Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

It's nice to see the governor of Texas actually dealing with a real catastrophe for a change instead of the other fictional one of evil brown invaders raping and killing gringos and pillaging his state. Funny how they all cry out for FEMA now instead of bashing it as useless and a waste of money like they did before.

Of course, you would not only trivialize drug and human tracking, crime and population surge devastating tiny border towns, etc. but also gloat over the tragic loss of life.
There were also a lot of Democrat mayors crying about the immigration crisis, once the burden was shifted from hapless, small border cities to those that touted themselves as "sanctuary cities."

When his state in April 2022 began busing thousands of asylum seekers and other migrants to cities far from the Texas-Mexico border—dropping them off often with little to no warning—it struck many as a crisis. Chaotic scenes took place at city shelters and dropoff points, some of which—such as outside Vice President Kamala Harris’s residence in Washington, DC—had clearly been chosen for political reasons. Tent encampments sprouted on the streets of Chicago, Denver, New York, and other so-called sanctuary cities, which spent billions of dollars to provide basic necessities. The situation threatened to “destroy New York City,” Mayor Eric Adams famously warned last September.

Politically, the arrivals forced a rift within the Democratic Party, exposing the Biden administration on its most politically vulnerable issue and prompting wide bipartisan support for tougher border restrictions, including blanket denials of access to asylum for certain migrants. “Those buses will continue to roll until we finally secure our border,” Abbott said at the Republican convention. And indeed, city leaders in Chicago already are bracing for the prospect that Texas will bus up to 25,000 new migrants to the city before the start of the Democratic National Convention there in August.
- https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/...e-arrivals


Calls to do more to control the flow of undocumented immigrants into the country have been an unrelenting GOP rallying cry, a central tenet of party beliefs.

But with tens of thousands of migrants now attempting to settle in blue states and cities around the country, the ground has shifted in the national immigration debate, with Democrats increasingly calling on President Joe Biden to take action on the border.

It’s all quickly created a political headache for the president.
...
“This is a major humanitarian crisis that we have never experienced before in the modern age in this city,” Sol Flores, Illinois' deputy governor, said in an interview. Flores argued the Biden administration could do more, given that the majority of the migrants she sees are seeking asylum.
- https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/joe-bid...rcna118690

EMA Ends Wasteful, Politicized Grant Program, Returning Agency to Core Mission of Helping Americans Recovering from Natural Disasters

FEMA is ending the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program and canceling all BRIC applications from Fiscal Years 2020-2023. If grant funds have not been distributed to states, tribes, territories and local communities, funds will be immediately returned either to the Disaster Relief Fund or the U.S. Treasury.
...
“The BRIC program was yet another example of a wasteful and ineffective FEMA program. It was more concerned with political agendas than helping Americans affected by natural disasters. Under Secretary Noem’s leadership, we are committed to ensuring that Americans in crisis can get the help and resources they need.”

"President Trump says the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, should be eliminated, and that states should take on more responsibility for responding to and preparing for extreme weather and other disasters.

That would mean big changes for the millions of Americans who rely on FEMA after hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, floods and other weather disasters every year. The cost of weather disasters in the U.S. has skyrocketed in the last decade, as climate change causes more intense weather and populations grow in areas that are at high risk for hurricanes, wildfires and other destructive events.

FEMA currently works with states to prepare for disasters, provides on-the-ground help during emergencies and pays out billions of dollars for repairs. Emergency management experts and state disaster response officials say that FEMA plays a crucial role that state governments cannot handle on their own.

Here's what we know about the Trump administration's plans to eliminate FEMA.

When will FEMA be eliminated?

President Trump says the agency could be eliminated as soon as December 2025. Speaking in the Oval Office in June, he said that major changes to FEMA would come after the Atlantic hurricane season ends in November. "We want to wean off of FEMA, and we want to bring it back to the state level," the president said. He also said that the agency will immediately "give out less money" to states that are recovering from disasters.

The president also appointed a council of cabinet members, governors and emergency management experts, tasked with recommending changes to FEMA. That group, the FEMA Review Council, had its first meeting in May, and is supposed to make recommendations by mid-November. The council is expected to complete its work by May 2026, suggesting that the Trump administration intends to eliminate or restructure FEMA in the period between the 2025 hurricane season and the 2026 hurricane season.

