Trump's Hate Of "Green New Deal" Will Especially Hurt Red States That Voted For Him

The "Big Beautiful Bill" is anything but for the clean
energy industry in the United States.

 Donald Trump hates so called "green energy," which is produced by sources other that fossil fuel, such as wind and solar. He calls that type of thing the "Green New Scam."

He is reversing, or plans to reverse, subsidies to states for that type of project. 

The green energy cutbacks are largely contained in the (ugh!) "One Big Beautiful Bill" that passed the House last past week. The bill has moved on  to the Senate, where it's their problem, at least for now. 

As it stands now, billions of dollars in tax incentives within former President Joe Biden's signature Inflation Reduction Act are on the chopping block. 

The bill would also end a tax credit for up to $7,500 for the purchase of an electric vehicle. That would of course slow the shift to EVs. \\slow the shift to EVs.

The "Big Beautiful Bill" would also end subsidies and tax breaks for the clean energy industry. 

Trouble is, most of green money is flowing to Red States that voted for Trump. 

Republican Congress creature who love Trump face a dilemma.  All this is going to hurt the very people they represent. 

Per Washington Post:

"Republican senators now must grapple with the reality behind the slogan: Cutting hundreds of billions of dollars of clean energy subsides that are flowing to their own states."

'The majority of the government spending is creating jobs and manufacturing capacity in red states,' said Jason Bordoff, the founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, 'So this puts Republicans, generally and now in the Senate, in the position of having to choose whether to support the party line or maintain support for government programs that are creating a lot of economic activity in the states."

Given the recent track record of Republic Congress Creatures, I'd bet on fealty to Trump instead of what their constituents want.  That's particularly true of House Republicans, whose districts are so gerrymandered that they'll get voted in no matter what. After all, some hard core MAGAs in these districts love Trump so much they'll vote against their own interests every time.

For Senators, it's more complicated.  They represent entire states. Even the hard core red states aren't exclusively Republican.  They can still lose if Democrats turn out in force and a percentage of Republicans get disillusioned by the Trump policies and by extension their senators. 

And there will be activism. Forces are gathering against legislation to kill green energy programs. As Washington Post reports in their article about this:

"Climate advocates are mobilizing against the legislation, warning the it threatens to cede the United States' leadership role in global efforts to combat climate change. They plan to pressure Republican senators by citing home-state economic damage."

Now that the "One Big Beautiful Bill" (I still have trouble writing that without getting the dry heaves) is now in the Senate, it's probably in for a rough ride. Partly for the green energy cutbacks and certainly for a myriad of other reasons.

As WaPo says, "To pass it, Trump will  need votes from Senate Republicans who have championed the green subsidies in their home states."

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina) one of the most vulnerable senators up for re-election next year, suggested....that he would push for a slower phaseout of the clean energy subsidies. An immediate phaseout, he said, would 'have a chilling effect" on 'future investments in the domestic energy sector. 

In Tillis' home state of North Carolina, the law has helped attract $23 billion in investment, according to data compiled by Atlas Public Policy and Utah State University. Forty-seven new facilities in the state - including a massive Toyota battery plant - could create about 20,000 new jobs, the data shows."

Of course, I'm not sure how a "slower phase out" would help much since the subsidies would still disappear, making investors less likely to risk their money in United States green energy. 

Tillis is probably trying to have it both ways. Like virtually all Republicans he's afraid of Donald Trump's wrath, yet he knows Trump's policies hurt the economy. Just speculation here, but perhaps Tillis is trying to buy time until Trump is no longer a problem so that the money flowing into his state through green energy subsidies will continue. 

Trump's ideas on clean energy indeed might also be shooting himself in the economic foot. Washington Post again: 

"Factories that would manufacture solar panels, wind turbines, batteries and other crucial pieces of America's energy future as envisioned by former president Joe Biden and Democrats are on the chopping block."

