[matthest]

I don't know enough about how FEMA works, but I'm assuming it operates at a federal level?

Could eliminating it force states to strengthen their own disaster relief programs?

If that's the case, some potential benefits of this might be that states get more efficient with their overall budget (in order to support disaster relief initiatives). And maybe spurs more innovation in disaster relief tech/processes.

[redserk]

I'd assume states with tighter budgets and less of a tax base will be unable to replicate FEMA's resources, while more populous and wealthy states will be able to work around it.

My questions are if this would have any repurcussions on EMAC membership and if it would increase politicization of aid between states. We've seen this with a number of conservative-leaning states pulling out of ERIC over flimsy political reasons.

[taylodl]

BINGO! Poor, rural states don't have the manpower resources or monetary resources to take care of the aftermath of disasters. Let me put it this way, North Carolina wasn't waiting on FEMA in order to start taking care of their disaster.

[dmicah]

Yes, FEMA is federal. If eliminating FEMA lowers federal taxes states could increase their state taxes to compensate and each have their own emergency management agencies. But generally it seems like having 50+ emergency management agencies is less efficient than having 1.

[joezydeco]

Red states will still get government assistance after disasters. Just watch.

[taylodl]

Never forget Super Storm Sandy