Connect with us

Environment

DHS Secretary Mayorkas Admits FEMA Running Out of Funds as Hurricane Season Continues

Published

on

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas revealed on Wednesday that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) does not have enough funding to last through the rest of the year, despite the increasing threat of more hurricanes. FEMA, which is overseen by DHS, has spent hundreds of millions of dollars under the Biden administration to assist migrants settling in the U.S. The agency now faces a funding shortfall just as it is responding to the widespread devastation from Hurricane Helene, a Category 4 storm that recently tore through the southeastern U.S.

Mayorkas addressed reporters, stating, “We are meeting the immediate needs with the money that we have. We are expecting another hurricane hitting. FEMA does not have the funds to make it through the season.” His remarks come as FEMA is still grappling with the immense damage caused by Hurricane Helene, which has claimed more than 100 lives and left many people unaccounted for. The storm has also resulted in billions of dollars in infrastructure damage and widespread food shortages.

FEMA’s financial shortfall is concerning given the agency’s role in disaster relief, especially with more hurricanes potentially on the way. The situation has raised questions about FEMA’s recent spending priorities. In April, FEMA announced $640 million in new funding, including $300 million for direct assistance to help migrants settle in the U.S. and an additional $340 million in grants to cities to support similar initiatives.

The Center Square writes that this allocation of resources follows a trend under the Biden administration, which has placed significant emphasis on managing the surge of migrants entering the country. Last year, FEMA awarded over $780 million through the Shelter and Services Program (SSP) and the Emergency Food and Shelter Program—Humanitarian Awards, directing funds to organizations and cities across the U.S. to assist with migrant settlement efforts.

Hurricane Helene, which hit the U.S. mainland in late September, has severely tested FEMA’s capacity to respond to natural disasters. The storm’s impact has been devastating, with major infrastructure damage across several states, including Florida and North Carolina. Many communities are still without basic necessities, and search-and-rescue teams are working to locate the missing. As FEMA handles the immediate relief and recovery efforts from Helene, Mayorkas’ comments suggest that the agency may not be fully prepared for the rest of the hurricane season.

President Joe Biden acknowledged the potential funding crisis earlier this week, stating that he may ask Congress to approve additional funding for FEMA. Despite this, the agency’s financial constraints are increasingly evident. “FEMA has what it needs for immediate response and recovery efforts,” said FEMA Spokesperson Jaclyn Rothenberg, “but we’re not out of hurricane season yet, so we need to keep a close eye on it.”

FEMA’s financial woes are compounded by the escalating immigration crisis under the Biden-Harris administration. According to estimates from the Center Square, nearly 14 million migrants have crossed the southern border or been deemed inadmissible under the current administration, overwhelming the federal government’s ability to process the influx. Some experts believe the actual number of illegal border crossings could be even higher.

As FEMA’s resources are increasingly allocated to address the needs of migrants, concerns are growing about the agency’s ability to respond to natural disasters like Hurricane Helene. While FEMA’s funding is allocated by Congress, the redirection of resources has left the agency ill-prepared for what is shaping up to be a challenging and costly hurricane season.

With the possibility of more hurricanes looming and a pressing need for additional funding, FEMA finds itself at a critical juncture. The agency’s focus on immediate disaster relief must now be balanced with managing the ongoing demands of migrant resettlement, leaving both FEMA and the DHS under pressure to secure the necessary resources to respond to future emergencies.

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Environment

Republicans Looking to Boost America’s Energy Independence and Combat the Left’s ‘Green New Deal’

Published

on

Republicans are advocating for alternative strategies they argue can effectively address environmental concerns while boosting America’s energy independence and economic growth, and simultaneously combat the Left’s ‘Green New Deal’ and the Paris Climate Accord.

As President-elect Donald Trump prepares for his second term, his administration is expected to prioritize an energy independence plan focused on leveraging domestic resources, cutting regulatory red tape, and ensuring low energy costs for Americans, writes Just the News.

The Democratic approach to climate change, including the Green New Deal championed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and participation in the Paris Climate Accord, has faced criticism from Republicans who argue these initiatives harm the American economy while failing to deliver global environmental benefits.

Former Republican Congressman Doug Collins voiced skepticism about Democratic solutions, pointing to what he sees as their reluctance to embrace pragmatic energy sources like nuclear power and hydrogen fuel. “I will not take the left seriously on climate change until we embrace nuclear,” Collins said during an appearance on Just the News, No Noise.

Collins also criticized the Paris Climate Accord for imposing what he called unfair burdens on the United States while allowing countries like China to continue high levels of emissions. “We can’t let China and third world countries do whatever they want,” he said, emphasizing the importance of balancing environmental goals with economic fairness.

Republicans have emphasized a broader mix of energy sources, including natural gas, nuclear power, solar, and wind, to ensure both environmental sustainability and energy reliability.

Benji Backer, founder of the American Conservation Coalition, highlighted the need for expanding America’s energy infrastructure. “Solar and wind can’t do it alone, but neither can the current natural gas and nuclear supply that we have,” he said, advocating for a diversified approach. Backer also stressed that nuclear energy is among the least harmful options for the environment, a sentiment echoed by many young conservatives.

North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum pointed to natural gas as a cleaner, more abundant resource that could play a critical role in meeting energy demands. Burgum and other Republicans argue that natural gas, along with nuclear and hydrogen technologies, can reduce emissions without sacrificing economic growth.

Another area of contention is the rise of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) policies, which encourage companies to prioritize progressive causes like climate change and diversity. Critics argue that these policies often undermine energy independence and harm investors. Republicans have called for a return to focusing on economic viability and energy efficiency rather than politically driven initiatives.

In his campaign and transition statements, Trump has made it clear that affordable energy will be a cornerstone of his administration’s policy. “As President, I will set a national goal of ensuring that America has the No. 1 lowest cost of energy of any industrial country anywhere on Earth,” Trump declared, adding that cheaper energy would lead to lower inflation and more job creation.

Trump’s pledge to end what some Republicans describe as a “war on energy” includes cutting taxes and reducing regulatory barriers to domestic energy production. His administration aims to achieve energy independence by maximizing the use of American energy resources and reducing reliance on foreign imports.

While Democrats have sought to address climate change through ambitious international agreements and sweeping reforms, Republicans are championing a more cost-effective and pragmatic approach by prioritizing domestic energy production, promoting nuclear and natural gas, and resisting regulatory policies they view as economically harmful.

Continue Reading

Trending