Why is the Trump administration proposing this?

FEMA has a long history of failing to serve those who need help the most after disasters. Under the Biden administration, the agency was taking steps to address those problems. For example, the agency simplified paperwork, expanded on-the-ground help after disasters and made it easier for survivors to get money for diapers, food and other immediate needs.

The Trump administration is taking a different approach. The president has repeatedly suggested that FEMA is hopelessly flawed. At the first meeting of the FEMA Review Council, the council's co-chair, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, said, "The president and I have had many, many discussions about this agency. I want to be very clear. The President wants it eliminated as it currently exists. He wants a new agency."---- https://www.npr.org/2025/06/26/nx-s1-543...limination

When FEMA has a history of blocking non-FEMA relief efforts, letting aid supplies go to waste, and generally being inefficient, it would make more sense that the funds go to local government better suited to provide aid, instead of bloated federal salaries of authoritative bureaucrats who are not familiar with the areas they try to serve.

But I notice how you don't defend or apologize for gloating over the deaths of children.

Quote:“Those buses will continue to roll until we finally secure our border,” Abbott said at the Republican convention.

He's the one who politicized the plight of homeless immigrants by weaponizing them to score points against Democrats. They weren't real people to him to help and be provided for. They were just inconveniences to be shuffled off to and dumped on sanctuary cities to create problems for their mayors. He even doubled down on it, relishing the media attention he got to appear as the clever "take no shit" culture warrior. So excuse me if I'm not sympathetic for him actually having to deal with a problem of his own. With having to see displaced and indeed now homeless people as real human beings needing help. What comes around goes around.

No, he sent them to the cities and states that literally claimed they wanted to help... by being "sanctuary" cities/states. Hypocrite Democrats loved open borders until they had to face the consequences themselves, instead of blithely foisting it on people who never asked for it and didn't have the resources to handle it. Democrats virtue-signaled/lied for years while others felt the brunt. So sending the migrants to "sanctuaries" was not only asked for but completely fair.

You're a moron if you think tiny border towns somehow, magically, had the resources to handle what large, Democrat cities claimed they couldn't. That you STILL gloat about children dying, through no fault of their own, while playing whataboutism with people who willingly broke immigration law, just proves what a piece of crap you are. You're willing to sacrifice others for your politics, but God forbid anyone inconvenience you or your political side for your own policies.

Quote:No, he sent them to the cities and states that literally claimed they wanted to help... by being "sanctuary" cities/states.

They had long been sanctuary cities before this ever happened, taking in undocumented immigrants and helping them instead of herding them into ICE's "detention" prisons. Abbott ambushed those cities by sending immigrants unannounced, even dropping off some in front of Kamala Harris's home. He wanted them to be confused and to embarrass them for their liberal compassionate policies. It was all a blatant self-aggrandizing media stunt to make himself look good in front of the world by exploiting helpless people as political pawns. You're an idiot if you think this is what they wanted. But in the end, the actual people he bused off into the darkness probably found help faster in those cities than had they just been ignored and imprisoned by Texas border agents.

It's the policies supported by sanctuary cities that caused the problem in the first place. If you want to whine about people not facing the consequences of their own policies, you're just a hypocrite. They had been sanctuary cities far from the border, where illegal aliens had to travel much further to reach them. Abbott helped those illegals reach the people who professedly wanted to help them... for free.

If you don't like it, quit supporting the policies that incentivize illegal entry. Easy. Otherwise, you have no argument other than "I (my political side) shouldn't face the consequences for my own policies." In which case, you're supporting policies that harm other people and communities... which makes you evil.

Quote:It's the policies supported by sanctuary cities that caused the problem in the first place.

Uh no. Safety nets for immigrants who have crossed the border are not causing any problems at all. The problem is how to adapt our country to a situation that is not going away and that we are in fact contributing to thru the employment of immigrants. Criminalization has never stopped them. Incarceration doesn't deter them. The desperation of these people is so extreme nothing has worked so far. The only feasible solutions lies in some sort of pathway to citizenship. Of streaming the process of immigration so there is no 3 year wait period. Treating them like dangerous fugitives only to be deported solves nothing.