Trump Walks Back Talk of Abolishing FEMA
After criticizing the agency for being ineffective for months, the Trump administration now plans to reform it to supplement state disaster response efforts.

Only a month after President Donald Trump said he planned to phase out the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) after this year's hurricane season, he is now reportedly walking back his plans.
On Friday, The Washington Post reported that "the White House has backed away from plans to abolish the agency." In a statement, Tricia McLauglin, assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), said, "Federal Emergency Management will shift from bloated, DC-centric dead weight to a lean, deployable disaster force that empowers state actors to provide relief for their citizens. The old processes are being replaced because they failed Americans in real emergencies for decades."
"Changes in the agency will probably amount to a 'rebranding' that will emphasize state leaders' roles in disaster response," per the Post.
The announcement comes after the deadly Guadalupe River flood in Texas on July 4. Heavy rainfall flooded the Guadalupe River, causing the river to rise nearly 30 feet in less than an hour in the early morning of July 4. The flood damaged homes and summer camps, killing at least 120 people, including 36 children. More than 160 people remained missing when Trump and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) surveyed the aftermath of the flooding on Friday.
Since the tragedy, the government's ability to warn and respond to natural disasters has come under scrutiny. Some have blamed agency cuts for impairing emergency response efforts, making people less safe. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D–Fla.) has called for DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to be investigated for needlessly delaying the disbursement of funds by requiring personal approval of FEMA resources in excess of $100,000. On Friday, three Democrats from the House Oversight Committee sent letters to FEMA, the Commerce Department's inspector general, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration demanding answers to concerns regarding "the apparent delay in FEMA's response efforts cause by the politicization of the agency and its funding."
Trump's apparent walkback from abolishing the agency marks a stark contrast from earlier this year, when he sharply criticized FEMA's response to Hurricane Helene. While surveying damage in North Carolina in February, Trump floated the idea of ending FEMA and announced his executive order to assess the agency's ability to provide "immediate, effective, and impartial response to and recovery from disasters."
Following the order, the FEMA Review Council was created to "begin the process of fundamentally reforming and overhauling FEMA, or maybe getting rid of FEMA," according to Trump. But the council's report containing recommendations to reform federal disaster response won't be released until November. During the wait, Trump and DHS have kept the prospect of abolishing the agency alive, and even ousted the agency's acting administrator, Cameron Hamilton, in May for disagreeing with the president's call to eliminate the agency. However, no official changes to FEMA have taken place.
But now, abolishment looks to be off the table. FEMA may instead be "reformed in ways that best serve the national interest" and "supplement state actions," according to Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman. "President Trump is committed to right-sizing the Federal government while empowering state and local governments by enabling them to better understand, plan for, and ultimately address the needs of their citizens," she added.
The majority of Americans believe the federal government should have a "major role" in natural disaster response. But the specifics of how involved it should be has been an ongoing topic of debate for decades as the number of natural disasters—and the amount spent on recovery efforts—has risen. "In 2018, there were 14 disasters in the U.S. that caused more than $1 billion in damages. In 2024, there were 27," said a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report released in March. Congress has appropriated $458 billion for disaster assistance over the last 10 years, according to the GAO.
Despite these massive financial resources, Americans have received suboptimal federal recovery responses from disasters in Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Florida, North Carolina, and California. The agency has also been accused of denying aid to political enemies. And now the country's most recent natural disaster along the Guadalupe River, Trump's FEMA has already received criticism for providing too little aid and a delayed deployment of funds to Texas.
Trump's original instinct that the mere existence of FEMA causes unnecessary bureaucratic bloat during times of emergency was correct. While "right-sizing" the agency to empower state and local governments is a step in the right direction, a better approach would be to abolish FEMA altogether.
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
Fuck. You. Cut. Spending.
Hilarious given you've been against literally every cut since Jan 20th.
Sarc walks back sobriety. Daily.
Don’t we all?
