To view this on the COS website, click here trump-targets-fema

Trump targets FEMA

The media responded with typical shock. But should FEMA even exist?

Hurricane season is upon us, and the president has unleashed a hurricane of his own in the administrative state.

Last year, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) wrecked the progressive notion that the federal government exists to “help” the American people when it reportedly refused to assist hurricane victims in Florida who had MAGA flags or campaign signs in their front yards. Ever since, Donald Trump has been wary of the federal disaster-relief agency, floating the possibility of abolishing it entirely. (Ironically, it was FEMA that former President Joe Biden praised for “reinforcing people’s faith” in the government.)

“I’ll … be signing an executive order to begin the process of fundamentally reforming and overhauling FEMA, or maybe getting rid of FEMA,” the president teased in January.

This week, he doubled down, revealing in a press conference that his administration plans to start “phasing [FEMA] out” after the current hurricane season ends in November. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem added that she has called for the creation of a “FEMA council” to determine “what FEMA will look like in the future as a different agency.”

“The governor [of a state hit by a natural disaster] should be able to handle it,” Trump maintained. “And frankly, if they can’t handle it, then maybe they shouldn’t be governor.”

The media responded with typical shock.

The Atlantic claimed that the president’s plan fails to provide “enough time to dismantle the federal apparatus of disaster response and transfer full responsibility to the states without casualties. Literal casualties, potentially.” A former FEMA leader told CNN that shuttering the agency amounts to an “abdication” of responsibility.

However, these critics overlook the more fundamental question of whether FEMA is even constitutionally justified.

According to Convention of States President Mark Meckler, the answer is no.

FEMA, Mark explained, has “been a disaster for a long time, but I would argue, fundamentally, at its core, that’s because it should not exist. Our Constitution does not authorize broad-scale emergency management response like this. In other words, why should the rest of the country pay for emergency response in North Carolina or Florida or Georgia, etc.?”

“Everything should be handled as close to the home as possible,” he continued. “When you have a one-size-fits-all agency based in Washington … it will fail.”

While making the states responsible for disaster support may be an uncomfortable or difficult process, it’s vital to restoring the Founders’ vision for federalism. Supporters and opponents of the president alike should ask whether they really want unnecessary power to reside in the hands of the federal government, where it can more easily become politicized.

By tearing through the administrative state and kicking power back to the American people, Trump has created the perfect window of opportunity for Convention of States, the nationwide grassroots organization, to reverse decades of federal overreach and establish constitutional self-governance; only through Article V can we permanently limit the size and scope of the federal government.

It’s time to step up.

Sign the petition below to encourage your state legislator to support the call for a limited Article V convention to curb Washington’s power and keep the administrative state in check!

#

PETITION_WIDGET{petition_tag:comms_blog_NA_06/11/2025_trumptargetsfema06112025;coalition_id:;anedot_url:}

#

Page Metadata
Login Required to view?	No
Created:	2025-06-11 23:23 GMT
Updated:	2025-06-18 07:00 GMT
Published:	2025-06-11 23:00 GMT
Converted:	2025-11-11 12:05 GMT
Change Author:	Jakob Fay
Credit Author:	Article V Patriot