Congress rejected many of the cuts, but the agency warned that repeated targeting injected “harmful uncertainty.”
“Better models save lives—if you let the modelers speak.”
Language soon followed budgets onto the chopping block. By 2018, FEMA released a strategic plan that omitted “climate” and “climate change,” diverging sharply from its 2014 version. A FEMA spokesperson said the move “was designed to ensure alignment with evolving risks while maintaining political neutrality.” Critics, including Columbia Law’s Sabin Center, argued the omission weakened state and local capacity to plan—and stripped funding pathways for resilience projects.
At EPA, the agency removed its longstanding public climate-change website in 2017, replacing it with a placeholder promising updates. “We are modernizing our online resources to better serve the public,” an EPA spokesperson said. But the core content remained unavailable for years. The Washington Post tracked the disappearance and noted how communities lost access to scientific data mid-crisis. At USDA, internal emails advised staff to refer to “weather extremes” instead of “climate change” in public documents.
“Change the words, change the budgets. Change the budgets, change the world.”
On the ground, the effects multiplied. After Hurricane Maria, FEMA admitted it wasn’t adequately prepared. By 2024, GAO found just $1.8 of $23.4 billion in aid had been spent, stalled by procurement and review delays. FEMA said rebuilding complexities and layered oversight were slowing disbursement but increasing accountability. Still, for Puerto Rican officials, the aid felt invisible. “You lose people’s trust in the silence,” one municipal engineer told El Nuevo Día.
In May 2025, acting FEMA administrator David Richardson rescinded the agency’s 2022–2026 strategic plan two weeks before hurricane season. The memo, obtained by WIRED and CBS News, said a new strategy would be developed “this summer.” A FEMA spokesperson said the shift would “ensure alignment with emerging threats.” But state emergency managers said the move gutted climate and equity guidance when they needed it most. “It felt like we couldn’t even say the word ‘climate,’” said one former FEMA planner.
Three days later, 180 current and former FEMA officials signed an open letter to Congress warning the agency had “regressed to pre-Katrina dysfunction.” They cited leadership churn, procurement bottlenecks, and eroded readiness systems.
“You can’t download trust after landfall.”
By summer 2025, the rollback sharpened. A draft federal budget proposed eliminating NOAA’s climate research portfolio—$2.2 billion in cuts. E&E News reported the move, and Eos summarized the draft simply: “$0” for climate.” NOAA declined public comment. Internally, the agency described the shift as a “realignment toward operational excellence.” But local broadcasters warned it would gut hurricane modeling and stall new satellite deployment.
That same month, the administration re-initiated withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement. Under new executive orders, the exit timeline was compressed. The State Department confirmed the decision, stating that “global agreements should not compromise domestic energy priorities.” Legal analysts warned the withdrawal would hinder scientific collaboration and degrade international forecasting systems.