan, principal research associate at the Urban Institute.
'Very few of them would have had enough funds set aside to anticipate the federal government stepping back from its historic role in disaster recovery for major events,' McTarnaghan said.
A recent Urban Institute analysis found that between 2008-2024, quadrupling the economic threshold of when major disasters are declared would have shifted $41 billion in public assistance costs alone to state and local governments.
'I think the trade off for states and communities is going to be, do we accept a less full recovery or do states draw on other resources to meet these goals and needs, perhaps at the cost of investments in other kinds of social programs or functions of the state,' said McTarnaghan.
Not all states will be able to generate much more revenue, she added.
'The confluence of states that have really high disaster exposure and states that have relatively limited fiscal capacity are overlapping in many ways,' she said. 'That's the case for a lot of states along the Gulf Coast that we're concerned about going into hurricane season but also the case for some Midwestern states that face issues with severe convective storms.'
Trump dismissed the idea that states can't handle the bulk of disasters on their own.
'The governor should be able to handle it and frankly if they can't handle the aftermath, then maybe they shouldn't be governor,' he said.
He suggested that some of the gaps could be filled by more collaboration among states. Noem said FEMA is building communication and mutual aid agreements among states 'to respond to each other so that they can stand on their own two feet.'
A national mutual-aid structure called the Emergency Management Assistance Compact already exists, but its operations are typically reimbursed by the federal government, said Coen. 'There's already robust communication between states. The confusion is what they can expect from the federal government.'
Regarding the current hurricane season, which began June 1, Noem said FEMA 'stands prepared.' But there have already been changes to how the agency operates. It suspended its door-to-door canvassing program that helped enroll survivors for assistance. More than 2,000 FEMA staff, around one-third of the full-time workforce, have left or been fired since January.
After severe weather this spring, some states waited as long as eight weeks for their disaster declaration requests, and several requests are still pending. Trump has not approved any requests for hazard mitigation assistance since February, a typical add-on to individual and public assistance that helps states build back in more resilient ways.
A FEMA review council established by Trump and co-chaired by Noem and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth will submit suggestions for reforms in the next few months, according to Noem.
In its first meeting in May, Noem told the group of governors, emergency managers, and other officials primarily from Republican states that Trump is seeking drastic change.
'I don't want you to go into this thinking we're going to make a little tweak here,' she said. 'No, FEMA should no longer exist as it is.'
___

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Judge promises quick ruling over Trump's use of National Guard in Los Angeles
Judge promises quick ruling over Trump's use of National Guard in Los Angeles

Washington Post

time13 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

Judge promises quick ruling over Trump's use of National Guard in Los Angeles

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge said Thursday that he plans to rule quickly on whether President Donald Trump exceeded his authority by deploying the California National Guard in Los Angeles against the governor's wishes. 'This country was founded in response to a monarch, and the Constitution is a document of limitations. I'm trying to figure out where the lines are drawn,' U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer said before a packed courtroom.

Most US adults say Trump's military parade is not a good use of money, a new AP-NORC poll finds
Most US adults say Trump's military parade is not a good use of money, a new AP-NORC poll finds

Associated Press

time14 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Most US adults say Trump's military parade is not a good use of money, a new AP-NORC poll finds

WASHINGTON (AP) — As Washington prepares for a military parade this weekend to honor the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, a new survey finds that U.S. adults are more likely to approve than disapprove of President Donald Trump's decision to hold the festivities, which officials have said will cost tens of millions of taxpayer dollars. But about 6 in 10 Americans also say that Saturday's parade is 'not a good use' of government money, including the vast majority of people, 78%, who neither approve nor disapprove of the parade overall, according to the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. The survey found that about 4 in 10 U.S. adults 'somewhat' or 'strongly' approve of the parade, while about 3 in 10 'somewhat' or 'strongly' disapprove. About 3 in 10 neither approve nor disapprove. Carol Sue Quillen, 69, of Live Oak, Florida, said she sees the parade as a way to honor the country's service members, who she said include her late father — an Air Force test pilot killed on a helicopter training mission when she was a baby — and her son-in-law, who serves in the special forces. 'I don't necessarily think we appreciate our military as much as we should,' said Quillen, a retiree who described herself as a Trump supporter — although she said the Republican president's personality 'can be a bit overwhelming.' 'All branches should be celebrated for what they do,' Quillen said. 'That just boosts morale.' Democrats and independents say parade is not good use of money Featuring hundreds of military vehicles and aircraft and thousands of soldiers, the celebration on Saturday, which also happens to be Trump's birthday, has grown extensively in scope and size since Army planners started working on a festival two years ago to mark the military branch's anniversary. Besides a military parade — which Trump had unsuccessfully pushed for during his first term — there will also be concerts, fireworks, NFL players, fitness competitions and displays all over the National Mall for daylong festivities. The Army expects as many as 200,000 people could attend and says putting on the celebration will cost an estimated $25 million to $45 million. Most Republicans, around two-thirds, approve of the event, and a similar share sees it as a good use of money, but about one-third say it's not a good use of government funds. Democrats overwhelmingly say the parade is not a good use of public money, as do independents. And while about half of Democrats disapprove of the parade, about half of independents neither approve nor disapprove, suggesting that they may have heard less about it or have less strong feelings about it generally. Matt Wheeler, 40, called the display 'extremely wasteful' and 'a bit of a performance' that 'just sends a bad message' in terms of the overt military display. 'The only other time I can think about this, it's been in old throwbacks to the USSR or things you see out of North Korea,' said Wheeler, who works in nonprofit fundraising in Los Angeles and described himself as a lifelong Democrat. 'It's a direction this administration is inclined to move in that isn't in line with what I thought our country really was.' Few think military spending is too low Sam Walters, 45, who works in restaurants in Fort Worth, Texas, described himself as a former conservative who now has more libertarian leanings. Walters, who voted for Trump in last year's election, said he appreciated that Trump had 'really kind of stuck to his guns' concerning many of the issues on which he campaigned, assessing his second term so far as 'a pretty good job.' But when it comes to the military parade, Walters said he was concerned about why so much additional funding was needed for military-adjacent activities, given the country's overall defense spending price tag. 'When they're getting hundreds of billions a year for funding, more than for anything else, it seems kind of hard to justify them spending extra for that,' Walters said, referencing the parade. Americans are generally divided on whether the government is devoting too much money to the military. About 3 in 10 say the government is spending 'too much' on the military, while a similar share says the government is spending 'too little.' About 4 in 10 say the government is spending 'about the right amount.' Those numbers are largely unchanged from an AP-NORC poll conducted in January. Trump's approval is unchanged About 4 in 10 Americans approve of the way Trump is handling his job as president, which is unchanged from an AP-NORC poll conducted last month. The poll was conducted June 5-9, meaning the field period began before protests started in Los Angeles over Trump's immigration crackdown and ended after the National Guard was deployed but before active-duty Marines arrived in the city. It did not include questions about the protests or military deployment. Approval of his handling of immigration, at 46%, continues to be higher than approval of his handling of the economy or trade negotiations with other countries, which both landed at 38%. Andrew Thomsen, 31, of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, said that he has voted for Trump in general elections and that he would 'generally approve' of the direction in which the country is headed. Thomsen, who works in education, said that, while he appreciates any intent of the parade and associated events 'to celebrate those who have given of themselves to the service of our protection,' he wasn't a fan of attempts to show off U.S. military might. 'If it is a march of rows and rows of members from our different branches while showboating our tanks, missile systems, and other equipment to show how strong we are, then I don't support that,' he said. ___ The AP-NORC poll of 1,158 adults was conducted June 5-9, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 4 percentage points. ___ Kinnard reported from Chapin, S.C., and can be reached at

