Imagine waking up to news of another devastating natural disaster, only to find that the very agency sworn to protect you—FEMA—is teetering on the edge of irrelevance and potential shutdown. That's the stark reality facing our nation's emergency management system right now, and it's a crisis that demands our immediate attention and understanding.
Since Donald Trump's return to the White House for his second presidential term, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA for short, has been under relentless scrutiny and turbulence. To put it simply, FEMA is the U.S. government organization responsible for coordinating disaster response, recovery, and mitigation efforts across the country—think floods, hurricanes, wildfires, and more. But under this administration, the agency has seen a rapid churn of leadership, cycling through three different acting administrators in quick succession. This instability has also led to a significant downsizing, with nearly 10 percent of its workforce being cut. For beginners, this means fewer experts on the ground to handle emergencies, potentially slowing down aid and leaving communities more vulnerable during crises.
As 2025 comes to a close, things are heating up even more. On December 12, the FEMA Review Council is set to unveil its draft final report, packed with recommendations aimed at completely revamping the federal disaster recovery framework. It's like a blueprint for rebuilding from the ground up after a stormy year for the agency. President Trump and his Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem, have publicly advocated for FEMA's complete dissolution—essentially dismantling it altogether. But here's where it gets controversial: there's mounting skepticism that the council's report will endorse such a radical move. Why the doubt? Critics argue that dissolving FEMA could leave states and localities overwhelmed without federal support, potentially exacerbating inequalities in disaster-prone areas. On the flip side, supporters of the dissolution idea claim it could streamline operations and empower local governments to take charge, fostering innovation in disaster management. And this is the part most people miss: the report might reveal hidden inefficiencies that have plagued FEMA for years, sparking debates on whether the agency has outlived its usefulness or just needs a major overhaul. What if the real issue isn't the agency itself, but how it's funded and integrated into broader national security priorities?
So, what lies ahead once the FEMA Review Council's work wraps up? Will Congress step in to redefine the landscape of federal emergency management, or will it allow executive decisions to dictate the future? How have disaster policies evolved this past year, perhaps shifting toward more private-sector involvement or tech-driven solutions? And critically, what steps are essential to forge a reliable, adaptable disaster recovery network that spans federal, state, and local levels starting in 2026? These are the burning questions that could shape how America bounces back from catastrophes for decades to come.
Don't miss this opportunity to dive deeper with experts in the field. Join Sarah Labowitz, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment's Sustainability, Climate, and Geopolitics Program, for an engaging virtual panel discussion. She'll be joined by a powerhouse lineup: Deanne Criswell, who served as FEMA administrator from 2021 to 2025; Pete Gaynor, FEMA's former administrator from 2019 to 2021; Michael Coen, who held the position of FEMA chief of staff twice—first from 2013 to 2017 and again from 2021 to 2025; and Danielle Aymond, a specialist in disaster recovery and FEMA funding at the law firm Baker Donelson. Together, they'll unpack the lessons from 2025 and chart a course for resilience.
This event touches on key topics like Domestic Politics, Climate Change, and issues specific to the United States—perfect for anyone interested in how policy intersects with real-world crises.
A quick note: The Carnegie Endowment maintains neutrality on public policy matters, so the insights shared here are solely from the authors and panelists, not reflecting the institution's official stance.
What do you think—should FEMA be dissolved, or is it indispensable for national security? Do you agree with the administration's approach, or is there a better way to modernize disaster response? Share your thoughts in the comments below; let's start a conversation on this divisive topic!