So, other countries will take over, reaping the economic benefits instead of the United States.  Clean industries in other nations probably shouldn't worry too much about Trump's tariff spree.   These overseas clean energy companies will just find other places to sell their wares,  After all, there's plenty of markets for solar panels, turbines, batteries in Europe, Asia, Africa and a host of other places.

Fossil fuel companies, of course, love the "Big Beautiful Bill."  The American Petroleum Institute said in a statement it will "help restore American energy dominance."

The Institute shouldn't be too sure about that. 

Over the past few decades, old, dirty coal fired plants have been decommissioned. If we're so bent on returning to fossil fuel and getting rid of clean energy, it won't be so easy to develop that infrastructure.

It's hard and takes years to build new coal and gas plants. Local opposition is sure to slow down any proposals to build them. Plus, it takes forever to get the supplies, engineers and construction workers to actually construct these things. 

Meanwhile, more than 80 percent of the electricity added to the power grid in 2024 came from solar panels and industrial batteries that store the energy they capture says the U.S. Energy Information Administration. 

There appears to be public support for at least some clean energy initiatives that are under the chopping block under the "Big Beautiful Bill."

A clear majority of Americans support the tax credits for electric vehicles.  Republicans obviously are less enthusiastic about the idea. But still, a Yale Program on Climate Change Communication poll found 42 percent of liberal or moderate Republican and 28 percent of conservative Republicans support the tax rebates for EVs.

We haven't even talked about how the Big Beautiful Bill advances Trump's efforts thwart efforts to fight climate change.  Which is itself a danger both to lives and the economy of the United States and the world. The increasingly extreme weather climate change has wrought is a drag on the economy, one that will continue to get worse.

Think about the disruption to industry as factories, offices and such are destroyed by giant storms, or at least shut down temporarily due to evacuations, power cuts and transportation disruptions. 

In addition to battling climate change, clean energy provisions are at least causing some benefits to employment and the economy in general for the population at large. The Big Beautiful Bill funnels money from a variety of worthwhile programs in favor of giving more money to a cadre of billionaires and millionaires, who certainly don't need it. 

It's a shameless transfer of money and power from most of us to a few very rich people. Of course, the Republicans who support this will lie their way through this, trying to convince the public - some successfully - that up is down and down is up. 

Such is the world we apparently live in these days.  

UPDATE: Among Many Potential Casualties Of Musk/Trump Shutdown Effort Is Critical Disaster Aid

House Speaker Mike Johnson worked out a deal to prevent
the government from shutting down, but it appears his 
overlords Elon Musk and Donald Trump don't approve.
Which means the government has a high chance of 
shutting down, and badly needed FEMA disaster
relief won't go to victims who have 
already been waiting a long time for help. 

 So, President Musk, I mean, President-elect Trump don't like the budget deal that would prevent a government shutdown, so these kings of chaos want to make a mess.  

They're doing a good job of it. 

Sure, the negotiated deal between Republican and Democratic house members is a bit o a cumbersome mess.

The whole effort by Musk to shut everything down, though, seems designed solely to throw a monkey wrench into the workings of government by any means necessary, and this is just the opening salvo of the chaos that we will endure for the next four years. 

This being a weather and climate blog, I'll ignore for now most of the zillions of things that will go wrong if there is a government shutdown.

But part of the deal that Musk and Trump and the MAGA crowd don't like is the more than $100 million in badly needed FEMA relief money from the weather and climate disasters we've had in the past year. Those included Hurricanes Helene and Milton, and the some of the flood disasters here in Vermont.

Per CBS News:

The now-threatened funding "included $110.4 billion in disaster aid:  $29 billion for FEMA's disaster relief fund; $8 billion for federal highways and roads, $12 billion for the Community Development Block grants and disaster relief; and $3.2 for Tribal Assistance grants. It also replenishes the Small Business Administration's disaster loan program with $2.2 billion. The program was exhausted in the aftermath of Hurricanes Milton and Helene earlier this year."

