FEMA's Targeting of Trump Supporters Makes the Case for Less Government
Government agencies and officials can’t be trusted, so we should give them less to do.

At a time when Americans worry—for good reason—that the apparatus of the state is used to punish the political enemies of those in charge, a government employee just got caught doing what many people fear has become common practice: politicizing the use of government power. A Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) official who ordered workers to deny assistance to Trump supporters affected by Hurricane Milton powerfully bolstered the arguments of those of us who want government kept small and out of the way to minimize the danger it represents.
When Officials Only Help Their Political Friends
"More than 22,000 FEMA employees every day adhere to FEMA's core values and are dedicated to helping people before, during and after disasters, often sacrificing time with their own families to help disaster survivors," FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell noted in a November 9 press release. "Recently, one FEMA employee departed from these values to advise her survivor assistance team to not go to homes with yard signs supporting President-elect Trump."
Criswell added, "this employee has been terminated and we have referred the matter to the Office of Special Counsel."
Criswell was responding to a story broken by the Daily Wire's Leif Le Mahieu that a FEMA supervisor, named as Marn'i Washington, "told workers in a message to 'avoid homes advertising Trump' as they canvassed Lake Placid, Florida to identify residents who could qualify for federal aid" after Hurricane Milton. The supervisor "relayed this message both verbally and in a group chat used by the relief team."
The Daily Wire story included screen shots of the directives to FEMA employees, though further evidence isn't necessary after Criswell conceded the point and fired the supervisor. The question now is, if one supervisor issued such orders, how many others did the same without being caught? If you ask the American people, they suspect such political weaponization is common.
Low Public Trust
In February 2024, after years of allegations of misuse of police, regulatory, and prosecutorial powers by government officials, Harvard/CAPS/Harris pollsters asked Americans about the issue. Asked, "Do you think the Democrats today are engaged in lawfare - a campaign using the government and the legal system in biased ways to take out a political opponent?" 58 percent of respondents said "yes." The "yes" vote drew an unsurprising 81 percent of Republicans, but also 50 percent of independents and even 42 percent of Democrats.
In December 2022, months after the FBI raided former (and now future) President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate over the handling of classified documents, only half of respondents voiced much trust in the FBI, according to a poll by the McCourtney Institute for Democracy/APM Research Lab. Fifty-one percent of Republicans said the FBI is biased against Trump, while 24 percent of Democrats said it's biased against the left. Belief that FBI "agents are fair" was lowest among the youngest respondents at 31 percent, rising with age until it hit 50 percent among the oldest cohort.
A History of Political Weaponization
The use of government agencies as political weapons isn't new. Over a decade ago, the Internal Revenue Service faced allegations (confirmed by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration) that it targeted "Tea Party" groups for unfair treatment when they applied for tax-exempt status.
"The Obama administration isn't the first to face criticism of using the Internal Revenue Service as a political hit squad," The Christian Science Monitor noted in a 2013 story on the matter. "Since the advent of the federal income tax about a century ago, several presidents – or their zealous underlings – have directed the IRS to turn its formidable police powers on political rivals."
Likewise, "the FBI…has placed more emphasis on domestic dissent than on organized crime and, according to some, let its efforts against foreign spies suffer because of the amount of time spent checking up on American protest groups," the U.S. Senate's Church Committee complained in 1976.
Compared to the havoc wreaked by the attention of prosecutors, FBI agents, and tax collectors, politically motivated neglect by a FEMA supervisor seems like small potatoes. But it's maddening for those forced to pay taxes to support government agencies that then selectively expend those funds on supporters of the powers that be. When one government official is caught denying services to opponents of the current administration, it inevitably raises concerns that the rot goes much deeper. It's perfectly fair to wonder how many American taxpayers have suffered delays, neglect, or abuse at the hands of petty, politicized bureaucrats whose paychecks are funded by people they despise.
That's why, in the process of denying aid to Floridians whose politics she abhorred, Marn'i Washington did a service to the American people by politicizing her response to a hurricane. If something so seemingly removed from partisan disputes as disaster relief can be made contingent on espousing the "right" political views, then any government service can be weaponized to assist friends of the powerful and harm those with dissenting viewpoints.
If You Can't Trust Government, Shrink It
The solution isn't found in a changing of the bureaucratic guard. Vice President-elect J.D. Vance famously wants to "seize the administrative state for our purposes" and replace existing bureaucrats with "our people," as he commented in a 2021 interview. That would certainly ensure that Trump supporters get their government services—but only until political power once again changed hands. In the meantime, critics of the new administration, or of government in general, would likely continue to be targeted by tax-funded political operatives, with nothing changed but the identities of those getting the shaft.
It's too much to ask that government agencies be depoliticized in how they go about their business. Government is, at its core, a political entity. We live in an era when devotees of the dominant political tribes hate each other and seek every opportunity to inflict harm on their enemies. It's impossible to believe that this country's political factions are up to the job of administering the vast powers of government in an even-handed way without wielding it against foes when that was beyond the grasp of their predecessors in less-fraught times.
