As wind-swept fires ravage Southern California, the winds of political change could dash the state's hopes for a fast recovery from future natural disasters.
The president-elect has repeatedly threatened to withhold disaster relief funds from California amid an ongoing feud with Gov. Gavin Newsom. Unlike his goals of annexing Greenland and Canada or retaking the Panama Canal, withholding disaster aid is something Trump could easily do, in keeping with one expert.
He could “absolutely refuse” aid to California, said Matt Sedlar, a climate analyst on the Washington, D.C.-based organization Center for Economic and Policy Research. “It is entirely at the president’s discretion whether to distribute federal disaster assistance.”
Federal disaster declarations, which trigger the flow of funds to disaster-affected states, are typically an impartial and routine act.
But Trump in 2018 considered denying wildfire aid to California – a blue state he lost each time he ran for president – and only relented when he was presented with pro-Trump voter registration data from Orange County, considered one of the areas affected by wildfires this yr to Matt Harvey, who served as special assistant to the president for matters related to domestic crises.
In October, POLITICO reported that Trump, a Republican, rejected a request for $37 million in wildfire aid to Washington state in 2020 “over a bitter personal dispute” with Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee.
“Trump sat on Inslee's request for the final four months of his presidency, delaying the recovery and leaving communities uncertain about how to rebuild because no one knew whether they would get federal aid,” in keeping with POLITICO, which added that Biden followed his request took office.
Trump took to social media this week in charge the wildfires on Newsom, a Democrat who’s rumored to be running for president in 2028.
“Governor Gavin Newscum refused to sign the water restoration declaration presented to him that would have allowed millions of gallons of water daily from excessive rain and snowmelt from the north to flow into many parts of California, including areas that are currently burning in an almost apocalyptic manner “said Trump posted on his Truth social media platform.
“He wanted to protect an essentially worthless fish called a smelt by giving it less water (that didn't work!), but he didn't care about the people of California,” the post continued, one of several he wrote on fires in California.
“Now the ultimate price is being paid. I will demand that this incompetent governor allow beautiful, clean, fresh water to FLOW into CALIFORNIA! He is to blame for this. In addition, there is no water for hydrants and no firefighting aircraft. A real disaster!”
Local officials blamed infrastructure for fire hydrant failures, and Newsom's office quickly pushed back against the facts in Trump's posts. The water declaration that Trump said Newsom wouldn’t sign doesn’t exist, in keeping with the Newsom administration.
“The governor is focused on keeping people safe, not on politics, but on making sure firefighters have all the resources they need,” said Izzy Gardon, communications director for Newsom.
During a campaign rally outside Coachella within the Riverside County desert in October, Trump also threatened to withhold disaster aid.
“We will take care of your (water) situation and impose it on him,” Trump said was quoted on the rally. “And we'll say, 'Gavin, if you don't do it, we're not going to give any of the fire money that we keep sending you for all the fires and wildfires that you have.' It’s not difficult.”
Republicans blame Newsom for the wildfires and say his policies have left the state vulnerable to infernos. Rep. Bill Essayli, R-Corona, called on the governor to call a special session on wildfires, citing the ongoing special session to arm California for litigation with the Trump administration.
“Now will not be the time for political posturing or spending hundreds of thousands to 'Trump-proof' California,” Essayli said known for his sensational disputes with the Democratswrote in a letter to Newsom dated Wednesday, January 9th. “Instead, it is time to take significant action to fireproof our state.”
In an emailed statement to Essayli, Gardon reiterated his statement that Newsom is not focused on politics but on protecting people.
Taking into account the poverty rate and the number of uninsured people in a disaster area, the Federal Emergency Management Agency makes disaster relief recommendations to the president, who can “just say yes or no,” Sedlar said.
Federal money is critical to disaster recovery, Sedlar said.
“There's so much to do after a disaster, and when federal assistance doesn't come, it really hurts the state and how … can the state recover and how quickly can it recover.”
There are federal funding sources, reminiscent of Small Business Administration loans, that are usually not tied to FEMA and may very well be available to residents of disaster areas, Sedlar said.
“There are many different ways for the state to get money,” he said. “I can’t say whether that can be denied.”
Depending on where a fireplace breaks out, states could have other options for in search of federal aid if the president cuts off aid, Sedlar said.
For example, if the fireplace began on U.S. Forest Service property, a state could potentially sue the federal government for relief on the grounds that the Forest Service's mismanagement contributed to the fireplace. But “we cannot predict which direction these cases will develop,” Sedlar said.
Another challenge, Sedlar said, is that the size and severity of wildfires, hurricanes and other disasters made worse by climate change could overwhelm FEMA's pot of disaster relief funds.
“At a certain point, there is a real risk that there will not be enough money and more disasters will occur than the disaster relief fund can handle,” he said. “And I think that's the dangerous area where someone like Trump can step in and basically distribute the money,” he says, which he likes.
California is fortunate that Biden is president during this week's wildfires, Sedlar said.
“If we were having this conversation in February, I wouldn’t really know how to respond because we don’t know what (Trump) is going to do.”
Originally published:
image credit : www.mercurynews.com