Claim:
Project 2025, a conservative coalition's proposal for a future U.S. Republican presidency, proposes ending the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Rating:
False ( About this rating? )
Context:
While the Project 2025 document does outline significant reforms and changes to FEMA's structure, role and funding, it does not propose dismantling the agency.
In late September and early October 2024, one of the many rumors circulating on social media about Project 2025 , a conservative coalition's proposal for a future U.S. Republican presidency, held that it included a plan to dismantle the Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA is the primary federal agency responsible for preparing for and responding to disasters in the U.S, such as Hurricane Helene .
One X post, with more than 1.2 million views as of this writing, read ( archived ): "I kept seeing tweets about how Pr*ject 2*25 would basically dismantle FEMA and other federal aid that helps during disaster relief, so I went and did my own digging to confirm and yes, that is absolutely what conservatives plan to do if it's implemented."
Another X use claimed : "Hurricane survivors in the Southern states need to know that if Trump is elected, this is the last disaster you will get federal aid for. Ending FEMA is literally a key goal of project 2025."
Similar claims spread on other social media platforms, including TikTok , Instagram and Reddit .
However, the claim that Project 2025 aims to "end" or "eliminate" or "dismantle" FEMA is false. Rather, the Project 2025 " Mandate for Leadership " document outlines significant reforms to FEMA, including moving the agency to a different federal department, privatizing certain programs and transferring more responsibilities to state and local governments.
https://media.snopes.com/2024/06/2025_mandate_for_leadership_compressed.pdf
A Project 2025 spokesperson confirmed via email that the proposal does not seek to eliminate FEMA:
Rather than "cutting" FEMA, Project 2025 is advocating for a realignment of the agency's mission and focus – away from DEI and climate change initiatives and restoring it to that of helping people before, during, and after disasters.
What Project 2025 Says About FEMA
The first mention of FEMA in the document, on Page 134, proposes it be moved from the Department of Homeland Security to the Department of the Interior or, if combined with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, to the Department of Transportation.
Later in the text, Project 2025 proposes privatizing FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program and reforming "FEMA emergency spending to shift the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities instead of the federal government."
The bloated DHS bureaucracy and budget, along with the wrong priorities, provide real opportunities for a conservative Administration to cut billions in spending and limit government's role in Americans' lives. These opportunities include privatizing TSA screening and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program, reforming FEMA emergency spending to shift the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities instead of the federal government, eliminating most of DHS's grant programs, and removing all unions in the department for national security purposes.
The document states the next administration should take steps to "restore lawfulness and integrity to the [DHS'] massive regimen of federal grant programs, most of which are managed and distributed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency":
The Secretary should direct FEMA to ensure that all FEMA-issued grant funding for states, localities, and private organizations is going to recipients who are lawful actors, can demonstrate that they are in compliance with federal law, and can show that their mission and actions support the broader homeland security mission. All applicants and potential recipients of such grant funding should be required to meet certain preconditions for eligibility (except for receipt of post-disaster or nonhumanitarian funding) or should simply be considered ineligible for funding.
The document devotes a section to FEMA (pages 153-154), organized into three key areas: "Needed Reforms," "Budget Issues" and "Personnel."
The "Needed Reforms" section claims FEMA is "overtasked, overcompensates for the lack of state and local preparedness and response, and is regularly in deep debt," adding that FEMA should raise the threshold for states and localities to qualify for public assistance, because the " per capita indicator " has not kept pace with inflation:
After passage of the 1988 Stafford Act, the number of declared federal disasters rose dramatically as most disaster costs were shifted from states and local governments to the federal government. In addition, state-friendly FEMA regulations, such as a "per capita indicator," failed to maintain the pace of inflation and made it easy to meet disaster declaration thresholds. This combination has left FEMA unprepared in both readiness and funding for the truly catastrophic disasters in which its services are most needed. Reform of FEMA requires a greater emphasis on federalism and state and local preparedness, leaving FEMA to focus on large, widespread disasters.
Under the Stafford Act, FEMA has the authority to adjust the per capita indicator for damages, which creates a threshold under which states and localities are not eligible for public assistance. FEMA should raise the threshold because the per capita indicator has not kept pace with inflation, and this over time has effectively lowered the threshold for public assistance and caused FEMA's resources to be stretched perilously thin.
