Fighting Back
by Lucien Canton
Generative AI in EM
by Timothy Riecker
FROM THE BOOKSHELF
Isaac's Storm: A Man, a Time, and the Deadliest Hurricane in History
by Erik Larson
In troubled times such as these one of the biggest problems for many people is a feeling of powerlessness as we face a much stronger opponent. In lieu of my usual article, I’d like to offer two options for making our collective voices heard.
The first is an email I just received from my colleague, Edie Schaffer, in which she calls for the International Association of Emergency Managers to enforce its Code of Conduct. Edie writes:
I am reaching out to ask you, as a current or former member of the International Association of Emergency Managers-USA Council (IAEM-USA), or as someone who has achieved the CEM® or AEM® credential from IAEM, to join me in signing a petition to the Board of Directors of IAEM-USA. The petition calls on the IAEM-USA Board to protect our profession by making it clear that emergency managers in the United States who assist in detaining people perceived to be immigrants are acting outside the scope of the profession and may be disciplined.
Over the past months, we have seen a growing number of emergency management agencies actively assisting federal immigration officials in establishing and operating detention centers for immigrants. These actions violate IAEM-USA’s Professional Code of Conduct, which provides that:
Yet, despite the apparent violations of its Code of Conduct by emergency managers who participate in detaining persons perceived to be immigrants, IAEM-USA has taken no action.
The petition calls on the IAEM-USA Board of Directors to take the following steps:
I hope you will join me in signing the petition, which is here: https://forms.gle/A8czpL8iyQAyZw66A
I also encourage you to share the link to the petition with colleagues you trust who are either current or former members of IAEM-USA, or who have earned the AEM or CEM credential.
Even if you are not a member of IAEM, the actions that Edie describes also violate the Foundational Tennents our recently adopted Code of Ethics and Professional Standards of Conduct for Emergency Managers Professionals. You can find a copy on my website at https://luciencanton.com/?page_id=293. If we are ever to truly become a profession, enforceable ethical standards are essential. I encourage you to review and sign the petition. You do not have to be a member of IAEM to sign the petition.
The second option is to support the recent action by a group of FEMA employees who recently sent a letter to Congress stating that the Post Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act (PKEMRA) “… introduced safeguards to ensure the shortcomings of disaster preparation and response would not be repeated. However, two decades later, FEMA is enacting processes and leadership structures that echo the conditions PKEMRA was designed to prevent” (see the full document at https://www.standupforscience.net/fema-katrina-declaration ).
The letter identifies six “Statements of Opposition” that the signatories oppose:
Further, the signatories petition Congress to:
Given the current political climate, this is an incredible act of bravery on the part of the 191 signatories, particularly the 36 who have allowed their names to be used. I encourage you to read their petition and to add your name to their Statement of Solidarity and Support https://www.standupforscience.net/katrina-declaration-support-statement.
These may seem like small steps that may have little impact, but I assure you that unless we make our voices heard, nothing will change for the better.
In troubled times such as these one of the biggest problems for many people is a feeling of powerlessness as we face a much stronger opponent. In lieu of my usual article, I’d like to offer two options for making our collective voices heard.
The first is an email I just received from my colleague, Edie Schaffer, in which she calls for the International Association of Emergency Managers to enforce its Code of Conduct. Edie writes:
I am reaching out to ask you, as a current or former member of the International Association of Emergency Managers-USA Council (IAEM-USA), or as someone who has achieved the CEM® or AEM® credential from IAEM, to join me in signing a petition to the Board of Directors of IAEM-USA. The petition calls on the IAEM-USA Board to protect our profession by making it clear that emergency managers in the United States who assist in detaining people perceived to be immigrants are acting outside the scope of the profession and may be disciplined.
Over the past months, we have seen a growing number of emergency management agencies actively assisting federal immigration officials in establishing and operating detention centers for immigrants. These actions violate IAEM-USA’s Professional Code of Conduct, which provides that:
Yet, despite the apparent violations of its Code of Conduct by emergency managers who participate in detaining persons perceived to be immigrants, IAEM-USA has taken no action.
The petition calls on the IAEM-USA Board of Directors to take the following steps:
I hope you will join me in signing the petition, which is here: https://forms.gle/A8czpL8iyQAyZw66A
I also encourage you to share the link to the petition with colleagues you trust who are either current or former members of IAEM-USA, or who have earned the AEM or CEM credential.
