As the climate changes, spurring ever more extreme weather events, the US government’s disaster-relief system is as about as prepared for the challenge as a wood-frame house is ready for a Category 5 hurricane.
So far this year, the US has suffered 23 natural disasters causing US$1 billion or more in damage, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said on Monday. That breaks the previous annual record, set in 2020, and it is still only September. From California flooding this winter to destructive Midwestern storms this spring to the Maui wildfires and Hurricane Idalia this summer, Americans have barely been able to catch a break between disasters. Note: The NOAA tally does not yet include the impact of the rare hurricane that hit California last month or the prolonged drought in the South and the Midwest. The past four years have been among the six busiest for billion-dollar disasters on NOAA records going back to 1980. The top six have all occurred since 2011. The hotter the planet gets as we pump heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere, the more the climate is infused with energy, and the more unpredictable and destructive the weather gets.
Unfortunately, the federal agency dedicated to avoiding and responding to such catastrophes is simply not built for this hotter, more chaotic age.
On the same day the NOAA released its data, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) reported its Disaster Relief Fund only had US$3.4 billion remaining to cover new requests for help as of the end of last month. With hurricane season in full swing, it is unclear whether the funds will last until the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30.
To stretch its last few dollars, the agency last month restricted spending to life-saving emergency measures. US President Joe Biden has asked Congress for US$16 billion to refill FEMA’s coffers to help cover recent disasters, and US Senator Rick Scott has introduced a bill to that effect. When the US House of Representatives returns to work this week, Congress should embrace this rare bipartisan spirit and pass this bill without delay.
Yet a short-term cash injection is just the start of what FEMA needs. Born in the administration of former US president Jimmy Carter as an attempt to bring order to an unruly mob of competing government disaster-relief efforts, FEMA has long been underfunded, understaffed and subject to political squabbles.
And despite occasional attempts at reform, usually in response to some epic rake-stepping by the agency, federal disaster relief has gotten no simpler nor more effective. Good luck making any sense of how agencies are supposed to coordinate, as illustrated by a recent Government Accountability Office report:
One practical result of this spaghetti mountain is that precious money is wasted and fails to reach the people who need it most. In 2018, for example, the Department of Housing and Urban Development set aside US$16 billion for disaster mitigation. That same year, Congress gave FEMA the budget to launch basically the same project.
“So now there are two programs designed to perform essentially the same function, but with different funding streams, application processes, statutory limits, and program rules, and overseen and funded by different congressional committees,” a recent study by the Brookings Institution said.
The complexity of applying for relief in this morass is one reason it is far too difficult for lower-income households to get the help they need when disaster strikes. Wealthier victims typically get the bulk of FEMA and other federal money. These people are also more likely to have insurance and better credit in the first place, meaning they often have less need for assistance than their lower-income counterparts.
Then- US president Bill Clinton elevated the FEMA chief to a Cabinet-level job in 1996. That ended when FEMA got stuffed into the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2003. It is time to restore FEMA to its proper status, free it from the DHS, and make it a Cabinet-level agency once again. It should be given the muscle to both simplify and strengthen the disaster-recovery process, while bulking up its staff and technology to help the country better prepare for disasters before they happen.
Toward that latter goal, FEMA should also stop forcing grant recipients to clear high and outdated cost-benefit analysis hurdles when launching projects to harden communities against disasters. FEMA loosened the requirements for some projects last year, but not all. It must go further.
While we are making a wish list for a better FEMA, it is worth noting that heat — deadlier than most other natural disasters — is not even considered a disaster under federal law. That means states could not get relief for the many heat waves wracking them this summer, costing lives and economic activity. This should change.
Meanwhile, FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program, on which about 5 million Americans rely, is set to expire at the end of this month. Congress might re-up this program; yet as my colleague Jonathan Levin has written, it should overhaul it instead. The program should stop subsidizing wealthy homeowners and better protect vulnerable ones. FEMA is also long overdue to update its flood maps to reflect climate change.
Recently, Friederike Otto, a pioneer in the science of attributing disasters to climate change, noted in a study that societal weakness is still a greater threat to human life during climate-related weather events than the weather itself. In other words, if we can do a better job of protecting people before, during and after catastrophes, then we can save lives and property. A strong, healthy FEMA should be that shelter in the storm.
Mark Gongloff is a Bloomberg Opinion editor and columnist covering climate change. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
RSS