New York relies on FEMA in the aftermath of disasters. Here’s how the presidential election could change that

When Cortland County was struck by an unexpected tornado in July, Gov. Kathy Hochul called on the federal government for response assistance. After evaluating the damage of the storm, President Joe Biden declared a major disaster in New York and opened up funding to provide emergency work and repair infrastructure through the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 

Just a month later, record rainfall and severe flooding caused damage to homes and businesses, breached two dams, displaced families and students at Stony Brook University, and damaged vital roads and infrastructure in Suffolk County. Once again Hochul requested Suffolk County be declared a major disaster to unlock aid. New York has received federal disaster declarations six different times this year so far. The aid provides physical and financial support to homeowners, businesses and local municipalities affected by the storms to repair in the aftermath.

In the aftermath of Hurricanes Helene and Milton in the southeast, FEMA’s response to this historic flooding has been uniquely difficult amid the tense political atmosphere of the election. While working to meet the needs of affected communities, FEMA must also account for the increased frequency and strength of these storms.

As the need to mitigate disasters and protect communities against climate emergencies increases, so will the financial and physical resources that need to be allocated to disaster recovery and preparedness. The outcome of the presidential election will shape the way the agency meets this challenge, considering the stark differences in Donald Trump’s and Kamala Harris’ stances on climate change. If he does incorporate proposals from the conservative blueprint Project 2025, another Trump presidency could also shift the financial onus of disaster preparation and recovery to the states.   

“We’re experiencing more disasters, they’re getting worse, they’re getting more severe, more complex. We as a society are going to pay for it somehow,” said Samantha Penta, an assistant professor of emergency preparedness at SUNY University at Albany. “Whether it’s money going through the federal government, local government or paying for it in the consequences that we have to bear, we’re paying for it one way or another.”

Shifting responsibility to states? 

Created in 1979, FEMA provides physical and/or financial assistance to local emergency response efforts on order from the president. When local resources have been exhausted and overwhelmed by disaster, FEMA steps in to assist at the request of the state governor. Congress determines how much funding FEMA receives and is responsible for approving any additional spending.

Prior to the creation of FEMA, disaster relief existed in sporadic fragments throughout the federal government, making it incredibly difficult for governors whose states experienced emergencies to obtain national assistance. The National Governors Association wanted to ease this process and worked with President Jimmy Carter to group emergency resources under one agency. FEMA, under the Department of Homeland Security, became the national resource for coordinating federal response to all domestic disasters, from acts of terrorism to natural disasters.

“Not to say the system is perfect as is, but the federal response exists for a reason,” said Penta. “Everything about how (extreme weather) events are unfolding would suggest that we would at least need to maintain federal involvement, if not increase it.”

Project 2025, a policy “playbook” from the conservative Heritage Foundation authored in part by former Trump administration officials, proposes dramatic changes to FEMA that would directly impact funding for New Yorkers. Despite Trump’s continuous efforts to distance himself from the project, CNN reported that at least 140 former Trump officials have been involved with its creation. Heritage claims that 64% of their policy recommendations were included in Trump’s budget during his first term. 

Project 2025 advocates restricting FEMA’s aid and grant programs and proposes a drastic reshaping of the agency’s function and emergency response operations. Largely it suggests shifting the majority of emergency preparedness and response costs to states and localities instead of the federal government. 

The blueprint recommends that Congress “change the cost-share arrangement so that the federal government covers 25 percent of the costs for small disasters with the cost share reaching a maximum of 75 percent for truly catastrophic disasters.” The current agreement requires the federal government to cover a minimum 75% of costs, while states or receiving municipalities cover the remaining maximum 25% for mitigation and assistance programs.

“If Trump were to return to office, it’s possible we could see a further shift toward reducing federal oversight and placing more responsibility on state and local governments,” said Craig Fugate, former director of FEMA under then-President Barack Obama. Placing the onus of emergency preparation and recovery on states could hurt disaster vulnerable communities like New York, where coastal cities already face a relatively high risk of flooding.

“By shifting responsibilities to the states, it could reduce the federal government’s involvement in emergency response, leaving states to manage disasters with less federal oversight and potentially less funding,” said Fugate. “States that have greater financial resources and established emergency management systems might fare better, but it could lead to uneven disaster responses nationwide.”

