Uncertainty is hanging over this year’s hurricane season as meteorologists predict “above-normal” activity and the Trump administration sends shifting signals over the future of the federal government’s role in natural disaster response.
Despite talk of eliminating the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in its current form, the administration says it remains “laser focused on disaster response and protecting the American people.”
But red and blue states alike say they aren’t sure what the future of FEMA looks like.
In June, at a hurricane preparedness news conference, Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) was asked whether the state could take on more responsibilities amid the administration’s push for states to take a bigger role.
“I don’t know what added responsibilities that would be,” he responded.
A handful of states have set up task forces or commissions to prepare for changes being discussed in Washington.
A bipartisan coalition of Georgia state lawmakers led by state Rep. Clint Crowe (R) created a study committee on disaster mitigation.
Kentucky’s state Legislature passed a law creating a task force to prepare for potential changes in FEMA funding. Republican state Sen. Matthew Deneen, who co-sponsored the Kentucky bill, said the panel would make sure the state is prepared for whatever comes.
“Well, I think that any time that we’re going to have change coming out of Washington, D.C., on the federal level, you know, we don’t know exactly what those numbers are going to be, and so it’s very important for us to be agile, to be responsive and to be prepared,” he told The Hill.
Trump administration officials and some Republicans on Capitol Hill argue the agency is inefficient and should take a more supportive role, with states taking the lead in disaster response.
“Federal emergency management should be state and locally led rather than how it has operated for decades,” Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem said earlier this month.
“This entire agency needs to be eliminated as it exists today and remade into a responsive agency,” she added.
But rhetoric from President Trump’s officials shifted toward reforming FEMA, rather than axing it entirely, following the devastating floods in Texas this month.
Noem faced criticism over reports of botched disaster response efforts, and the Houston Chronicle editorial board even slammed Noem’s leadership, comparing FEMA’s response to the Texas floods to the Hurricane Katrina debacle.
The Texas floods killed at least 120 people, with more than 100 still missing. A preliminary estimate from AccuWeather projects the disaster to cost between $18 billion and $22 billion.
Still, Trump has praised Noem’s handling of the floods and brushed off reports that her changes to funding decisions slowed down the federal response in Texas.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) is forecasting 13 to 19 named storms this hurricane season, including three to five major hurricanes in the Atlantic basin.
“As we witnessed last year with significant inland flooding from hurricanes Helene and Debby, the impacts of hurricanes can reach far beyond coastal communities,” acting NOAA Administrator Laura Grimm said in May.
A FEMA spokesperson said in a statement there is “no uncertainty about what FEMA will be doing this Hurricane Season.”
“The old processes are being replaced because they failed Americans in real emergencies for decades,” a spokesperson said.
States, however, are facing a barrage of new budget demands as federal lawmakers cut spending on issues ranging from health care to natural disasters.
In April, FEMA suspended its Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program, eliminating $882 million in federal funding. The program helped communities reduce risk hazards by providing economic support for states to improve disaster prevention.
Twenty states sued FEMA this past week, alleging unlawful termination of congressionally approved grants. The lawsuit highlighted that many projects, in the works for years and meant to prevent devastating damage, are left unfinished or paused.
The FEMA spokesperson said BRIC was a “wasteful and ineffective FEMA program.” Two-thirds of the counties that received grants under the program voted for Trump in 2024, according to a CBS analysis of FEMA data.
Colin Foard, director of the Pew Charitable Trust’s fiscal risk project, said the latest moves are compounding existing pressures on state budgets.
“States were already facing challenges of rising disaster costs, and our research shows that their traditional budgeting approaches were beginning to fall short in the face of those rising costs,” Foard said.
“So, as states are deciding how they can more proactively budget for disasters, that will come at the cost of trade-offs in other policy areas,” he added.
States are already bracing for sweeping federal cuts to Medicaid services. About 16 million Americans are expected to lose their health insurance by 2034 under Trump’s “big, beautiful bill,” likely leaving states to pick up more of the slack to cover increasing medical costs.
“If states lost FEMA reimbursement on top of the hole they just blew in their health care budget because of the lack of federal funding … there are states that are just a ticking time bomb,” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), a former Florida emergency management director, told The Hill.
Mathew Sanders, a senior officer at Pew, said states should focus their resources on proactive measures.
“I would argue the states need to increase their spending on long-term risk reduction. It’s always cheaper to reduce risk, to avoid risk, than it is to recover from a disaster,” Sanders said.
“One thing that I think is absolutely true, is that, across the disaster spectrum, the federal government is the predominant funder,” he added. “And so, you know, whatever the federal government may not provide in the future, states, localities, that’s a gap that’s going to need to be filled from other sources.”
When it comes to where those gaps might be, or whether states can fill them, there are more questions than answers.
Last fall’s Hurricane Helene prompted some forward thinking on these questions in states that were hit.
The study committee in Georgia recommended building code updates and a reforestation tax credit. The tax credit was signed into law in May.
Both North Carolina’s and South Carolina’s emergency agencies are seeking to foster more private sector collaborations and connections with other state emergency management organizations.
A spokesperson from North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein’s (D) office said eliminating FEMA entirely would be a “man-made disaster.”
“We need FEMA to help us address natural disasters. Let’s work together to improve FEMA so we are ready for future disasters,” the spokesperson added.
It’s not only hurricane-prone states that are bracing themselves for change and looking for clarity on what’s ahead.
Republican South Dakota Lt. Gov. Tony Venhuizen helms a state task force established in June to prepare for potential changes at FEMA.
“I … understand that the federal government has a spending problem and needs to tighten the belt in some areas. And so, we are sympathetic to that, but we really need to know what the details are,” Venhuizen told The Hill.