Even if you are not a member of IAEM, the actions that Edie describes also violate the Foundational Tennents our recently adopted Code of Ethics and Professional Standards of Conduct for Emergency Managers Professionals. You can find a copy on my website at https://luciencanton.com/?page_id=293. If we are ever to truly become a profession, enforceable ethical standards are essential. I encourage you to review and sign the petition. You do not have to be a member of IAEM to sign the petition.
The second option is to support the recent action by a group of FEMA employees who recently sent a letter to Congress stating that the Post Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act (PKEMRA) “… introduced safeguards to ensure the shortcomings of disaster preparation and response would not be repeated. However, two decades later, FEMA is enacting processes and leadership structures that echo the conditions PKEMRA was designed to prevent” (see the full document at https://www.standupforscience.net/fema-katrina-declaration ).
The letter identifies six “Statements of Opposition” that the signatories oppose:
Further, the signatories petition Congress to:
Given the current political climate, this is an incredible act of bravery on the part of the 191 signatories, particularly the 36 who have allowed their names to be used. I encourage you to read their petition and to add your name to their Statement of Solidarity and Support https://www.standupforscience.net/katrina-declaration-support-statement.
These may seem like small steps that may have little impact, but I assure you that unless we make our voices heard, nothing will change for the better.
In troubled times such as these one of the biggest problems for many people is a feeling of powerlessness as we face a much stronger opponent. In lieu of my usual article, I’d like to offer two options for making our collective voices heard.
The first is an email I just received from my colleague, Edie Schaffer, in which she calls for the International Association of Emergency Managers to enforce its Code of Conduct. Edie writes:
I am reaching out to ask you, as a current or former member of the International Association of Emergency Managers-USA Council (IAEM-USA), or as someone who has achieved the CEM® or AEM® credential from IAEM, to join me in signing a petition to the Board of Directors of IAEM-USA. The petition calls on the IAEM-USA Board to protect our profession by making it clear that emergency managers in the United States who assist in detaining people perceived to be immigrants are acting outside the scope of the profession and may be disciplined.
Over the past months, we have seen a growing number of emergency management agencies actively assisting federal immigration officials in establishing and operating detention centers for immigrants. These actions violate IAEM-USA’s Professional Code of Conduct, which provides that:
Yet, despite the apparent violations of its Code of Conduct by emergency managers who participate in detaining persons perceived to be immigrants, IAEM-USA has taken no action.
The petition calls on the IAEM-USA Board of Directors to take the following steps:
I hope you will join me in signing the petition, which is here: https://forms.gle/A8czpL8iyQAyZw66A
I also encourage you to share the link to the petition with colleagues you trust who are either current or former members of IAEM-USA, or who have earned the AEM or CEM credential.
Even if you are not a member of IAEM, the actions that Edie describes also violate the Foundational Tennents our recently adopted Code of Ethics and Professional Standards of Conduct for Emergency Managers Professionals. You can find a copy on my website at https://luciencanton.com/?page_id=293. If we are ever to truly become a profession, enforceable ethical standards are essential. I encourage you to review and sign the petition. You do not have to be a member of IAEM to sign the petition.
The second option is to support the recent action by a group of FEMA employees who recently sent a letter to Congress stating that the Post Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act (PKEMRA) “… introduced safeguards to ensure the shortcomings of disaster preparation and response would not be repeated. However, two decades later, FEMA is enacting processes and leadership structures that echo the conditions PKEMRA was designed to prevent” (see the full document at https://www.standupforscience.net/fema-katrina-declaration ).
The letter identifies six “Statements of Opposition” that the signatories oppose:
Further, the signatories petition Congress to:
Given the current political climate, this is an incredible act of bravery on the part of the 191 signatories, particularly the 36 who have allowed their names to be used. I encourage you to read their petition and to add your name to their Statement of Solidarity and Support https://www.standupforscience.net/katrina-declaration-support-statement.
These may seem like small steps that may have little impact, but I assure you that unless we make our voices heard, nothing will change for the better.
Who's Really In Charge of a Disaster
by Lucien Canton
Mixing Exercise Types
by Timothy Riecker
Acting FEMA Director Testifies Before House On Improving Disaster Response
Krakatoa: The Day the World Exploded: August 27, 1883
by Simon Winchester
At the second public meeting of the FEMA Review Council on July 9th, the Secretary of Homeland Security repeated in her opening statement much of the disinformation that has been circulating about FEMA. Among these was the need to return leadership for disasters to the state. This need to “stop FEMA from supplanting the states” was a theme that was repeated by many of the speakers. With August being designated Emergency Management Awareness Month, this question of who leads in a disaster is one that should be addressed with the public.
