Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

FEMA’s disaster relief practices under Biden administration spark legislation

FEMA’s disaster relief practices under Biden administration spark legislation

A sign marks the location of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) headquarters building on January 29, 2025, in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, J. David Ake

From 1995 until COVID hit, Scott Harding led student groups to volunteer in areas affected by natural disasters through the National Relief Network (NRN).

Harding, who also founded NRN, said he has taken groups across the country to disaster sites in his time and noticed Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) representatives, a group helping communities in the United States recover from natural disasters. But Harding said what he calls a “Biden Administration phenomenon,” caused by the Democratic culture in the nation’s capital, has politicized the disaster relief process.


“If I am not mistaken, D.C. is probably 95 or more percent Democrat, and there just seems to be a lot of political turmoil,” Harding said.

According to results from the 2024 presidential election, 92.5 percent of D.C. residents voted for Vice President Kamala Harris and 6.6 percent for President Donald Trump.

During efforts to assist those affected by Hurricane Milton and Helene in 2024, FEMA supervisor Marn’i Washington was fired after reports stated she told FEMA workers to skip over houses in Placid, Fla., displaying support for Trump.

As a result, Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody sued former FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell and Washington in November 2024.

“I am taking swift legal action to find out how far this political discrimination reaches and to make sure all Americans who fall victim to devastating storms are served, regardless of their political affiliation,” Moody stated in a press release.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

In February 2025, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel filed a Hatch Act complaint against Washington for her actions. The Hatch Act’s purpose is to ensure federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan manner so federal employee's actions are not passed on political merit.

According to a report from the New York Post, an agency official told The Post it was “an open secret” during the Biden administration that FEMA employees avoided “white or conservative-dominated” disaster zones. These orders were “clear guidance” from the official’s supervisors.

Recently, new legislation has been introduced to the House of Representatives. Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) introduced legislation to prohibit discrimination based on political affiliation when granting disaster assistance. Perry, Tracey Mann (R-Kan.), and Sam Graves (R-Mo.) introduced similar legislation during the 118th Congress.

“The blatant disregard of President-elect Trump supporters directly contradicts FEMA’s core mission and values,” the members wrote when introducing the legislation last year.

Although Harding has not volunteered to support people in natural disasters since before COVID-19, he said FEMA supervisors in the nation’s capital can override what local FEMA representatives are doing. One example Harding recalls is FEMA supervisors drawing a line in a community in North Carolina affected by flooding, meaning not all residents received disaster assistance.

“They make decisions in Washington, D.C., which make absolutely no sense for the people on the ground,” Harding said, adding storms do not follow man-made lines.

Harding also said that in American society, he has noticed how people with different political opinions cannot get along now, compared to previous years. According to the Vanderbilt Unity Index, the U.S. is on track to continue increasing political polarization. When Harding used to take students to volunteer in these natural disaster areas, he said he encouraged students to talk with those they were serving.

One example he recalls is bringing a group of students down to Morehead City, N.C. While cleaning out an older man’s house, which was flooded, he brought out a rocking chair to sit on his lawn and watch the volunteers. Harding said he suddenly looked over and noticed six students seated on the ground talking to the man.

Harding said the students learned the man had been born approximately 80 years ago in his now-flooded house, which his father had also built.

“That’s what I think FEMA forgets,” Harding said. “They’re too busy looking at logistics they forget who they are serving.”


Maggie Rhoadsis a student journalist attending George Washington University School of Media and Public Affairs. At The Fulcrum, she covers how legislation and policy are impacting communities.

Read More

Donald Trump

President-elect Donald Trump at Madison Square Garden in New York

Chris Unger/Zuffa LLC/Getty Images

Trump’s First 100 Days Changed the Game – the Next 1300 Could Change the Nation

The country has now witnessed and felt the first 100 days of President Donald Trump’s second term. These days were filled with unrelenting, fast-paced executive action. He signed a record-breaking number of executive orders, though many have been challenged and may be reversed. Working with Congress to pass legislation, though more difficult, leads to more enduring change and is less likely to be challenged in court. While certainly eventful, the jury is still out on how effective these first days have been. More importantly, the period of greater consequence - the months following the first 100 days, which should focus on implementation - will ultimately determine whether the president’s drastic changes can stand the test of time and have their desired impact on American society.

The first months of all Presidential terms include outlining a vision and using presidential influence to shift priorities and change governance structures. The media often focuses on polling and popularity, comparing previous presidents and highlighting public perception of the president's handling of specific issues like the economy, immigration, and national defense. Rasmussen Reports' daily Presidential Tracking Poll now shows 50 percent of likely voters approve of President Trump's job performance, but change has never been popular, and he is unapologetically pursuing it in these first months.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump’s Immigration Crackdown Spurs Brain Drain of International Talent

Close up of american visa label in passport.

Getty Images/Alexander W. Helin

Trump’s Immigration Crackdown Spurs Brain Drain of International Talent

This article is part of a short series examining the Trump administration’s impact on international students in American higher education. This is the second and final installment of the series, which is focused on F1 student visa-to-citizenship pipelines.

The first part of the series, entitled “Legal Battles Continue for International Students With Pro-Palestinian Views,” was about ongoing litigation against the Trump administration for ideological deportations in higher education.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Bill Spotlight: No Invading Allies Act

United States Capitol building in Washington, D.C.

Getty Images, dcsliminky

Congress Bill Spotlight: No Invading Allies Act

The Fulcrum introduces Congress Bill Spotlight, a weekly report by Jesse Rifkin, focusing on the noteworthy legislation of the thousands introduced in Congress. Rifkin has written about Congress for years, and now he's dissecting the most interesting bills you need to know about, but that often don't get the right news coverage.

In response to Trump’s takeover threats, Canadian coffee shops and cafés are rebranding the Americano beverage as the “Canadiano.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Raising Taxes or Cutting Spending: House Budget Committee Argues Over Debt Crisis Fix

Republican and Democratic representatives discussed the fiscal state of the United State in a House Budget hearing on May 7, 2025

Huiyan Li | Medill News Service

Raising Taxes or Cutting Spending: House Budget Committee Argues Over Debt Crisis Fix

WASHINGTON –– Republicans and Democrats clashed on May 7 at a House Budget Committee hearing over how to address the nation’s mounting federal debt—whether to raise revenue through tax increases or cut spending on federal programs such as Medicaid.

Both parties agreed that the United States was on an unsustainable fiscal path and that urgent action is needed to prevent a debt crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less