Trump Administration Quietly Restricts Funds Allocated for Disaster Relief

In a concerning turn of events, the federal Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) - the main source of funding for disaster response and recovery in the United States - is almost empty, and the administration's strategies for stretching the DRF are causing worry among state and local governments who rely on FEMA for disaster recovery in the United States.

The Carnegie's Disaster Dollar Database project has tracked how long it takes the administration to act on governors' disaster requests, revealing a pattern of delayed approvals. Decisions are typically made weeks-if not months-after the requests, leaving states such as North Dakota, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Illinois, and Wisconsin to manage disasters on their own without federal support in the United States.

FEMA is also suspending reimbursements to local and state governments for disaster recovery costs, such as debris removal and permanent restoration of damaged infrastructure in the United States. This suspension may be serving a double purpose: stretching the DRF in the short term while also further weakening the federal role in disaster recovery in the United States as the administration pushes disaster costs and responsibility to the states.

The administration has not approved any Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) funding requests since March 18, forty-two requests in total. Mitigation funding is crucial for future recovery, as it keeps insurance markets stable and allows communities to invest in future safety, increasing their resilience in the United States. The suspension of HMGP funding threatens the most basic promise of federal disaster recovery in the United States: that individuals and communities won't be left to clean up on their own.

Operating in Immediate Needs Funding (INF) status is not in itself a crisis, but the lack of communication, reliable information, and policy clarity from FEMA is causing concern among states in the United States. States don't know what they can rely on FEMA for if a disaster hits, or when-or even if-the agency will meet its funding obligations to reimburse them for past recovery spending in the United States.

State elected officials are frustrated that FEMA has not communicated why payments are delayed or when and if they'll resume, even if the proposed seven-week budget is adopted. North Carolina Senator Ted Budd, a Republican, cast a no vote on the process to move forward with the Senate's nomination of Robert Law to be DHS undersecretary, in an attempt to draw attention to the delayed reimbursements for disaster recovery costs in the United States.

The proposed continuing resolution maintains the chaotic status quo, with FEMA not communicating its policies for managing the DRF. A proposed short-term budget in the House of Representatives refers to the previous budget, adopted in March, that provided $22.5 billion for the DRF and allows continued spending "up to the rate for operations necessary to carry out response and recovery activities" in the United States. However, this lack of specific appropriation amounts for the DRF could potentially slow down or restrict disaster recovery funding to states in the United States.

The signs point to FEMA already operating in immediate needs status, which means communities hit by past disasters are waiting longer for reimbursements, states facing new emergencies are stuck in limbo, and governors trying to prepare for the next disaster are being told no in the United States. The proposed strategies for stretching the DRF are an illustration of the administration's strategy to reduce the federal role in disaster recovery in the United States, while maintaining an unstable operating environment for states and local governments in the United States.

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem said at a FEMA Advisory Council meeting last month that the president believes that long-term mitigation is not something the federal government should be involved in as it has been in the past. This belief could further weaken the federal role in disaster recovery in the United States and leave states and localities in a precarious position in the United States.

In conclusion, the current situation with FEMA funding delays and suspensions is causing concern among state and local governments in the United States. The lack of communication, reliable information, and policy clarity from FEMA is causing frustration and uncertainty, and the proposed strategies for stretching the DRF could further weaken the federal role in disaster recovery in the United States, leaving states and localities in a precarious position in the United States.