The role of the federal government in disaster relief is one that has evolved over time, largely in response to focusing events, major disasters that created a demand for action by the federal government. Initially, however, disaster relief was considered a state responsibility. The Constitution does not assign specific powers for disaster relief to the federal government, so under the 10th Amendment, these powers were assumed to be reserved to the states. This issue would resurface frequently as the federal disaster bureaucracy developed.
In those occasions where the federal government did involve itself in disaster relief, it was as the result of individual bills and was normally limited to economic relief from federal excise taxes. There were exceptions, such as compensation for citizens following the Whiskey Rebellion (1791-94) and the War of 1812 and the land transference scheme following the New Madrid earthquake in 1811 but generally the federal government did not provide general relief bills. By the end of the 19th Century, however, general relief bills were becoming increasingly common, despite claims that such relief was unconstitutional. By the beginning of the 20th Century a combination of factors such the growth of urban areas with their concentration of people and complex infrastructure, major disasters such as the Great Chicago Fire (1871, the Johnston Flood (1889), and the San Francisco earthquake and fires (1906), and the emerging role of the American Red Cross in disaster relief led to an increased role of the federal government in disaster relief and the beginnings of a disaster bureaucracy.
Despite the growth of the disaster bureaucracy, the leadership of state and local governments in disaster relief was never in question, sometimes to the detriment of citizens. In Plagues in the Nation: How Epidemics Shaped America, historian Polly J. Price traces how the commitment to states’ rights and individual liberties often hindered the response to epidemics. In the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927, where Herbert Hoover served as what later become the Federal Coordination Officer, Hoover worked through state governors and local officials rather than taking direct charge.
When FEMA was created in 1979, it was through a transfer of existing funding programs from other agencies. FEMA was considered at the time as a “third responder” that would provide relief funds following a disaster. This would change following Hurricane Hugo in 1989 and particularly Hurricane Andrew in 1992 where FEMA was accused of taking too long to respond. The reason given by FEMA was that the Stafford Act required a governor’s request before FEMA could act. This criticism and the continued public demand would result in changes that allowed FEMA to pre-deploy personnel and resources in anticipation of a major disaster.
Despite this new role, FEMA was expected to defer to the state. FEMA personnel could be deployed to a state emergency operations center to ensure rapid response to state requests for direct federal assistance and, following an event, could establish a Joint Field Office with state representatives but the Stafford Act is clear that the state and, by extension, the local government has the lead on response:
302 (c) When the President determines assistance under this Act is necessary, he shall request that the Governor of the affected State designate a State coordinating officer for the purpose of coordinating State and local disaster assistance efforts with those of the Federal Government.
303 The President shall form emergency support teams of Federal personnel to be deployed in an area affected by a major disaster or emergency. Such emergency support teams shall assist the Federal coordinating officer in carrying out his responsibilities pursuant to this Act…Each emergency response team shall work in coordination with State and local officials and onsite personnel associated with a particular incident.
401…as a prerequisite to major disaster assistance under this Act, the Governor shall take appropriate response action under State law and direct execution of the State’s emergency plan.
So, what’s the problem? The most visible part of FEMA’s response is the Individual Assistance Program. It is also the one that creates the most visible problems. It is a convoluted program that involves multiple funding streams and relies heavily on verification by contract employees with often limited training and familiarity with FEMA regulations. State and local agencies have limited involvement with the program. There is considerable research that strongly suggests that the program is skewed against people of color and those with low incomes. Many attempts have been made over the years to improve the program with limited results. Reforming this program would go a long way to improving both the delivery of disaster relief to survivors and to enhancing the reputation of the agency.
To be clear, both by law and by tradition, state and local governments are responsible for disasters affecting their communities. When they request assistance from the federal government, the Stafford Act requires:
302 Such a request shall be based on a finding that the disaster is of such severity and magnitude that effective response is beyond the capabilities of the State and the affected local governments and that Federal assistance is necessary.
That federal assistance is provided at the request of and in coordination with state and local governments. FEMA does not supplant, it supports.