"Since the tragedy, the government's ability to warn and respond to natural disasters has come under scrutiny. Some have blamed agency cuts for impairing emergency response efforts, making people less safe."
Sure, by people who are undeniably incorrect on everything they are saying. You could note that staffing was not harmed at all.
Did autumn really couch her ignorance by using the "some people say?"
Did she learn that in journalism school? Or maybe a Reason staff workshop.
The School of Boehm and Sullum.
Last week huh?
June.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/11/politics/fema-hurricane-season-phase-out-trump
“We want to wean off of FEMA, and we want to bring it down to the state level,” Trump told reporters during a briefing in the Oval Office, later saying, “A governor should be able to handle it, and frankly, if they can’t handle it, the aftermath, then maybe they shouldn’t be governor.”
So... same policy.
And same as back in January.
https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/2025/01/24/what-is-fema-why-does-trump-want-to-get-rid-of-fema/77931810007/
The goal was always to move the actions to state. Whether under governors or fema itself. Thats what the phase out means. It doesn't mean sudden cut off.
Yes we know. Trust the government. Everything they say can be taken at face value.
Well yeah. The right people are in charge. That changes everything. Remember it’s always who, not what.
What idiotic comments from both of you lol.
We get it. You demand all money and power flow through D.C. bureaucracy.
But only the "proper" (Team Blue!) D.C. bureaucracy.
He wants to be the director of the Department of Homeless Child Security.
Or ultimately. Perhaps some international governing body. They are both open borders Neo Marxist Sorosites.
Hilarious that a vulture capitalist like Soros could be called a Marxist.
Are you taking umbrage with the idea that disaster relief, should not exist at all, should be handled at a state level, or are you saying you don’t think that will happen?
Like the local government in Texas that decided that emergency warning systems were a waste of money.
Abolish the weather service. Anyone who really wants to understand the weather can learn partial differential equations and buy their own multimilliondollar supercomputer to program weather models. Anyone not rich enough to buy a supercomputer, and anyone without the math ability to program partial differential equations, well, they are just losers and the Libertarian ideology -- and the Trump ideology -- is that we would be better off without them.
Let anyone eho
Big flood in big blue state. That means FEMA is good now. Trump to the rescue! As always it’s about who, not what.
Big blue huh?
Sarc has trouble with colors after "lunch".
This sketch makes me think of Sarc buying ‘lunch’.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnWwFRAI_9U
To all the sensitive people with permanently twisted panties--and clinical anxiety that they can't get free government health care for--sometimes Trump says things for effect. And sometimes the media either takes the bait or deliberately inflates what Trump said. And sometimes politicians and media try to amp up your anxiety to make you more irrational, and more dependent on them.
So, settle down, go to your safe space, and try again tomorrow.
This is exactly why our constitution was set up the way it is. The president does not have any authority to eliminate any agency. Congress decides how big an agency is, what budget it gets, and what its mission is. It is the duty of the president to run the agencies as Congress intended.
One person deciding what government agencies exist or not is dictatorship.
Where in the constitution does it say all federal agencies are run with no accountability in D.C.?
You talked about the take care clause a few days ago. Congress mandates the president look for wast fraud and abuse, so how is that unconstitutional?
Have you ever read the appropriations or law for FEMA?
You dont think even shallowly.
Legal authority to run an agency efficiently and the legal authority to eliminate or drastically downsize it are very different. Nice Straw Man argument...fail.
Constitutionally, FEMA shouldn’t even exist in the first place, doc.
You beat me to it,
Who decides what efficiently running an agency looks like?
Ultimately Congress.
"The president does not have any authority to eliminate any agency."
Only the soviet has THAT authority, right comrade?
He walks it forward, he walks it back! OMG what is he even doing? Ugh!
One day at Mar-a-lago, Trump's golf cart stalls out.
Trump: I'm going to get rid of that piece of junk. It doesn't work.
