Keaton PetersThe U.S. has a new and rapidly evolving strategy for dealing with disasters. President Donald Trump signed an executive order intended to overhaul federal preparedness and response policies, giving more control to state and local governments. The order establishes a National Resilience Strategy and directs a comprehensive review of infrastructure and preparedness protocols to streamline federal approaches to crisis management.
The executive order is not the only potential change coming out of the White House.
At a recent Cabinet meeting, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said she wants to “eliminate” the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), tasked with overseeing the response to large natural disasters such as hurricanes that can wreak havoc on multiple states at once. FEMA also assists with long-term recovery efforts. Those responsibilities may or may not shift.
Without explicitly endorsing the elimination of FEMA, Trump signaled his approval by repeating “good job” after Noem finished her comments. Trump has previously pronounced that the agency should be reformed and possibly eliminated altogether.
FEMA has been under increased scrutiny in recent years for what critics see as a slow response to storms. However, not all reform efforts center on eliminating FEMA altogether. Legislation proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives by a Democrat and a Republican from Florida would make FEMA its own cabinet-level agency in the White House instead of remaining one arm of the Department of Homeland Security. Proponents of salvaging FEMA believe independence would allow FEMA to respond more quickly.
The efforts to reform or eliminate FEMA, along with the executive order, are the latest actions in a broader overhaul of disaster preparedness. With increasing cyberattacks, extreme weather events and other emergencies requiring swift coordination between different levels of government, the executive
order is an attempt to create more streamlined disaster preparedness frameworks. In emphasizing local control, the order marks a significant shift in how the federal government may approach disaster planning and response in the future.
The centerpiece of the order is the creation of a National Risk Register, a tool designed to “identify, describe and measure risks to our national infrastructure, related systems and their users.” The White House describes this as changing from an “all-hazards” methodology to a “risk-informed” approach. White House officials say this register is meant to guide strategic spending and planning by focusing resources on the most pressing threats rather than attempting to address all potential hazards equally.
“This order injects common sense into both infrastructure prioritization and strategic investments through risk-informed decisions,” according to the White House fact sheet.
The order also calls for overhauling the national continuity policy to modernize its framework and streamline operations. This includes “right-sizing the federal footprint for sustained readiness,” suggesting potential reductions in certain federal emergency management functions in favor of more state and local control.
Critics question whether state and local governments have the resources and expertise to handle additional emergency management responsibilities, particularly in areas with limited budgets. Supporters counter that those closest to emergencies understand local needs best and can respond more effectively when empowered to do so. Decisions about FEMA are yet to be determined.
Photo Courtesy
ajay_suresh via Wikimedia Commons
Creative Commons Attribution 2.0