Is It Possible to Save FEMA
by Lucien Canton
Why Aren’t We Asking Questions and Demanding Answers?
by Timothy Riecker
National Emergency Management Awareness Month 2025: Informational Webinar
The Civil Disobedience Handbook: A Brief History and Practical Advice for the Politically Disenchanted
by James Tracy
Last month I offered some thoughts on why I thought that the fate of FEMA had already been decided (Is FEMA a “Dead Man Walking?). Sadly, this has proven to be prophetic. On June 10, the President announced that he would dismantle FEMA after the hurricane season, which ends on November 30th and shift responsibility for response and recovery to the states. Diminished funding for disaster relief would be disbursed directly from the President’s office.
This renders moot any report that might be prepared by the FEMA Review Council. As I mentioned last April (President Names FEMA Review Council Members: Can You Say, “Stacked Deck?”), the Council membership is clearly stacked against FEMA and the Council has not exactly been making much effort. It’s inaugural meeting was just held on May 20. You can view the proceedings at https://www.dhs.gov/medialibrary/assets/video/60813.
Of note were remarks by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, who co-chairs the Council along with the Secretary of Defence, in which she stated:
Let me be clear about the future of this agency. The president wants it to be eliminated as it exists. So, I don’t want you to go into this thinking that we’re going to make a little tweak here, a little delegation of authority over here, that we’re going to maybe cut a few dollars somewhere. No, FEMA should no longer exist as it is. He wants this to be a new agency, something that understands its role in emergency response. That is our direction from the President of the United States. And as we go forward, everything will be viewed from that lens.
It is clear from this and other comments that many members of the Council are continuing to confuse immediate response, which has always been the responsibility of local government, with the disaster relief FEMA provides. This is a bit surprising, considering that many of the Council members have had direct experience with FEMA support in disasters.
It will be interesting to see how the Council will be able to follow these marching orders and recommend dismantling FEMA when much of the input they are receiving suggests just the opposite. You may recall that in March, DHS requested public input on their experiences with FEMA. By the time the comment period closed on May 15, over 11,000 comments were received. Of those, over 99% were supportive of FEMA and its mission and urged that the agency continue, albeit with good-faith reforms. You can find a breakdown of the data at https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/2025-05/FEMA_RFI-Summary_of_Public_Comments-FINAL.pdf.
In addition to this show of public support, on April 14, over 40 community organizations signed a letter to Congress opposing the dismantling of FEMA. National emergency management organizations such as the International Association of Emergency Managers (IAEM) and the National Emergency Managers Association (NEMA) also oppose the dismantling of FEMA and support reform.
Given this level of support, can FEMA be saved? It’s clear that the Republican administration has already decided that FEMA must go, so any attempt to save and reform FEMA will be an uphill battle. However, the executive branch does not have the authority to dismantle an agency; that can only be done by Congress. Pressure on legislators may yield results.
So, what can be done? Here are some ideas:
Having spent seven years with FEMA, I well know that the agency is not perfect. But over the years, I have seen it grow and adapt under the guidance of professional emergency managers like James Lee Witt and Craig Fugate. It is light years ahead of where it was when I started and has helped build an emergency management system that is not perfect but still damn effective. Dismantling the agency would negate all the gains we have made over the last seven decades. We can’t let this happen.
]]>
Is FEMA A "Dead Man Walking?"
by Lucien Canton
The Future of The US Emergency Management System
by Timothy Riecker
Acting FEMA Administrator Cam Hamilton Testifies Before The House Appropriations Committee
Recovering Inequality: Hurricane Katrina, the San Francisco Earthquake of 1906, and the Aftermath of Disaster
by Steve Kroll-Smith
On May 7, the Acting FEMA Administrator, Cameron Hamilton, appeared before the House Appropriations Committee. Hamilton has few qualifications for the job beyond loyalty to the President. So, it came as a stunning surprise when he praised the FEMA staff as “one of the greatest workforces in the entire federal government” and provide a realistic appraisal of needed improvements in the agency. When questioned about the possibility of eliminating FEMA, he replied, “As the senior advisor to the President on disasters and emergency management, and to the Secretary of Homeland Security, I do not believe it is in the best interest of the American people to eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency.” Hamilton made it clear that this was his recommendation and that the decision about FEMA’s continued existence was not his to make but rather the responsibility of the President and Congress.
Cameron Hamilton was fired on May 8.