McLauglin: Look, I get you're frustrated, just give me a minute and let me see if I can fix it.
Trump: .... fine.
McLauglin: OK, see, look, it's working just fine again.
Trump: We'll see.
McLauglin: See? We finished the round, and no complaints right?
Trump: OK I guess you did a pretty good job. Thanks.
Reason: TRUMP WALKS BACK PROMISE TO GET RID OF GOLF CART!!!!!!11!!1!!!!
Put on the nose, Autumn. You are Clown World.
The Golf of America
As long as he's getting America's balls out of the sand traps.
(You were missed, Chumby! :D)
You mean out of sand traps and into your genocidal Zionist loving mouth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3uqv0eP7Tg
Fuck off and die, Nazi shit.
You must be John Z Misek.
Seems pretty accurate. That Trump considers major policy changes with the research, deliberation and care that one usually gives to trivial matters such as switching golf carts. That doesn't mean we should be so cavalier with federal policy, nor curtail our criticism of the head of said federal government.
So I agree with you. Our criticism should focus on how little consideration is being put into these decisions; how fickle and unpredictable the most powerful government in the history of the world has become and how the entire world, but especially Americans live at the mercy of one egomaniac's whims...and those that elected and support him.
People with dementia experience both good days and bad days during onset. Our very own King Joffrey is not an exception.
Next thing you know he will be confused with gobbling genocidal Zionist ball sacs with gobbling everybody else’s ball sacs.
how the entire world, but especially Americans live at the mercy of one egomaniac's whims
You're supposed to fall gently to the fainting couch on your back Brix, not hurl yourself at it at full force headfirst.
The is the problem with perpetual news absorption - and especially biased news absorption. You lose perspective. The statement you made, I'd posit, is suggestive of that.
Ask yourself - honestly - how was yesterday all that really different for you from today? Or the day before that? Or the day before that. Different watercooler talk maybe, but more or less the same 'ol humdrum routine, right? Is America - are you, as an American - suffering whiplashing inducing twists and turns in life on a daily (or even monthly) basis as a result of "an egomaniac's whims?"
My job hasn't changed. My week's regular errands haven't changed. My bank account and investment portfolio is still where it should be. I still go to Church every Sunday. The bar still serves liquor. The parks open up for farmers markets and kids soccer games at the same time. The highways are still paved.
Exactly what "whims" are you "at the mercy of" that have turned your world upside down, such that you think you can no longer tell north from south?
That Trump considers major policy changes with the research, deliberation and care that one usually gives to trivial matters
He echoes the frustrations and outcries of the American People - and it assures them that, unlike pretty much ANY other politician, he's actually listening to them. This, incidentally, is what Reason is trying to undermine by this type of rEpOrTiNg.
We were all rightfully appalled at FEMA's gross mishandling of Helene and Hawaii, which fell somewhere between complete incompetence and outright malevolence. (Nobody actually cared about California though, go ahead let it burn). The public made their reaction known - and Trump let them know they were heard.
He recognized that the People recognized there was a problem with FEMA. And he added it to his list.
That endears Trump to the People. And Reason - the MSM Leftist/Globalist Democrat vassals they are - not one to suffer such a thing, intentionally ignores the context and then tries to twist it as "promises broken!"
Ask yourself - honestly - how was yesterday all that really different for you from today?
Yesterday and today aren't different for me. Today and 7 months ago is very different. My routine has indeed changed, but it's been much worse for some immigrant friends/coworkers.
I don't remember this "no big deal" attitude when Biden was president. So let me turn this around on you. If there's drag queen story hour, legal weed, if rich kids have their school loans paid for, if Hunter Biden gets a 7 figure income from China or Ukraine, how does that change your routine? If Kamala won, would your routine have changed?
There's principles at stake here. There's a strengthened imperial presidency that may well go to a Dem and a weakened judicial branch that would struggle to check that president's excesses.
