Disaster Assistance And Elections: How Trump’s Policies May Play A Role – OpEd

One aspect of the post-election commentary that is likely to be overlooked is Trump’s record on disaster assistance. CEPR has written previously about his tactic of punishing states that didn’t support him in his presidential runs, his recent focus on adding requirements around immigration policy to aid, and his attempt to dismantle programs aimed at building community resilience. Despite the potential harm to affect communities, it is difficult to predict what effect these actions will have on future elections in the US. However, we do know that Trump took a similar stance in his first term. 

For example, during his first term, Trump overwhelmingly denied disaster declarations for incidents for which the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program was requested (see figure below). Under the Stafford Act, governors can request a disaster declaration to unlock various types of funding. The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is one type of funding that may be approved following a presidential disaster declaration.  The program enables communities not only to reconstruct damaged infrastructure but also to enhance it, thereby mitigating future disaster risks.

This is not to suggest that this one move led to Trump losing to Biden in 2020. But there is research showing that the use of disaster declarations and funding plays a role in elections. Researchers observed a notable shift in voting behavior during election years. Presidents Bush, Obama, and Trump frequently issued disaster declarations in FEMA Region 3 (Northeast) states, which correlated with increased electoral support.

To be clear, elections are complex and cannot, as much as the media tries, be boiled down to a single issue or a couple of issues. However, what is clear is that the more the Trump administration takes away from communities, whether it is SNAP benefits, healthcare tax credits, or federal disaster assistance, the more voters may question what the administration is doing for the public.

• This article was published by CEPR

About Matt Sedlar

Matt Sedlar is the climate analyst for CEPR. He holds an MA in sociology from George Mason University; a BA in communications and a minor in political science from the University of California, Fullerton; and certifications in data journalism and data science from the European Journalism Centre and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, respectively. He’s authored opinion pieces for the Los Angeles Times and The Hill and has been interviewed by various California radio stations, such as KPCC and KWMR, on climate and housing issues.

View all posts by Matt Sedlar →