Disaster Aid Should Not Politicized
Federal disaster relief has always rested on a simple premise: When a hurricane, flood, or wildfire overwhelms a state, the rest of the country helps it recover. A governor asks for help, federal officials measure the damage, and the President decides whether it warrants a major disaster declaration under the Stafford Act.
This process is meant to be simple, straightforward, and nonpolitical. That is because floodwaters do not check voter registration, wildfires do not care how a state voted, and hurricane do not care whether an incumbent was defeated in the last election. Federal aid is not supposed to, either.
That principle is giving way. Over the past two years, the White House has turned disaster relief into a campaign instrument, approving aid more slowly and less often for states that voted against the President while openly suggesting that help for others depends on how they vote in the midterm elections.
The numbers tell the story first. An Associated Press analysis found that the President now takes about a month and a half, on average, to approve a disaster request — twice as long as in his first term and longer than any president since 1989 and denies a larger share of requests than any other president. States that voted for President Trump in 2024 won approval more than three-quarters of the time; states that did not, less than half the time.
That gap is new. In his second term, President Obama approved requests at identical rates whether or not a state had voted for him. In his first term, President Trump approved a larger share of requests from states that opposed him.
The White House insists there is “no politicization” here, only closer scrutiny to make sure states carry their share of the cost. The record, however, suggests otherwise. In July, the President denied aid to New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island after a record-breaking February blizzard, even though FEMA’s own regional offices had found that at least three of them met the federal thresholds. Rhode Island’s validated costs were roughly nine times its threshold. Since George W. Bush, presidents had approved every qualifying snow-assistance request but one.
If the data left any doubt, the President has removed it himself. Campaigning in North Carolina in September for Michael Whatley, the Republican running for Senate, he noted that billions in Hurricane Helene recovery money had yet to arrive. “Now if Michael loses, I’m not sending it,” he said, before adding that he was only kidding.
That is a strange joke to make in a state where FEMA payments amount to only about 18 percent of the estimated $60 billion in damage Helene caused, according to an analysis by the North Carolina Budget and Tax Center.
It also wasn’t the only time the President brought up disaster aid at a campaign rally: in Ohio, the President implied he “took care of” disaster funds at the request of the candidate he was there to support. In Wisconsin, the President also linked approval of disaster aid with the candidate he was rallying support for. And at an October rally in Greenville, North Carolina the President again contemplated withholding disaster aid based on the outcome of the election, except this time there was no such disclaimer: Settlements for service members and families exposed to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune, the President said, would come only if Republicans keep the House and Senate. “If we don’t win, there’s no money. If we do win, you’re getting it,” he told the crowd.
Get Nicholas Monck’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Congress already answered that question. The Camp Lejeune Justice Act, passed with bipartisan support in 2022, gives those families a legal path to compensation. It contains no partisanship test or election clause.
The President has also combined announcements of new disaster aid with references to his political endorsements in posts on social media, creating the appearance of partisan considerations. And in a press statement about an upcoming winter storm, FEMA named 18 Republican congress members it was “working closely” with ahead of the storm, but did not name a single Democratic member of Congress.
The politicization of relief has a quieter companion: the erosion of programs that help survivors navigate the system under the current administration.
Since the early 1970s, Disaster Legal Services has done some of the most practical work in disaster recovery. Run by the American Bar Association’s Young Lawyers Division alongside FEMA and local legal aid offices, the program helps state bars and volunteer lawyers stand up hotlines so survivors can get free help sorting out insurance claims, lost documents, repair contracts, and landlord problems. It answered the call after Hurricanes Katrina and Maria, and since 2007 alone it has responded to 254 disasters in 45 states and five territories.
In March 2025, FEMA froze the program’s funding and stopped reimbursing even the cost of running survivor hotlines, putting a partnership more than four decades old on hold. In a letter to partners, the program’s director wrote that the challenges that followed had “shuttered our ability to provide meaningful services,” and Disaster Legal Services suspended its formal operations. That same week, it began winding down its Hurricane Helene work in North Carolina.
A survivor fighting an insurer or a landlord does not stop needing a lawyer when Washington stops paying for the hotline.
The Stafford Act gives the President broad discretion over disaster declarations, but that discretion exists so help can reach people quickly, not so it can be rationed by party. The statute itself requires that relief and assistance be carried out in an “equitable and impartial manner.” And under the Constitution, it is Congress, not the President, that holds the power of the purse.
Congress should use it. Lawmakers can require written reasons whenever a request that meets FEMA’s thresholds is denied, set firm deadlines for decisions, and restore support for programs like Disaster Legal Services.
Disaster aid is not a campaign prize. It is a promise, paid for by taxpayers in every state, that no community will face catastrophe alone. Whether that promise is kept should depend on the damage on the ground, never on the outcome of an election.
Nicholas Monck previously chaired the American Bar Association Young Lawyers Division’s Government, Military, and Public Sector Lawyers Committee. He was a member of the ABA DLS team from 2021–2025 and coordinated legal assistance for survivors of multiple major disasters, including Super Typhoon Mawar, hurricanes, severe storms in the Midwest, and wildfires in New Mexico. Opinions expressed are his own and do not represent the views of his employer.