You may well point out that not much changes from minute to minute for the slowly boiling frog, but at some point, the frog dies. And Trump cranked up that burner like never before.
Trump's whims do affect me and no president has had such a dramatic change in my life than Trump 2.0. And while I don't care much about FEMA, I think Trump’s economic ramifications are potentially disastrous and eventually us frogs will notice.
he's actually listening
He's listening to a subset of Americans. Certainly not me nor anyone like me. His fools rush in (and back out in his case) approach to governing is problematic in a nation with such an overbearing government. He lost his rock solid support among my friends and family that had been faithful Trump supporters.
I won’t speak to the other issues, but In this case, he didn’t back out though. Autumn acknowledged that with this quote “begin the process of fundamentally reforming and overhauling FEMA, or maybe getting rid of FEMA,".
“…FEMA may instead be "reformed in ways that best serve the national interest" and "supplement state actions,"” would seem to fulfill the former part of the other quote.
Yesterday and today aren't different for me. Today and 7 months ago is very different. My routine has indeed changed
How? And in what ways do you lay that solely at the feet of the POTUS?
So let me turn this around on you. If there's drag queen story hour, legal weed, if rich kids have their school loans paid for, if Hunter Biden gets a 7 figure income from China or Ukraine, how does that change your routine?
It wouldn't. But I also wouldn't be saying that the above suggests I'm living "at the mercy of an egomaniac's whims."
I'd be saying, in that case, that the President supports pedophilia, drug addiction, corruption, and that his son should be in CECOT.
If Kamala won, would your routine have changed?
Dunno. That was never a possibility, so such a thing has never been considered by anyone.
There's principles at stake here.
Then talk about the principles, Brix. Don't hurl yourself at the fainting couch like your life has been personally and intentionally destroyed by Donnie T like he singled you out for such a thing.
and a weakened judicial branch
Brix, with all due respect, are you smoking crack? Our judicial branch is OUT OF CONTROL. The Federal Bench, save SCOTUS, is completely off the rails. And SCOTUS is effectively two members short right now.
Trump's whims do affect me and no president has had such a dramatic change in my life than Trump 2.0.
And yet you don't list even a single one. You talk about your immigrant buddies (but again don't state anything specific) and you talk about boiled frog-like future harms that you also don't articulate.
Maybe, Brix, the drama is just in your head. Like I said at the beginning - perhaps the biased news slow-drip is only having an effect on your perspective.
He's listening to a subset of Americans.
No, he's listening to an extreme majority. I can appreciate your frustration, because I'm not a part of it either - but I can also take a step back and admit that Americans no longer want Conservativism (and it certainly does not want Christian Conservatism, and it absolutely does not want Leftism).
It wants MAGA. And he's giving the People what they want. We can talk about that - how the American People have lost their moral path (hence they're MAGA instead of Conservative) but how they haven't gone completely insane (hence why they're vocally anti-Leftism). But what we can't do is pretend we're the victim in all this.
MAGA is the populist revolt against Marxist ideology worming its way into all facets of America. The #1 issue being illegals flooding this nation and raping/killing both its values AND it's people. Americans - left AND right - have had enough of that nonsense, and Trump was the only one who not only promised, but DELIVERED, on actually doing something about it.
Have you visited any right-leaning sites lately? It's all "Promises kept!" and "This is what I voted for!" over there. (Though, yea, they're kind of pissed about the Epstein thing right now.)
Is a populist movement healthy in the long-term? I have my doubts. But if we're looking at it objectively - this is what the People want, and the People are happy because they're getting it.
You and I might not be happy, from a broad policy perspective - but it's not like our lives have been ruined as a result of said policy. Again, perspective.
I appreciate the respect, AT (and DesigNate too) because Ive burned some bridges here lately
How? And in what ways do you lay that solely at the feet of the POTUS?
Because I work at Johns Hopkins University.
Our judicial branch is OUT OF CONTROL. Not nearly to the degree the executive branch is. Who is spying on citizens? Who is sending the military abroad? Who is enacting new taxes? Who is in prime position to usurp total control?
