Life is slowly returning to normal in Cave City, Arkansas, seven months after a devastating tornado. The only grocery store is reopening, and construction on a rebuilt funeral home has begun. Yet, Mayor Jonas Anderson reports that the town, much like many others facing severe post-disaster challenges, has largely been left to manage its recovery independently.
The Trump administration rejected Cave City’s requests for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funds. This forced Mayor Anderson to push ahead with recovery efforts, incurring an estimated $300,000 bill, which amounts to roughly 15 percent of the small town’s annual budget.
While some of Cave City’s nearly 2,000 residents received federal assistance for damaged homes, and the state pledged relief money, Mayor Anderson noted that the city itself carried a heavier financial burden than expected.
“We’re making a really good recovery not because of some big FEMA reimbursement we got, but in spite of not getting it,” Mr. Anderson said. “People here are super resilient.”
This situation may foreshadow the future for numerous communities nationwide, aligning with President Trump’s vision for emergency management: shifting disaster recovery responsibility from federal oversight to individual states, reserving federal intervention only for the most severe catastrophes. For many areas, this new reality is already in full swing.
FEMA has been observed delaying disaster declarations and aid disbursements, introducing more obstacles to accessing certain grant programs, and halting funds designed to enhance community resilience and mitigate future disaster impacts.
Across the country, emergency managers and elected officials are adapting to a new paradigm. They can no longer reliably expect the customary FEMA disaster assistance. They’re developing new strategies to prepare for future calamities without crucial FEMA grants, raising private funds to offset federal shortfalls, and pressuring state governments to bolster their own emergency preparedness. In some regions, grassroots volunteer groups have even emerged to fill the gap in disaster response.
Daniel Llargues, a FEMA spokesman, confirmed in an email that some disaster relief funding has indeed been reserved for future use. For example, a summer report indicated that $11 billion earmarked for coronavirus pandemic-related disaster declarations, expected by states by September 30, was instead withheld. Agency officials clarified these payments are not canceled but deferred to the new fiscal year to maintain the solvency of the disaster aid fund.
Llargues asserted, “Under President Trump’s leadership, FEMA remains dedicated to supporting disaster survivors,” emphasizing that the agency manages funding by “prioritizing immediate needs and long-term recovery efforts.”
However, critics warn that such delays could leave communities less prepared when disasters inevitably strike. Sarah Labowitz, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who monitors disaster recovery spending, stated, “They’re making good on their promise to shift the burden onto states without giving the states any runway to prepare for that.”
A quieter hurricane and wildfire season than anticipated has meant fewer recent challenges to this evolving emergency response system, allowing FEMA to conserve its disaster relief fund longer than expected. While the fund was projected to be depleted by now, it reportedly held over $2 billion at the end of September, a significant drop from the $22.5 billion Congress typically allocated in March.
Since January, President Trump has authorized 32 federal disaster declarations, which provide access to various federal aid programs for communities and individuals. This figure is considerably lower than the annual average of over 60 declarations observed from fiscal years 2015 to 2024, as per the Congressional Research Service. Additionally, Mr. Trump has denied approximately a dozen state requests for FEMA aid this year, a number consistent with his first administration and President Joe Biden’s term, according to FEMA data.
A persistent backlog of a dozen pending disaster aid requests has characterized this year. In contrast, prior administrations rarely had more than a handful of outstanding requests at any given time.
Typically, Congress would allocate tens of billions of dollars to replenish the disaster aid fund around this time of year. However, amidst a government shutdown now in its third week, discussions about disaster funding on Capitol Hill have been minimal. A bipartisan group of lawmakers is advocating for a House bill that would elevate FEMA to a Cabinet-level agency, separate it from the Homeland Security Department, and streamline its payment processes while accelerating investments in national disaster resilience.
Representative Frank Pallone, a New Jersey Democrat, underscored the importance of a robust FEMA for coordinating efforts among states, which often possess varying capacities for crisis management.
“These disasters often span multiple states,” Mr. Pallone observed. “Expecting each state to handle everything independently simply won’t work, as they lack the necessary collective expertise.”
Conversely, proponents of a leaner FEMA argue that excessive federal aid can discourage communities from investing in their own preparedness. Dominik Lett, a budget policy analyst at the Cato Institute, a right-leaning think tank, suggested that state and local governments are better equipped to understand and manage the most common and foreseeable disasters, given their closer ties to community needs.
However, for areas still reeling from historical disasters, FEMA’s inconsistent and slow support highlights the limitations of these theories. Mayor Zeb Smathers of Canton, N.C., noted that a year after Hurricane Helene—and four years following the destructive remnants of Tropical Storm Fred—his town still operates out of temporary trailers, awaiting federal funds for a new town hall and police station.
“We shouldn’t have to view disaster recovery as a lottery,” Mayor Smathers asserted. “It needs to be efficient, dependable, and streamlined. Currently, it’s anything but.”
Camille Rivera, president of La Brega Y Fuerza, a non-profit dedicated to connecting the Puerto Rican diaspora, cautioned that a greater shift of responsibility to states and territories by FEMA would disproportionately harm impoverished communities. This is already evident in Puerto Rico, where frequent power outages and unresolved damage from Hurricane Maria in 2017 persist. Many residents, she added, are now bypassing FEMA and turning to crowdfunding platforms like GoFundMe for assistance.
“People still live under tarps, unable to rebuild their homes,” she lamented. “Many communities no longer rely on the federal government.”
Concurrently, the Trump administration has either paused or eliminated grant programs designed to enhance community resilience against disasters.
Erik Thorsen, CEO of Columbia Memorial Hospital on the Oregon coast, reported that as a $300 million expansion designed to withstand earthquakes and tsunamis progresses, he’s actively trying to secure alternative funding after a $14 million FEMA grant was revoked.
A lawsuit filed by 20 states seeks to reinstate the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities grant program, asserting that since its 2018 inception during Mr. Trump’s first term, its approximately $4.5 billion in investments have averted $150 billion in disaster-related damages.
In Cave City, where plans for a new park and community center are on hold due to tornado recovery expenses, Mayor Anderson acknowledges President Trump’s rationale for state-led disaster management—states are, after all, most familiar with their residents’ needs.
However, he stressed that an abrupt policy shift creates significant uncertainty, complicating local officials’ decision-making and jeopardizing community livelihoods.
“It’s absolutely going to require a major adjustment,” he concluded. “No one possesses the vast resources that the federal government does.”