Texas is relying on FEMA. State leaders said it should be cut

In the wake of the deadly floods in Central Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott praised President Trump for quickly approving a major disaster declaration for Kerr County, the hardest-hit area.

“The swift and very robust action by President Trump is an extraordinary help to our response,” Abbott said.

The declaration unlocked federal money to assist with the disaster response. That includes paying for debris removal, for search and rescue experts who are working around the clock, and for housing, food and other immediate necessities for those who lost homes in the floods.

But such assistance may not be available in the future.

President Trump has proposed eliminating the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which provides billions of dollars in assistance to communities hit by disasters. He argues that states should take on more responsibility for responding to and preparing for extreme weather and other disasters.

Texas leaders are helping Trump realize that goal.

This spring, the president appointed a council of Cabinet members, governors and emergency management experts, tasked with recommending changes to FEMA. Gov. Abbott and the top emergency official in Texas, W. Nim Kidd, are both on that council.

“FEMA is slow and clunky and doesn’t solve the needs of those who need it the most,” Abbott said at the first meeting of the FEMA Review Council in May. “States have proven that we can move more nimbly, more swiftly, more effectively.”

Now, as Texas responds to catastrophic floods, the officials leading the state’s efforts will also be considering how to reshape, or even dissolve, the country’s top disaster response agency.

What specific FEMA changes are being proposed?

The president has suggested that the federal government should have a much smaller role in responding to disasters. But it’s unclear what that means in practice.

Trump said in June that FEMA will provide less disaster-related funding to states overall. Bloomberg news reported that an internal agency memo confirmed that FEMA leaders were considering changing policies to make it harder for states to receive funding after disasters. FEMA spends about $45 billion each year on disaster relief nationwide.

At the first meeting of the new FEMA Review Council, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, whose department oversees FEMA, said she supports lump sum payments wherein states receive large disaster recovery block grants from the federal government, rather than tailored reimbursements and grants to cover specific damage.

Kidd, who leads the Texas Division of Emergency Management, agreed that the distribution of disaster-related federal money should be simplified, and pointed out that his state agency routinely works with dozens of federal offices and agencies.

Kidd also suggested that states should take more responsibility for training emergency experts, from emergency management courses for high school students to community college and university degree programs.

Other members of the review council suggested shrinking FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program, which provides the majority of residential flood insurance in the U.S. FEMA has already canceled billions of dollars in grants to help communities prepare for extreme weather, for example by upgrading stormwater pipes to handle more water or install warning systems for wildfires and floods.

The cuts come as climate change causes more frequent and intense weather across the country, including flash floods, hurricanes, heat waves and wildfires.

And many emergency management experts and state disaster response officials say that FEMA plays a crucial role that state governments cannot fill. Responding to and recovering from the largest disasters requires too many people and too much money for most states to handle on their own, they say.

Are there other proposals to reform FEMA?

Members of Congress have proposed a different approach to reforming FEMA: increase the agency’s focus on disaster preparedness, and make funding easier to access.

A bipartisan bill making its way through Congress would simplify the process for disaster survivors to apply for federal assistance, and remove FEMA from the Department of Homeland Security, giving the agency a direct line to the president.

Lawmakers say the goal is to make it easier for communities and individual disaster survivors to get help quickly. Right now, it can take months or even years for federal money to arrive in hard-hit places.

That bill would also incentivize states to invest more in disaster preparedness by tying state spending to federal aid after a disaster.

A second bill, introduced by Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt., days before the Texas floods, would make it easier for rural towns to get FEMA assistance and access federal money to prevent damage from extreme weather.

As far as the president’s stated goal of getting rid of the agency in its current form, only Congress can eliminate FEMA completely. But the executive branch can act on its own to restructure or reduce the size of the agency.

Edited by Rachel Waldholz