Vermont's Congressional delegation say they are ready to vote for the continuing resolution if it includes  the disaster aid. "I will not abandon Vermonts. I will not abandon those around the country impacted by flooding, wildfires, hurricanes and other extreme weather. I will not vote for a continuing resolution without comprehensive disaster aid," Sen. Peter Welch, D-VT said via a posting on Threads. 

Bottom line: Those of you who need help from the federal government after enduring climate and weather disasters are on their own, at least if shadow president Elon Musk, Trump and his minions have their way. Which seems a near certainty.

We'll see whether a deal is reached by Friday, but I'm not holding my breath.  

Current Congressional Government Shutdown Threat/FEMA Fight Is Small Hint Of Discord We'll See In Trump Administration

Congress has until Friday to pass a continuing 
resolution, and hopefully fund FEMA disaster
relief, though neither is a sure bet. 

The U.S. Senate plans to adjourn December 20, and there's a last ditch effort to pass some badly needed disaster relief money for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA.  

That FEMA money would hopefully one part of a continuing spending resolution must pass or there will be a government shut down.  Yeah, Congress is kicking the can down the road again instead of just doing the budget like they're supposed to.

FEMA funding is emerging as a major sticking point. 

As NewsNation reports:

"While there is broad bipartisan support for disaster relief, some Republicans have raised concerns with the size and scope of the White House's request, particular proposed fund in areas like the Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency."

Against that backdrop,  Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vermont is pushing for giving FEMA at least $98 billion in emergency funding to cope with a slew of big U.S. disasters in recent months. As we well know, some of those disasters have occurred in Vermont. 

Welch said Congress hasn't passed comprehensive disaster aid since 2022 and the need is piling up. 

"The longer we wait to help disaster victims, the more disaster victims we will have. The list of needs will only grow Delay hurts, it doesn't help. That's why I am asking my colleagues in the Senate and the House to act now and act quickly. 

For Vermont, and for every state hit by a disaster since we passed a disaster bill so many storms ago....We cannot wait. We have common ground in our common crisis. We must send a disaster bill to President Biden's desk," Welch said. 

FEMA funding is more important than ever because, as Welch just told us, those disasters are piling up. More and more people live in places with dangerous weather, and climate change continues to make those disasters worse than they otherwise would be. And they're expanding in scope.

In the short term, between now and December 20, the biggest obstacle to potential FEMA funding is the so-called Freedom Caucus, 

The caucus would only support disaster funding if money is taken out of the budget somewhere else. In a statement last week, members of the Freedom Caucus said. "The House should consider only what is absolutely necessary right now to prove critical relief to hurricane victims and farmers, and pay for it with offsets from wasteful spending elsewhere in the government, then wait for President Trump to take office to better manage disaster relief."

As of Saturday, at least some observers seemed optimistic some disaster aid will be approved in a stopgap measure, even if it's not the $98 billion the Biden administration - and Sen. Welch - want.

No matter what happens with Congress and FEMA funding this week, the problem is going to keep getting worse.  Like it or not, the federal government is going to have to fund more and more money for disaster relief in the coming decade. 

Even though Donald Trump, about to enter the White House doesn't want to spend money on things like that. 

The Trump and MAGA people seem intent on making life as hard as possible for most working class people, including disaster victims.  I think disaster aid will be severely curtailed during the Trump administration, even as those disasters will almost surely keep piling up.

 If Trump and his minions have their way, disaster victims will be on their own more than ever.  Eventually, there will be a lot of angry people out there.  Before I go on, I'll make things clear that I don't want anybody to threaten violence or actually cause it. 

But you saw the visceral anger in the past couple weeks at the murderous and dystopian U.S. health care industry after the murder of the United Health CEO. 

If the new administration dares screw over disaster and climate victims over the next four years, it could get ugly. Even some of Trump's biggest fans will turn on him, though I admit his most rabid followers will make excuses for him.