Have you visited any right-leaning sites lately? It's all "Promises kept!" and "This is what I voted for!
Yes. I come from a republican family in a rural red area and visit home often. My experience has not matched yours in their opinion of Trump 2.0.
But you are correct that my life is not ruined. As Americans we have it pretty good. As modern a humans, we have it really good. Politics is like sports to me. And just like someone screams at a player or ref that has no real effect on their life, i pound the qwertys to "yell" at politicians and officials, like most of us here. But when I have real life problems I forget politics and focus on things I can change.
You’re a disappointment.
Mom?
Because I work at Johns Hopkins University.
Not sure what I'm supposed to take from that.
Who is spying on citizens?
The federal government, every credit agency anywhere, most retailers, your cellphone and all its apps, your friggin' grocery store at this point. Welcome to the digital age. Regardless of party or politician.
Who is sending the military abroad?
Not Donnie T. He's been kinda against that.
We had to backhand slap Iran recently, but that's about it. And they seemed to get the message.
Who is enacting new taxes?
... Congress?
Who is in prime position to usurp total control?
OK, again, perspective. The actual answer to your question is nobody. The second most likely answer to your question is globalists. In a very distant third, the military. Far after that, probably somewhere past a few levels, is some orange guy in the oval office.
You said it yourself: your life is not ruined. Stop throwing yourself at the couch.
My experience has not matched yours in their opinion of Trump 2.0.
What has been your experience?
But when I have real life problems I forget politics and focus on things I can change.
Can I give you a protip from someone who's been there?
You can't change anything but yourself. Thinking you can is folly. I'm currently consulting for a company that asked for my help, but genuinely doesn't want it. They don't want the modernization, they don't want the tech improvement, they don't want any kind of standardized conventions - it's all old dogs who refuse to learn new tricks. They know they're in trouble, and they don't know the way out - but they also don't want to HEAR the way out. So, they're effectively paying me to bang my head against their wall. So be it, I'll take the money from those morons. (This is why watching Gordon Ramsey's Kitchen Nightmares is kind of a guilty pleasure of mine.)
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. Give a man a fish, feed him for a day; teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime - but he has to WANT to learn how to fish.
Most people don't. You can't change that. Regardless of anything Barry Soetoro said. Don't set out to change things, Brix. Just speak your mind and see if anyone agrees. If they do, great. If they don't, try to understand why.
That's the best you're going to get from doing little more than being behind a keyboard.
Careful consideration and study is how we haven’t managed to close one damn agency in 100 years of government bloat and overreach.
It seems to me they have much more of a plan than they did in 2016, so I’m not sure I would call anything the administration has done so far “cavalier”. Though I get healthy skepticism of those actions someone might disagree with. But I maintain that a halfway decent libertarian administration would look, and more importantly be covered by the media, pretty close to this (barring immigration, since I know the open border stance of most of the party. Oh and tariffs).
I mean, most of us can agree that the overwhelming majority of government bureaucracy and agencies are unconstitutional, but there’s little to no chance that Congress is going to dismantle the laws that created them, so what would a libertarian president do?
Hi DesigNate.
I get what you're saying. I agree that the court battles and press coverage for a libertarian president would look a lot like this.
So what would a hypothetical Ron Paul administration look like? There'd be no 25...no 35...no pause...no back on again tariffs on Canada or anyone else. There'd be no -I may do it or I may not-bunker busters on Iran especially without Congressional approval. The cuts would be more meaningful (and painful at first) and include SS and Medicare. FEMA would be cut, even if there were floods in TX. The military budget would be cut. The FBI would be cut, The CIA would be cut. The DOD would be cut. The DEA and ATF would be cut. There'd be no growth of ICE especially the associated government surveillance. There'd be no debt limit increase. There'd be no immigrants in jail for speech or midnight plane rides to CECOT. There'd be no executive orders removing birthright citizenship. There'd be no marines in LA. There'd be no threats to revoke Rosie O'Donnell's citizenship. There'd be no nothing to see here closing of the Epstein case. There'd be no jet from Qatar, There'd be no TrumpCoin. There'd be no power grab attempts to give to the next administration.