Penta said the changes to FEMA’s ability to provide financial assistance to states will have implications for state budgets, possibly leading to raised taxes or taking on increased debt as a state. “There are probably going to be a lot of tough choices that will need to be made in a situation where you have a very large, costly, complex event,” she said.

Some experts entertain the idea that by placing more of disaster response and recovery responsibilities on the local level, Project 2025 might encourage states to stop developing communities in areas most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. 

“The logic makes sense. It’s a dangerous area, don’t live there. But where isn’t dangerous?” said Kevin Reilly, whose Long Beach, Long Island, home was damaged in Hurricane Sandy. Reilly became a prominent storm recovery advocate in the aftermath, launching a Facebook group dedicated to sharing information about a FEMA-funded housing recovery program. Reilly is worried that states would be overwhelmed on their own – especially in places that are very susceptible to climate change. “To do this on our own is not going to work, it’s just too much. It’s a heavy lift for a community,” Reilly said.

Trump promises disaster prep, but denies climate change

Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance has pledged continued disaster relief under a Trump presidency. “We want as robust and aggressive a federal response as we can get to save as many lives as possible, and of course afterwards to help the people in those communities rebuild,” Vance said during the vice presidential debate. 

Both Vance and Trump, however, have made statements rejecting mainstream climate science. Trump removed the United States from international efforts to mitigate the impacts of climate change, such as the Paris Climate accord, during his first term in office. During Trump’s presidency, disaster response focused on economic recovery and rebuilding infrastructure, less so on mitigation efforts, according to Fugate. 

Harris plans to increase the agency’s budget and build climate resilience in U.S. communities. Her presidential platform has laid out methods for how she plans on tackling the climate crisis, specifically mentioning aims to mitigate the impact of disasters on communities by supporting them in becoming more resilient. Fugate believes a Harris administration will strengthen FEMA’s role in long-term recovery to address social and infrastructure vulnerabilities due to climate change.

As disasters have only become more frequent, extreme and costly, the Biden-Harris administration doubled funding for a FEMA program aimed at building more resilient communities and infrastructure. 

“The (Biden) administration has prioritized climate resilience in FEMA’s work, with a greater focus on mitigation efforts, reducing disaster risk and addressing climate-related vulnerabilities,” said Fugate. “For example, Biden’s FEMA has increased funding for pre-disaster mitigation through programs like Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC).”

FEMA has to allocate their budget during and after a storm without knowing what future storms lie ahead, what the human and financial costs will be, or when Congress will pass another resolution to provide funding. When disaster response costs billions of dollars each year, these funds are facing exceeding pressures and demands from the public to meet their needs. This was clear in the recent response to Hurricane Milton, which followed shortly after Helene, when available federal funding and disaster response workers were already exhausted. 

Once funds become available, challenges regarding distributing funds to affected communities remain. The process of accessing funds has been deemed “slow and bureaucratic.” To reduce delays in deploying disaster aid, FEMA must streamline bureaucratic processes, according to Fugate, “simplifying the application and approval processes would enable faster recovery.”  

The Biden-Harris administration updated FEMA’s disaster assistance capabilities this year in an effort to better and more quickly meet the needs of disaster affected communities. People with disabilities can now use FEMA funds to make accessibility repairs and improvements, for example.

“It’s in the aftermath that you can see the discrepancy between being a person with a disability, being a person of color, that you’re at the bottom of the feeding tube for any federal funding,” said Elizabeth Treston of Long Beach.   

Treston, a woman with quadriplegia who uses a power wheelchair to get around, overcame many challenges in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. Including difficulties accessing FEMA’s disaster recovery resources, which were located on the second floor of a building that was temporarily without wheelchair access. Treston has since become an expert in resiliency and preparedness, advocating for improved access to emergency resources in her community.

Equitable disaster response has become a major point of contention in the aftermath of hurricanes Helene and Milton. Trump has falsely accused the Biden administration of withholding aid from Republican communities and stealing FEMA funds to give to undocumented immigrants. Trump’s rhetoric, according to FEMA Director Deanne Criswell, created a “truly dangerous narrative” that impacts FEMA’s ability to effectively provide aid, as workers now face online threats, and valuable resources are designated to counter misinformation.

“Disaster recovery doesn’t know if you’re wearing a red hat or a blue hat or anything in between,” Reilly said. “At the end of the day there’s a family, a person, a child, a community that needs help.”