Now, as always, the answer to abusive government is less government. Rather than give the Marn'i Washingtons of the world more power with which to help friends and hurt enemies, they should have less to do. Or they can work for independent organizations that can't force people they dislike to fund them. Government agencies and officials can't be trusted, so we should give them less to do.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Far less government, particularly federal, and weed progressivism out of it.
WHO can be trusted? You? The media? Advertising? The public? Hell most can’t even trust their own families.
People lie and coerce for all kinds of reasons.
There is only one way to trust anyone. If they recognize that lying will result in more personal risk than reward.
1.Criminalize lying
2.Recognize that everyone has the inalienable right to record what they witness wherever they are.
Trust any other way is a risk and often a waste of time.
The solution isn’t to take responsibility away from people. It’s to make them recognize they are accountable for it.
We know we can’t trust nazis like you.
No socialist can be trusted. National, international, local, or freelance.
Your Kol Nidre israeli chumps are committing the holocaust in Gaza.
If you support them, why not your bogeyman Nazis?
""WHO can be trusted? "'
Well, not government so that's why we should reduce its authority. They are big liars so it's something you should support.
So should we reduce you?
Criminalize lying? And then enforce those laws with an army of avenging angels?
Uh, no fuckwit.
The same people who enforce current laws against perjury and fraud forms of lying.
You want to trust government to enforce laws against lying? What's next, asking prostitutes to enforce laws against promiscuity?
Well, it isn't like the DOJ is putting the Dems' political enimies in jail. If they were, I am sure Reason would cover it.
Sarc says it would be ok if the other team did it.
Would have been ok if they'd done it to the other team.
You're deluded if you suggest this is how the other side feels. That's projection. At worst, the right will say "serves you right" when the left finally gets the same unfair treatment they've been dealt.
It is excuse making for his past stances, pure projection, and his defense of deep state members. It is pretty pathetic.
Problem is he is so full of self delusion and a pathological liar he won't admit he wrote this in an hour.
Sorry, you are right.
Next time it will be ok if FEMA skips houses advertizing Team Blue, because Democrats did it first. It's like the opposite of qualified immunity.
When did FEMA do that under conservative presidents? You seem to be ignorant on the political make up of the bureaucracy you demand not be fired in an act of revenge.
Hey me guess Lois Lerner was fine. The attacks against Musk are fine. Democrat state actions are always fine. Because at some point a conservative might do it, so because you can imagine it, both sides are the same.
You are incapable of saying this is wrong in isolation. Because it was from the left.
You really should take medication for the voices in your head.
Ideas™ !
Coward.
Still not ok. It needs to parallel better. If we have a side by side of someone laughing at MAGA not getting support after a hurricane in FL and crying about not getting help after flooding in NY then that would count.
You're still projecting your own pathology on others. You're broken and can't differentiate between defense and aggression.
""Next time it will be ok if FEMA skips houses advertizing Team Blue,"
No it won't. It's not ok. Period.
Which stage of grief are you in now, sarc?
Somewhere between denial and anger.
No. The practice of government disaster relief functions in the field should be as apolitical as possible
I read a bit deeper into this issue and it looked as if some of the people who were advertising for Trump on their property tended to be rather hostile to FEMA workers, responding to knocks on the door from government with verbal threats and sometimes violence. While I don’t think that’s a good enough reason to just skip homes, I can understand the reluctance to help people like Nardz and Sevo.
Some people deserve it. Did you see how they were dressed?
You listened to MSNBC. Lol. Yes. This was their narrative. You blindly push it to justify it.
Cites, please. In Florida.
Just stuff I read in the Daily Mail.
Whoever could have predicted sarc would defend those weaponizing the government with DARVO.
Actually, everyone I think. When Dems do something outrageous sarc's immediate and only priority is finding a Rep to blame.
Me: “I don’t think that’s a good enough reason to just skip homes”
Marshal the Sack of Shit: “Whoever could have predicted sarc would defend those weaponizing the government with DARVO”
The thing that puzzles me is that I really thing you believe what you say. You see me say they shouldn't be skipping homes and your brain registers me defending the skipping of homes.
You’re mentally ill, bub. Your eyes and brain see totally different things.
Marshal the Sack of Shit:
Ideas!
Don't look at me! sock is no2 on mute. Enjoy being ignored!
Ideas™ !
Still reeling from when Ken muted you thinking others would be as damaged if you did that to them?
people who were advertising for Trump on their property tended to be rather hostile to FEMA workers, responding to knocks on the door from government with verbal threats and sometimes violence.
There's no evidence of any of this. This is just what left wingers invent because it helps them make their case. We've already established through ling experience their assertions have no relationship with reality.