"Alternatively, applying a deductible could accomplish a similar outcome while also incentivizing states to take a more proactive role in their own preparedness and response capabilities. In addition, Congress should change the cost-share arrangement so that the federal government covers 25 percent of the costs for small disasters with the cost share reaching a maximum of 75 percent for truly catastrophic disasters," the document continues.
The first section also mentions FEMA is responsible for the National Flood Insurance Program, which it argues should be "wound down and replaced with private insurance":
FEMA is also responsible for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), nearly all of which is issued by the federal government. Washington provides insurance at prices lower than the actuarially fair rate, thereby subsidizing flood insurance. Then, when flood costs exceed NFIP's revenue, FEMA seeks taxpayer-funded bailouts. Current NFIP debt is $20.5 billion, and in 2017, Congress canceled $16 billion in debt when FEMA reached its borrowing authority limit. These subsidies and bailouts only encourage more development in flood zones, increasing the potential losses to both NFIP and the taxpayer. The NFIP should be wound down and replaced with private insurance starting with the least risky areas currently identified by the program.
The "Budget Issues" section says "states better understand their unique needs and should bear the costs of their particularized programs" and because of that, "FEMA employees in Washington, D.C., should not determine how billions of federal tax dollars should be awarded":
FEMA employees in Washington, D.C., should not determine how billions of federal tax dollars should be awarded to train local law enforcement officers in Texas, harden cybersecurity infrastructure in Utah, or supplement migrant shelters in Arizona. DHS should not be in the business of handing out federal tax dollars: These grants should be terminated. Accomplishing this, however, will require action by Members of Congress who repeatedly vote to fund grants for political reasons. The transition should focus on building resilience and return on investment in line with real threats.
Finally, in the "Personnel" section, the document recommends changes in FEMA's leadership structure, reducing the number of Senate-confirmed positions from four to just the FEMA administrator:
FEMA currently has four Senate-confirmed positions. Only the Administrator should be confirmed by the Senate; other political leadership need not be confirmed by the Senate. Additionally, FEMA's "springing Cabinet position" should be eliminated, as this creates significant unnecessary challenges to the functioning of the whole of DHS at points in time when coordinated responses are most needed.
Progressive Groups Argue Reforms Would 'Gut' the Agency When It's Needed Most
An assessment by the Center for American Progress, a progressive advocacy group, concluded that the proposal for reorganizing FEMA ignores the sharply increasing costs disaster victims already face and, by increasing the threshold for disaster declarations, "would make it more difficult for states and localities — and, by extension, the families and businesses that call them home — to qualify for federal aid after disaster strikes."
The position paper concludes:
No one can stop disasters like Hurricane Debby from striking, but we can expect our government to be prepared to act swiftly and efficiently when they do—especially as these tragedies become more common and more devastating due to climate change. Instead, the far-right architects of Project 2025 would abandon American families and small businesses in a time of crisis, leaving them with fewer tools and resources to rebuild their lives.
For further reading, we have previously fact-checked whether "Trump's Project 2025" proposes eliminating the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Weather Service.
Project 2025 leaders are hoping to implement their proposals as early as November 2024, if voters choose Republican former President Donald Trump over Democratice Vice President Kamala Harris in the presidential election. Trump has publicly distanced himself from the initiative, and the extent to which his campaign and Project 2025 leaders may be working together is unclear.
Sources:
About Us | FEMA.Gov. 7 July 2023, https://www.fema.gov/about .
Biden-Harris Administration Supports Continued FEMA, Federal Family Helene Response | FEMA.Gov. 29 Sept. 2024, https://www.fema.gov/press-release/20240929/biden-harris-administration-supports-continued-fema-federal-family-helene .
Wrona, Aleksandra. "'Trump's Project 2025' Calls for Eliminating National Weather Service?" Snopes, 9 July 2024, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/project-2025-noaa-national-weather-service/ .
Wrona, Nur Ibrahim, Aleksandra. "What's Project 2025? Unpacking the Pro-Trump Plan to Overhaul US Government." Snopes, 3 July 2024, https://www.snopes.com//news/2024/07/03/project-2025-trump-us-government/ .
Local News