Louisiana AG investigating CVS for sending mass text messages lobbying against legislation
Louisiana AG investigating CVS for sending mass text messages lobbying against legislation

Associated Press

time15 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Louisiana AG investigating CVS for sending mass text messages lobbying against legislation

Baton Rouge, La. (AP) — Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill announced Thursday she is investigating whether pharmaceutical giant CVS improperly used customers' personal information to send out text messages lobbying against a proposed state law. Murrill also said she plans to issue a cease-and-desist letter to the company to stop the messages. As lawmakers debated a now-failed bill on Wednesday — which would have prohibited companies from owning both pharmacy benefits managers and drug stores — they held up screenshots of text messages sent by CVS. 'Last minute legislation in Louisiana threatens to close your CVS Pharmacy — your medication cost may go up and your pharmacist may lose their job,' one such text, obtained by The Associated Press, read. Attached was a link to a draft letter urging lawmakers to oppose the legislation that someone could sign with their email address and send to legislators. 'The proposed legislation would take away my and other Louisiana patients' ability to get our medications shipped right to our homes,' the letter read. 'They would also ban the pharmacies that serve patients suffering from complex diseases requiring specialty pharmacy care to manage their life-threatening conditions like organ transplants or cancer. These vulnerable patients cannot afford any disruption to their care – the consequences would be dire.' In fiery testimony, Rep. Dixon McMakin pointed to some of the messages, saying they were misleading and false. He specifically pointed to ads, that people reported seeing on social media, alleging that lawmakers 'may shut down every CVS pharmacy in the state.' 'No we're not, you liars. Quit being liars. Quit using scare tactics,' McMakin said. Republican Rep. Bryan Fontenot held up his phone, showing that he, too, had received a text message from CVS. 'It's in the same text thread (used) to notify when my prescription is filled,' he said. 'They've now taken that to send me political texts.' CVS sent messages to 'large numbers' of state employees and their families to lobby against proposed legislation involving the company's pharmaceutical benefits manager, Murrill said in an X post. Customers gave CVS their phone numbers to receive pharmaceutical information such as vaccine availability or prescription pick-ups but the company is using this personal information 'for their own personal corporate interests against pending legislation,' Murrill told reporters. 'That's not why anybody gave them their phone number.' Amy Thibault, a spokesperson for CVS, said the texts were the result of a last-minute amendment to the bill Wednesday without an opportunity for a public hearing. The amendment was crafted behind closed-doors by a conference committee — a regular practice utilized in the statehouse when the House and Senate cannot agree on final versions of a bill. 'We believe we have a responsibility to inform our customers of misguided legislation that seeks to shutter their trusted pharmacy, and we acted accordingly,' Thibault said in an email. 'Our communication with our customers, patients and members of our community is consistent with law.' Republican Gov. Jeff Landry has continued to push the bill as the state's legislature concluded Thursday afternoon. The bill, which proponents said would bolster independent pharmacies and reduce the cost of prescription medications, received overwhelming approval in the House, with a vote of 88-4. Among those who voted against the measure was Rep. Mandie Landry. The Democrat said that while she wanted to vote in favor, but she was receiving messages from people in her district urging her not to. She said CVS's lobbying had reached them and as a result they feared that they wouldn't be able to access their medications. 'CVS … you should be so ashamed of this. You are scaring people,' Landry said. The bill ultimately died with the Senate opting not to take it up in the final hour of the 2025 session. Landry spokesperson Kate Kelly said the governor plans to call a special session in hopes of passing similar legislation. 'Yes we will have a special to lower prescription drugs for our citizens,' Kelly said. 'It's that important.' ___ Brook reported from New Orleans.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store