Ultimately we can't achieve libertopia with just a strong president without a compliant congress and populace, but I think even without, said administration would be a more coherent, less waffling more predictable, more honest, more transparent administration.
So what would a hypothetical Ron Paul administration look like?
FEMA would be cut, even if there were floods in TX. The military budget would be cut. The FBI would be cut, The CIA would be cut. The DOD would be cut. The DEA and ATF would be cut. There'd be no growth of ICE especially the associated government surveillance. There'd be no debt limit increase.
So, you're talking about a Ron Paul Congress - as opposed to a Ron Paul Presidency.
There'd be no immigrants in jail for speech or midnight plane rides to CECOT. There'd be no executive orders removing birthright citizenship. There'd be no marines in LA. There'd be no threats to revoke Rosie O'Donnell's citizenship.
Meaning the People would be super pissed at President Paul for intentionally leading in a direction they oppose.
There'd be no nothing to see here closing of the Epstein case.
You know Ron is probably on that list too, right?
Meaning the People would be super pissed at President Paul
Sure.
You know Ron is probably on that list too, right?
There's no way. It would be so out of character. What makes you say that?
Nothing in particular. At this point, I just assume that everyone who has something to lose is on that list.
Well he's a humble Christian man that seems to live by his principles, a lot like you in that way I suppose. I'd be equally shocked to find out you or Dr. Paul was on the list.
Well, there you have. Another back peddling by Mr. MAGA.
I gave Trumpy the benefit of a doubt. I suspect Trump never meant to do any of those things he claimed he would do so at this point he has no more of my support and it appears he is losing support among others who voted for him.
George Carlin was right. Voting is meaningless. "The politicians are put there to make you believe you have a choice. You don't. You have no choice, you have owners."
What did he backpedal?
Was the FEMA response to Texas better than the FEMA response to North Carolina? Yes or no?
You think a Nazi scumball has facts?
King Joffrey didn’t initially recognize the value in FEMA camps for incarcerating Americans?
Maybe King Joffrey will also change his mind and seek the prosecution of pedophiles too?
Probably not. Investigation of those kinds of cases might implicate genocidal Zionist supporters of his.
Abolish FEMA.
It has proven its incompetence ever since Katrina, and trying to improve a needless, expensive and incompetent bureaucracy is like polishing a turd.
It's still shit.
After criticizing the agency for being ineffective for months, the Trump administration now plans to reform it to supplement state disaster response efforts.
There is only one way to reform FEMA to supplement state disaster response efforts. Transfer the whole thing out of the executive branch and into an interstate compact. The states will reform it themselves so it meets their needs. Congress can either choose to fund those changes (outside exec branch control - but directly within their Art1Sec8 duties) or just turn it all over to states for them to fund. The only exec branch function for FEMA would be for the exec branch to mobilize National Guard for out of state duties in case of emergency but that does not require an agency.
I will give Autumn props for her closing paragraph actually being the best libertarian solution.
My memory isn’t what it use to be but I can’t recall any disasters where FEMA functioned in any really meaningful way. And I’ve been around for quite a few years.
This is FEMA: https://mostcorrupt.com/Agencies--FEMA.htm
FEMA's dismal response to the hurricanes in South Carolina and Georgia along with their near Gestapo like treatment of any who attempted rescue or help others should not be allowed to be forgotten.
FEMA is a huge fraud scandal sheet of misappropriated money and theft.
Time to shut it down along with the FBI, DHS, TSA, CIA, IRS, ATF, BLM, CDC, Dept. of Agriculture, and a hundred other wastes of taxpayer's money.