The initial year of the Trump administration nearly led to the collapse of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Among the severe impacts on FEMA was Elon Muskâs overhaul of the federal civil service. Kristi Noem, the then Secretary of Homeland Security, implemented a freeze on nearly all disaster recovery and response expenditures, severely hindering the agency’s main operations. This freeze held back billions of dollars intended for communities nationwide, delayed responses to emergencies like the July 4 floods in Central Texas, and almost ceased FEMA’s future disaster preparedness initiatives. The agency also delayed or rejected numerous aid requests, notably from states governed by Democrats. Earlier this year, leaked documents revealed that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) intended to cut FEMA’s on-the-ground response personnel by about half. (FEMA is one of several agencies within DHS.)
Following President Trump’s dismissal of Noem last month, amid controversies over her immigration enforcement policies, misuse of personal funds, and claims of misleading Congress, there is renewed optimism that FEMA could recover its standing. Noem’s successor, former Oklahoma senator Markwayne Mullin, has pledged to lift the spending freeze, which he criticized as “micromanaging.” Mullin has also indicated plans to appoint a permanent leader for FEMA, a position Noem had left vacant. Reports suggest he has dismissed several of Noemâs senior aides, as noted by anonymous FEMA staff.
Nevertheless, FEMA officials and disaster response specialists remain uncertain about Mullin’s ability to restore the agency to its pre-Noem efficiencyâif that is indeed his intention. Concerns persist about the agency’s preparedness for the imminent hurricane season, as morale is low and many critical agency functions remain unresolved.
“It feels like we’re all just waiting for the other shoe to drop,” commented a regional FEMA official, who wished to remain anonymous to avoid repercussions from agency management.
Despite Mullin’s commitments to reverse some of Noem’s policies, FEMA’s operations have not significantly changed, according to sources who spoke with Grist. Some disaster relief payments to municipalities and states have been released, but numerous expenses still require high-level authorization from Karen Evans, Noem’s interim administrator appointment. (Evans will oversee the agency until Mullin’s nominee receives Senate confirmation.) Programs designed to fortify U.S. infrastructure against future disasters remain inactive; FEMA has not provided new long-term infrastructure aid for about a year from one major program and only abandoned plans to terminate another resilience program last month following a court ruling.
Critical initiatives such as the National Flood Insurance Program, which offers subsidized flood insurance to around 5 million households, have been compromised. The program’s rating system, which gives insurance discounts to cities actively engaging in flood prevention, has been suspended since the contract with the managing company expired several weeks ago. Consequently, no federal oversight currently exists to ensure U.S. cities and counties are avoiding construction in flood-prone areas and mitigating flood damage.
Although some FEMA officials hope Mullin can reverse Noem’s detrimental policies, they also anticipate a persistent move towards a more fragmented emergency response strategy. President Trump has consistently argued that states should take on more responsibility in disaster preparedness and response. During a recent visit to North Carolina, Mullin seemed to support this reduced role for FEMA, stating, “we shouldn’t look at FEMA as being a first responder, but … as supporting the first responders you already have.”
“The state is much more equipped,” he added, “but we can be there to get them past the first heavy lift.”
Some FEMA employees found these comments concerning.
“His comments show he has just as little of an understanding of FEMA as Noem did,” remarked a senior FEMA official, suggesting Mullin may not grasp the extent to which states currently depend on federal emergency management. (Neither FEMA nor DHS responded to requests for comment.)
FEMA is responsible for coordinating immediate responses to major hurricanes and wildfires, while for many disasters, it functions as a reimbursement entity, allocating funds set aside by Congress to support disaster recovery efforts beyond the financial reach of most states. Local and state governments must apply for reimbursement for each repair, elevation, or reconstruction project, all of which must comply with federal standards. The agency also runs national grant programs aimed at preventing issues such as power outages and tidal flooding.
Many experts in emergency management agree to some extent with the perspective shared by Trump and Mullinâthat states should assume a greater role in disaster planning. States like Florida and Texas, which face frequent hurricanes, have well-resourced emergency management departments capable of coordinating disaster responses. However, experts caution that the federal government remains crucial in coordinating recovery from large-scale disasters, and a shift to state leadership would require ample time and support.
“The implications depend on how it’s implemented,” said Andrew Rumbach, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute specializing in disaster and housing studies. “A smaller federal role with fewer resources has significant consequences.” For instance, states vulnerable to storms but with limited budgets, like Mississippi and Louisiana, would struggle with the increasing disaster burdens.
“Transferring federal resources to the states raises entirely different questionsâit might be a setback in some areas, but could lead to innovative approaches in others,” Rumbach continued. A state like Hawaiâi might leverage unrestricted federal funds for modular housing solutions suited to its islands, as opposed to relocating fire survivors to non-existent apartments or hotels, which is FEMAâs current default. However, this autonomy could also allow states to make poor financial decisions, potentially prioritizing wealthier cities over poorer ones without federal intervention.
Such reforms would require congressional action, yet the Trump administration has attempted to reduce FEMAâs role independently by withholding assistance previously provided by the agency. This has left states like Washington, Maryland, and Vermont to navigate severe flooding with fewer federal reimbursements than usual.
These states are bracing for a future without assured FEMA aid, where state leaders must spearhead disaster planning. After devastating river floods impacted communities in western Maryland last year, the Trump administration denied a state request for over $30 million in reconstruction aid, despite thorough documentation of the damage. Appeals by Governor Wes Moore and the stateâs congressional representatives were unsuccessful.
Lacking federal funds, the state had to act independently. Governor Moore’s administration launched Maryland’s first “state disaster recovery fund” and distributed approximately $500,000 to the county most affected by the flooding. This year, state legislators have reinforced this commitment to self-reliance by developing a bill to establish a new grant fund for resilience projects against future climate disasters, such as shoreline erosion control measures.
The challenge lies in scale. The damage from last year’s floods exceeded the federal aid threshold by more than threefold, and the cost of repairing roads and bridges amounts to about a fifth of Allegany Countyâs budget. Local authorities may begin recovery planning, but without federal support, funding remains a hurdle.
Last year, the Trump administration convened a “review council” comprising governors and state emergency managers to determine the agency’s future. In December, the council completed a report, approved by Noem, advocating for states to take primary responsibility with the federal government in a “supporting role,” though the report was never published. Trump has since extended the council’s mandate until May.
Mullinâs comments in North Carolina indicate that he aligns with the review council’s direction and seeks to diminish the federal role in disasters. Whether he will pursue these changes this year, as hurricane and wildfire seasons approach, is still uncertain.
In the interim, according to Rumbach of the Urban Institute, state and local emergency managers find themselves in a holding pattern.
“Thereâs a lot of, âwait and see,â” he observed.
