game on! future of fema to be determined

It will likely be seven or eight months from now before we know what recommendations are made by the council established by executive order to examine how the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) can be reformed. See this article, Trump Moves to Abolish FEMA, Shift Disaster Response to States  Check out which states are getting the majority of disaster recovery funding. Any big changes will bring howls of angst from Red States.

In the article there is a link to the actual Executive Order, COUNCIL TO ASSESS THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

I’ll spend the rest of this blog post commenting on that Executive Order. On the surface it would appear that it could be a good faith effort to reform the agency and make it less bureaucratic and more responsive. That would be the wish of most emergency managers that I know. I’ve written about this so many times before. Because “mistakes are made” in the allocation of resources in the form of grants and funding recovery projects, there are a mountain of details put in place to avoid those mistakes being made in the future. The cumulative impact is significant in the form of paperwork.

Here’s the problem. We have person in the form of the President who has already made up his mind. You have two co-chairs who are Trump loyalists (DHS Secretary and DOD Secretary) and will say and do anything he wants. The combination of those two will overcome all good efforts by people and organizations looking to make progress. My fear is that FEMA may survive, but you won’t recognize it in the future.

I’ll comment on specific sections:

From the EO, “There are serious concerns of political bias in FEMA.  Indeed, at least one former FEMA responder has stated that FEMA managers directed her to avoid homes of individuals supporting the campaign of Donald J. Trump for President.  And it has lost mission focus, diverting limited staff and resources to support missions beyond its scope and authority, spending well over a billion dollars to welcome illegal aliens.”  Within the order there is an accurate statement about “one person” doing something improper. If that is the standard to root out corruption—no organization is safe. And the statement on funding going to immigrants (the new term in the administration is “illegal aliens”) is false in the way it is presented. I don’t know if the number is wrong, but it is FEMA that administers grants on the behalf of the Department of Homeland Security, dispensing funds in accordance with appropriations determined by Congress.

When the Executive Order has incorrect information in it to begin with, where will the results lead?

The there is this on the composition of the Council, “solicit information and ideas from a broad range of stakeholders, including Americans affected by natural disasters; the research community; the private sector; State, local, and Tribal governments; foundations; and nonprofit organizations.”  That all sounds normal and good. Will the research community have someone with climate science background since the frequency, magnitude and cost of disasters are being driven up by climate change?  Global warming has been declared a hoax!  I doubt that climate science will have a place at the table these days.

Then there is this, “A comparison of the FEMA responses with State, local, and private sector responses — including timeliness of response, supplies provided, efficacy, and services (including communications and electricity) provided — during the same period.” Who, what how, where and when has “FEMA” directly provided communications and electricity? That is entirely a private sector service, other than the United States Army providing generator support of MERS teams from FEMA regions supporting a disaster response.

I support this one in-part, but it looks like a pre-determined outcome to me, “An evaluation of whether FEMA can serve its functions as a support agency, providing supplemental Federal assistance, to the States rather than supplanting State control of disaster relief.”  But the statement is inaccurate to begin with. FEMA is only to help beyond the capabilities of the state. It is not state control that is being supplanted. It is the state money obligations $$$,$$$,$$$M that are being suplanted!  States have full control on decisions.

Finally, this paragraph looks like standard language for every EO, “An analysis of the principal arguments in the public debate for and against FEMA reform, including an appraisal of the merits and legality of particular reform proposals.” I find it somewhat amusing since the “legality” of actions by the current Administration does not seem to be of top concern in accomplishing what they want to achieve. I’d eliminate that element in the sentence to make it more truthful.