I qualified it with "it looked as if" which you intentionally omitted because you're a liar who lies by omission.
In fact though it doesn't look like that at all, you merely repeated their self-serving justification as if it were true. Which is what you always do to support the left.
"" responding to knocks on the door from government with verbal threats and sometimes violence.""
Then you move on. You can't skip a house because you fear. Knock on the door and if big asshole answers, log it in your book that way. I knocked, dude answered with anger and didn't want our help, we moved on.
This is the VAST majority of sarcs post where he says he wants to cut bureaucracy and doesn't shill for dems.
Who are you talking to?
If you have to point at a post and say "Look over here! Not over there, over here! Over here! I said look over here!" then you're not pointing at the majority of posts.
Another example of the VAST majority of your posts that are moderate and attack government.
I've seen you say "moderate" a few times now. Is that your latest strawman?
It’s a reference to your claim. Which I’m certain you already forgot.
Whatever you do, do not take revenge by firing these bureaucrats. - jeffsarc
What's great is she is spilling the beans now, scorched earth. Says it happened in NC too. Orders came down from above.
https://x.com/libsoftiktok/status/1856373428133212340
Another reason you can’t have chicks in charge.
That is the trillion dollar question - at what level were the documented instructions issued.
It would be extra funny if they were stupid enough to write it down.
Someone was stupid enough to act on it from above without a written paper trail?
I just might take that bet.
Her claim is that FEMA workers were facing hostility from Republicans and the "avoidance" order came down from the top. A lot of people will be testifying in congressional hearings in the near future.
A claim like that is just begging for a sudden “suicide “.
You’re a leftist who watches MSNBC! Look how smart I am! I’m so smart! My mom says I'm smart!
\Jesse
Ideas™ !
Evaluate a comparable circumstance like police saying they won't attempt to work with any black crime victims because some have been hostile to police.
This is what sarc cites as an acceptable justification. Revealing.
The only thing I sarcastically said would be an acceptable justification would be your team refusing to help anyone advertising Democrats because they did it first. That is because you would be fine with skipping houses advertising Democrats because you consider Democrats to be subhuman. You going to deny that you'd be cheering, you pathetic, hate-filled old man?
your team
I thought you pretended to oppose putting people on teams? Pretend better.
That is because you would be fine with skipping houses advertising Democrats because you consider Democrats to be subhuman.
If it wasn’t so predictable your lunacy would be amusing. As it is though it’s more like the 843rd episode of a sitcom.
Repeal FEMA.
Each State should be responsible for the unique challenges they face. Better for them to be prepared then cry for federal assistance.
Disantis says Florida doesn't rely on FEMA. He says the agency is just a checkbook.
He's not wrong.
The feds are good at being a checkbook.
It's interesting how the left wingers leap to defend FEMA, but the original charges of threats against FEMA were debunked weeks ago. It turns out FEMA was telling locals what they were allowed to do and the locals told them to fuck off. In true government fashion this was telephoned into "threats" which the far left government personnel then pinned on Trump Voters to "justify" because that's how they think.
Naturally the left wingers here will pretend the original hyperbolic reports were true because the truth is not a consideration in their worldview.
It's the words = violence crowd.
It is simply disgusting that government agencies are discriminating against people for any reason. I didn't believe that such a damning revelation would be published that aid was denied based on a person's political choices.
The persons responsible are probably not a rogue outlier, but more likely more of a systemic problem. It's difficult to root out all biases, but denying aid based on politics is not distasteful, but criminal. There was intent to do harm and the persons involved should be convicted and serve time.
It's happening, but it's a good thing.
I forget, is this step 4 or 5?
"...selectively expend those funds on supporters of the powers that be. "
It's not just that the bias favors the "powers that be." The bureaucrats will always tend to favor the Democrats. That is why Trump was stalked by his own FBI. And if that FEMA woman were still there next year under a Trump administration, she would still have given the same instructions to her underlings.
"FEMA's Targeting of Trump Supporters Makes the Case for Less Government."
Wrong.
FEMA needs to disbanded and defunded.
It's incompetence has been demonstrated time and again.
The states are better at handling their own disasters.
Some states are, Texas and Florida could handle a disaster but look at New York's "Super Storm Sandy" response. A little rain and they completely shut down. Or Louisiana and the response in New Orleans to Katrina. The common thread here is states run by Democrats are unable to take care of themselves and the rest of us have to bale them out every time.
“”but look at New York’s “Super Storm Sandy” response. A little rain and they completely shut down.””
If you think it was just a little rain you are way wrong.
"paychecks are funded by people they despise"
WHO despises? The taxpayers, or the recipients of the paychecks?
I think the Federal Government is too friggin' large; however, I can't quite connect the dots between this particular incident and cutting government.
If you think that Federal Aid was a desirable thing that shouldn't have been curtailed because of political affiliation, it's pretty hard to say that we should eliminate Federal Aid altogether.