There was quite a dramatic twist in the battle over the future of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which coordinates federal response to national emergencies and disasters and funds recovery and mitigation projects. 

The vote on and release of a highly anticipated report from a council established to suggest agency changes had been set by the administration for 1 p.m. on  December 11. However, that same morning, CNN published an exclusive detailing the contents of a leaked draft. According to CNN, the report called for halving the agency’s already diminished staff and increasing requirements for federal aid. An hour after the council was scheduled to meet, the media reported that the administration had canceled the vote on the report. As of this writing, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has posted on its site, “The FEMA Review Council’s meeting has been postponed. We will keep you apprised of the new date as soon as possible.” 

If you’re lost, here’s a quick recap.

Background

In late January, Trump issued an executive order to establish the FEMA Review Council. One of its goals was to evaluate “whether FEMA can serve its functions as a support agency, providing supplemental Federal assistance, to the States rather than supplanting State control of disaster relief.” In other words, the Trump administration sought to reduce the federal government’s involvement in disaster relief, with the aim of shifting greater responsibility to states. We have noted FEMA’s shortcomings in the past, such as the difficulty smaller, rural governments face in applying for grants and the time it takes to provide cash aid to those who successfully complete applications. However, eliminating the agency or reducing its capabilities would worsen, rather than solve, those issues.

RELATED LINK: Will Trump’s FEMA Review Force States to Take on More Disaster Relief? 

Since the council’s formation, both Trump and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem have expressed strong views on the agency. Trump proposed phasing out FEMA after the 2025 hurricane season, while Noem stated the agency must be “eliminated.”

The council’s report was expected on November 16, which was “within 180 days of the date of the Council’s first public meeting,” per Trump’s executive order. But according to The New York Times, that deadline was extended because the draft report’s content did not meet the administration’s approval. The Times also reported that the draft proposed restoring FEMA to a cabinet-level agency that reports directly to the president — a status it held before 2003 — and speeding up the distribution of aid to states — the opposite of the administration’s goal of making FEMA “go away.”

RELATED LINK: The Battle for FEMA Continues as the Administration Undermines Itself

That brings us to last week, when the already delayed report was delayed once again.  There is currently no indication of when we will see the actual recommendations. 

What we do know is that late last week, an atmospheric river hit western Washington state, dumping over a foot of rain on the region and causing massive flooding and damage. This event is just one of many disasters in 2025. According to researchers, between January and June, the US experienced 14 distinct weather and climate disasters, each exceeding $1 billion in costs. These events, which began with the Los Angeles wildfires, have already totaled $101.4 billion, and data for the last six months are not yet available. Even before that data comes in, 2025 has significantly surpassed the long-term annual average of nine events.

The reason for pointing this out is that Americans need a proactive federal government for disaster recovery and mitigation. Right now is the worst time to introduce additional uncertainty. The costs of climate-driven disasters exceed the capacity of states, localities, and tribal nations, and it’s not clear what the administration expects to happen when these needs go unmet. The effort to diminish FEMA’s role directly contradicts the growing, multi-billion-dollar reality of climate-driven disasters. 

The government doesn’t even need a report from the council to take action. For example, there is already bipartisan legislation in Congress, the FEMA Act of 2025, that addresses some of the agency’s  most glaring shortcomings. And Sen. Peter Welch (D-VT) has introduced similar legislation in the Senate. The opportunity — from detailed legislative blueprints to broad political consensus — is there. The administration just needs to stop its political maneuvering and prioritize public safety. Every delay in providing assistance puts disaster-affected communities at risk and leaves vulnerable communities unprotected from the next inevitable disaster.