Chapter 5, Part 4: The Department of Homeland Security
It’s been awhile, but I’m back. It’s Day 26, and this is a short one.
It should be obvious why I’m doing this given the last week of executive orders that have enacted or attempted to enact pretty much everything I’ve written about before.
But if you want more detail, you can read my approach and why I'm doing this here.
SUMMARY
We are still in Chapter 5, The Department of Homeland Security, written by Ken Cuccinelli. His bio is in Part 1.
This section is on the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, and Cuccinelli jumps right in with a subsection on Needed Reforms.
He says FEMA is overtasked and in debt because the federal government is now in charge of tasks that used to be done by the states. He wants much of the responsibility to return to the states, “leaving FEMA to focus on large, widespread disasters.”
Cuccinelli argues that the threshold for disasters should be adjusted so states and localities aren’t eligible as often. Or it should apply a deductible, “incentivizing states to take a more proactive role in their own preparedness and response capabilities.” He says Congress should rule that the federal government only covers 25% of the costs of “small disasters” and a maximum of 75% for “truly catastrophic disasters.”
MY OPINION
What is a small disaster? And isn’t disaster response exactly what we want the federal government for? Because they’re too big for states to handle? This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. If FEMA can’t afford to respond, maybe we should increase FEMA’s budget instead of offloading responses to the states, which will undoubtedly have all kinds of work to do responding to a disaster already. Not to mention that having response come from outside may in the case of a disaster be more efficient, not less, because what if supplies/responders are affected by said disaster.
SUMMARY
Cuccinelli says the National Flood Insurance Program encourages development in flood zones by providing insurance at low rates and should be phased out, replacing it with private insurance.
MY OPINION
What about people who already live or do business in flood zones and can’t afford to move?
SUMMARY
Cuccinelli argues that FEMA provides pork spending that “do not provide measurable gains for preparedness or resiliency. Rather, more than any objective needs, political interests appear to direct the flow of non disaster funds.” His solution, again, is to have the states bear the costs.
**-“DHS should not be in the business of handing out federal tax dollars: These grants should be terminated.”
MY OPINION
He may have some valid points here. The question is what the role of the federal government is. If it’s true that states should manage their own programs, then federal taxes need to be lowered significantly so that states can raise theirs without impacting people. There’s no question that there’s inefficiency in government. I’m not sure (but I’m open to the idea) that decentralization is the answer.
Throughout Project 2025, I find it frustrating that there are sweeping statements without citation or data to back it up. This is yet another occurrence of that.
And if the goal is decentralization, a real plan needs to be in place with Congress and states on board to avoid chaos and disruption of services like we saw yesterday. (I realize that wasn’t FEMA specifically, but it points to the problem of deconstructing the government with nothing to take its place.) Real people with real needs are affected. This isn’t just a philosophical exercise.
SUMMARY
The next short subsection is Personnel. He says instead of four Senate-confirmed positions, there should just be one, and political leaders shouldn’t have to be confirmed by the Senate. He also says FEMA’s “springing Cabinet position” should be eliminated.
MY OPINION
I’m immediately suspicious of getting rid of Senate-confirmed positions. I have no idea what that last one is. Comment if you do.
SUMMARY
That’s it for now. The next section is Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.