**
In a significant move that may reshape disaster response in the United States, a council appointed by President Donald Trump has unveiled a controversial proposal aimed at reforming the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Experts warn that these changes could undermine the agency’s ability to effectively respond to increasingly frequent and severe climate-related disasters. As the nation grapples with the escalating impacts of climate change, the recommendations have sparked concern among emergency management professionals and climate advocates alike.
Concerns Over FEMA’s Future
The recommendations from the so-called “FEMA Review Council,” co-chaired by Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, advocate for a fundamental shift in the agency’s operations. The report, which was swiftly presented to the President following a public unveiling, suggests that disaster management should be primarily localised, with federal support relegated to a secondary role. “It is time to close the chapter on FEMA,” the council’s report stated, indicating a desire to reduce federal spending on disaster response and transfer more responsibility to state and local governments.
The implications of this proposed restructuring are profound. As climate-related disasters continue to intensify, with the first half of 2025 alone witnessing over $101 billion in damages, experts argue that this shift could further strain systems that are already under significant pressure. Shana Udvardy, a senior climate resilience policy analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists, expressed her alarm, stating, “The FEMA Review Council completely missed the moment we are in right now,” highlighting the inadequate response to the current climate crisis.
A New Funding Model and Increased Local Burdens
Among the 150 recommendations put forth by the council is a new funding model that would require states to meet higher thresholds for disaster declarations before accessing federal aid. This model is perceived as a means to impose stricter criteria on disaster relief, potentially leaving local governments ill-equipped to handle emergencies without substantial federal support. Kevin Guthrie, a committee member and Florida’s emergency management executive director, noted that disaster declarations should only be requested in situations that have “broken the back of local and state government,” which could lead to significant delays in assistance for affected communities.
Further, the proposed reforms aim to limit federal financial support for affected homeowners and renters, thereby placing a heavier burden on localities already struggling to manage disaster recovery. Dr Andrew Rumbach, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute, cautioned that many small governments lack the infrastructure and resources necessary to absorb these additional responsibilities. “They rely a lot on FEMA and on federal expertise to help them,” he said, indicating that the proposed changes could be detrimental to community resilience.
Overlooked Climate Challenges
Despite the urgency of the climate crisis, the council’s report conspicuously lacks a comprehensive discussion on the growing intensity and frequency of natural disasters linked to climate change. The term “climate” appears only once in the 74-page document, raising eyebrows among climate advocates who argue that a disconnect exists between the proposed reforms and the realities of modern disaster management. In 2025, the United States has already recorded unprecedented weather-related damages, with experts emphasising the need for a robust federal response that acknowledges and addresses climate threats.
The report’s emphasis on reducing federal oversight and increasing reliance on local entities for environmental reviews and inspections could further exacerbate the challenges faced by communities in disaster-prone areas. Critics have pointed out that without adequate federal support and a clear focus on climate resilience, localities may find themselves ill-prepared for future catastrophes.
The Path Forward: Legislative Hurdles Ahead
While the council’s report outlines a vision for a restructured FEMA, many of its recommendations face significant legislative challenges. Half of the proposed changes require congressional approval, and several will necessitate new policies or regulations. Although the report may provide clarity on the administration’s direction, local emergency managers have expressed frustration over stalled funding and shifting leadership priorities.
As the nation heads into what could be a tumultuous hurricane season, the future of FEMA remains uncertain. Rafael Lemaitre, a former director of public affairs at FEMA, remarked on the agency’s precarious state, stating, “The Trump administration spent over a year dismantling FEMA piece by piece, and now their own handpicked council is endorsing the wreckage.” This sentiment underscores the critical need for a robust and responsive disaster management framework, especially as climate change continues to pose an existential threat.
Why it Matters
The proposed reforms to FEMA signal a troubling shift away from a comprehensive federal disaster response strategy at a time when such support is more vital than ever. As communities across the United States face the mounting challenges posed by climate change, the potential decentralisation of responsibility could hinder effective recovery efforts and leave vulnerable populations at greater risk. Ensuring that FEMA retains the resources and authority to respond adequately to disasters is essential for safeguarding lives and building resilience in an increasingly unpredictable climate landscape.