While no reason was given for Hamilton’s firing, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem had testified the previous day, “President Trump has been very clear since the beginning that he believes that FEMA and its response in many, many circumstances has failed the American people, and that FEMA, as it exists today, should be eliminated in empowering states to respond to disasters with federal government support.” Noem’s comments and Hamilton’s firing for apparently expressing a conflicting opinion, is yet another indicator that FEMA is on the chopping block.
Hamilton was replaced by David Richardson, Assistant Secretary, Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office, a part-timer with no emergency management experience. According to CNN, Richardson has replaced over half a dozen long-time FEMA leaders with DHS staffers who have no experience in emergency management or senior management. Like Richardson, they are part-timers who will be splitting their FEMA duties with their current DHS duties. In a meeting with FEMA employees, Richardson threatened that he would “run over” any of the staff that resisted his intentions to implement the President’s agenda and stated. “I, and I alone in FEMA, speak for FEMA.” Employees later told CBS that the speech was “unhinged” and “terrifying.”
Richardson has stated that FEMA has no plan in place for the hurricane season that begins on June 1st. This is not surprising, considering that FEMA lost some 200 employees immediately and over 1000 employees (about 20% of the existing workforce) are expected to take a voluntary buyout. Since many of these employees were assigned to response duties, this represents a significant loss of experience and talent at a critical time for the agency Recall that a 2022 GAO report found that FEMA was understaffed by at least 35%. This is coupled with the cancellation of funding for preparedness and mitigation programs intended to help jurisdictions prepare for disasters such as the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program. With the lack of plan, a shortage of experienced response staff, the departure of many leaders, and low morale, FEMA is poorly positioned to deal with a major disaster. It will most likely fail catastrophically, adding further fuel to Republican demands for its elimination.
A further indicator that the elimination of FEMA has already been decided is the composition of the FEMA Review Committee. Of the thirteen members of the committee, only three are emergency managers, two of whom are from Republican states. The governor of one of those states is also on the committee, raising doubts that his emergency manager will stray far from the party line. In all, eleven of the committee members are Republicans. You can find more information in my recent article, President Names FEMA Review Council Members: Can You Say, “Stacked Deck?”
So where does the elimination of FEMA leave us? When Republican officials complain about FEMA, they tend to focus on recovery programs. They do not seem to realize that FEMA does not manage a disaster; that is the job of the state and local governments. What FEMA does is coordinate the delivery of direct federal assistance by tasking and reimbursing federal agencies as requested. Are state agencies prepared to coordinate and reimburse the activities of some numerous federal agencies? Does the financial and legislative authority even exist for this?
With regards to recovery programs, FEMA has been accused of being overly bureaucratic. It’s fair criticism but a lot of it is because FEMA must meet application requirements put into place by Congress to reduce fraud. Are states prepared to manage these programs? Do they have sufficient staff to conduct inspections, determine eligibility, disburse funds, and pursue fraudulent claims? What about determining eligible costs for response activities or auditing reconstruction costs?
There are other ways to reduce recovery bureaucracy and streamline the delivery of assistance. On May 8, Representatives Sam Graves (R-MO) and Rick Larsen (D-WA) released draft legislation that would significantly reform FEMA. The bill, Fixing Emergency Management for Americans (FEMA) Act of 2025, would return FEMA to a cabinet position, streamline the public assistance program and reduce the backlog of disasters to be closed out, and simplify application for and delivery of individual assistance. In short, it attempts to address the real problems that hamper FEMA rather than just eliminating the agency to score political points.
But disaster assistance is still only a drop in the bucket. In my recent article, What the Public Doesn’t Know About FEMA, I wrote about the many “behind the scenes" missions that FEMA has. This includes the grants that fund many emergency management offices. Without this funding, many small offices would close unless their costs are assumed by state or local governments. FEMA serves as a source of doctrine that brings cohesion to emergency response. This doctrine provides a basis for both higher education curricula and for professional training by both public and private agencies. Losing FEMA means the end of the cohesive emergency management system that has taken over seven decades to build. Once it is gone, it can never be replaced.
The phrase, “Dead Man Walking” is commonly used to describe a person on their way to execution or someone in a doomed or untenable situation. The deck appears stacked against FEMA but if the President’s own appointee can find the courage to speak the truth, there may still be hope. To quote Dr. Martin Luther King, “Only when it is dark enough, can you see the stars.”