In the aftermath of Hurricane Milton and Hurricane Helene, communities in the Southeastern United States are facing devastating impacts, while Donald Trump appears to be leveraging this tragedy to further his political agenda. Trump’s rhetoric has gravely undermined public trust in government institutions, with a particular focus on disinformation regarding the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and a tendency to scapegoat migrants for the crises faced by Americans. At a rally timed to coincide with the approaching Hurricane Milton, he peddled backfired claims about FEMA diverting funds, prompting President Joe Biden to defend the agency and characterize Trump’s fabrications as both “reckless and irresponsible.” This incident reflects a pattern established during Trump’s presidency, where crises become political ammunition, especially in the absence of a genuine commitment to and understanding of the climate crisis contributing to such severe weather events.
Historically, Trump’s management of national emergencies has come under scrutiny, raising concerns about a potential second term being even more detrimental. While in office, his approach often prioritized political implications over the actual needs of disaster-affected citizens. Visuals of him carelessly handing out paper towels to Hurricane Maria survivors in Puerto Rico starkly contrast with the grim reality faced by those who lost their lives or homes. An independent study estimates that nearly 2,975 people died post-Maria, a tragedy Trump dismissed as a mere inflation of numbers by Democrats aimed at damaging his reputation. Throughout his presidency, Trump’s administration repeatedly stalled necessary disaster relief, especially for Puerto Rico, which was reflective of his political biases regarding who deserved aid based on state affiliations.
Moreover, Trump’s ideology starkly reflected a rift between red and blue states. Reports indicate he threatened to cut federal emergency aid for California wildfires, restricting relief to states that predominantly backed him politically. Evidence suggests that he only relented after aides showcased voter data illustrating that many of his supporters were among the hardest-hit in situations requiring federal assistance. This indicative behavior further illustrates Trump’s tendency to view disaster response through a political lens rather than a humanitarian one, posing a challenge for anyone who finds themselves caught in an emergency during a politically hostile era.
Concern arises not just from Trump’s response to crises, but also from how he conveys essential information about looming disasters. His notorious misinformation during Hurricane Dorian, when he incorrectly predicted its path toward Alabama, is a telling episode of how he undermined science and federal messaging with his own narratives, resulting in the National Weather Service having to publicly correct him. This “Sharpiegate” incident exemplifies a broader pattern of Trump’s dismissal of scientific accuracy, posing significant risks in times of urgent public crises where clear communication and trust in government agencies are critical for effective disaster management.
Looking ahead, the prospect of a second Trump administration raises alarm bells about the potential systematic politicization of weather emergencies. Proposals under Project 2025 by Trump allies suggest radical overhauls, including the outsourcing of essential weather services to private companies, sidelining agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Such changes endanger the integrity of crucial weather information that communities depend on during emergencies, effectively prioritizing profit over public safety. Trump has also indicated intentions to undo commitments to address climate change, which could drastically hinder progress in preparing for and mitigating the effects of increasingly severe weather patterns.
As the U.S. grapples with the realities of climate change and the intensifying frequency and severity of hurricanes, countering misinformation has become paramount. The ongoing situation in North Carolina, where Trump’s misrepresentations present psychological barriers for those seeking assistance from FEMA, exemplifies alarming ramifications of his approach. With key elections nearing, the urgency for empathetic and steady leadership is imperative as communities work toward recovery amidst a backdrop of swirling disinformation. The pressing need for reliable federal support stands juxtaposed against a historical pattern where Trump has shown himself unprepared to provide the necessary guidance or care during dire moments.