Trump Targets FEMA Overhaul: Can States Do Disaster Response Better?

What Happened

President Trump has announced a new initiative to revamp the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). He has formed a 'FEMA Review Council' to address what he calls a 'terribly broken' system.

The council includes high-profile conservative leaders. Members include Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Governors Greg Abbott and Glenn Youngkin, and RNC Chair Michael Whatley. Their goal is to shift more emergency response power back to the states while reducing FEMA’s federal footprint.

Trump signed an executive order earlier this year to kick off the initiative. The order directs the council to evaluate FEMA’s performance, collect input from states and disaster survivors, and produce a report recommending major reforms, or potentially dismantling the agency entirely. The order also highlights accusations of political bias within FEMA. It points to an incident where workers were allegedly told to skip homes displaying Trump signs during hurricane relief efforts.

Why It Matters

FEMA has long been the focus of criticism for its sluggish response times, excessive bureaucratic red tape, and inconsistent aid delivery. From the botched response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 to the delays after Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico in 2017, FEMA has a spotty record.

In each case, overwhelmed workers and miscommunication left thousands without timely help. More recently, complaints have grown about politicization and inefficiency in how federal relief is distributed.

Trump proposes a state-first model. He argues that the added autonomy given to local governments will allow faster and smarter response times – provided they have the funding and flexibility. The issue has been framed as one of decentralization: removing Washington’s grip and giving states the tools to act without waiting for federal red tape to unwind.

The initiative is not without its critics, however. Some have warned that gutting FEMA or shifting too much responsibility too fast could leave some states as sitting ducks. They might be left unprepared for large-scale or multi-state disasters such as wildfires, hurricanes, or pandemics.

They argue that without centralized coordination, response efforts may become fragmented and unequal. Outcomes may depend heavily on a specific state’s resources and leadership.

How It Affects You

Should this initiative move forward, the way disasters are handled in the U.S. will likely change dramatically.

You may see faster local responses in states with strong emergency infrastructure. However, you might find slower, less organized aid in states that heavily rely on federal coordination. The safety net that FEMA currently provides, although flawed, could shrink or even disappear entirely, replaced by a patchwork of state-run systems.

For homeowners in disaster-prone areas, this could mean more pressure to rely on state and local emergency plans, rather than assuming the federal government will step in. Insurance, preparedness, and local emergency funding could take on even greater importance. On the flip side, should the task force succeed in cutting out bureaucracy and speeding up relief, the average citizen might end up actually getting help much faster during a crisis.

The FEMA Review Council is expected to publish its findings and recommendations later this year. Until then, expect a heated debate over the balance of power in disaster response and whether FEMA is salvageable, or overdue for a total reset.