The inevitable upcoming disasters and a lack of response to them will sow even more discord in the U.S., as if we don't have enough already.   

Surprise! Another Politician's Hypocrisy On Climate Change Policy

Republican Congressman Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania hated
President Biden's climate spending, but his business
dipped right into it to the tune of $315,000

 Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa) really didn't like President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.

Not a lot of Republicans did. And that's their right, the loyal opposition and all that. 

That is until the hypocrisy sets in. There's plenty of examples, but Kelly's is the latest and one of the more over the top of all the examples. Kelly used the climate portion of the act to receive a grant to install solar panels at one of his car dealerships. 

He got quite a bit of money out of the deal, too.  According to HuffPost:

"The U.S. Department of Agriculture gave a Uniontown dealership owned by Mike Kelly Automotive Group a nearly $315,000 grant to install a 261.9 kilowatt solar panel array, according to the Erie Times-News, the local news outlet that first reported the grant on Monday. The grant is set to save the firm $23,700 per year in energy costs, according to the USDA."

After the Inflation Reduction Bill was signed into law, Kelly said it was "loaded with bad policy and wasteful spending that will ultimately worsen inflation, expand government and hurt the middle class.

He really hated the law's climate provisions, at least supposedly. Kelly said in a statement at about the time the Inflation Reduction Act became law that the climate change portion of the spending package was wasteful and elitist. 

I guess Kelly forgot to mention he was one of those "elitists."

Responding to all this, a Kelly spokesman said:

"Representative Kelly's energy policy has always supported an all-of-the-above approach.... Additionally, Rep. Kelly does not have an active role in the day-to-day operations of his family's business. "

Ya, sure he's invested in the business but has no idea what's going on with it. Tell me another one. 

 

  

 

 

Dude's Congressional Climate Change Testimony Runs Up Against Stupid Congress Creatures

Olympic skier Gus Schumacher earlier this year gave
Congressional testimony on how climate change affects the
winter sports industry.  Troll, oops, I mean esteemed
Sen. John Kennedy, R-LA had other ideas. 

Earlier this spring,  Gus Schumacher a young dude (23) who is an Olympic cross-country skier, recently took up an invitation recently to testify before a U.S. House committee about how climate change is affecting the outdoor recreation industry. 

Two other outdoorsy types testified as well.

But the hearing went off the rails quickly. As Congressional hearings usually do, it was all about politicians' grandstanding and trolling.  This ended up having little to do with climate change or the outdoor recreation industry. 

Because social media trolling during supposed serious congressional work is now good politics, apparently.

Enter Sen John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana. As the Alaska Beacon reported:

"Kennedy did not ask Schumacher substantive questions about climate change's impacts on cross-country skiing, nor did he ask about the challenges posed to Alaska's oil-dependent economy by reducing the use of fossil fuels. Instead, he presented the Olympian with a deep excavation of his social media accounts, and a pop quiz on climate economics and science."

Now, granted, Schumacher is not the world's foremost authority on climate change and its impacts on winter recreation. I suppose he was there because his Olympic star power means something to some people. He was there representing a group call Save Our Winters. 

But Kennedy and other GOPers saw an opportunity for a weird ambush and took it. And it did get weird. 

Kennedy started by asking Schumacher about carbon dioxide. He didn't claim to be an expert. 

"I'm not a professional to talk about carbon dioxide so much."

Kennedy: "But you want to abolish it, right?"

Schumacher: "No. There's always going to be carbon dioxide."

From there, Kennedy surely congratulated himself by gotcha-ing Schumacher for saying incorrectly that carbon dioxide is a major component of the atmosphere, when it's actually just a small part of it. 

Kennedy: "You was to abolish fossil fuel?"

Schumacher: "I never said that."

Then a little back and forth, then Kennedy, referring to a past tweet Schumacher either wrote or re-tweeted about holding police involved in misconduct accountable, asked,  "Do you think we ought to abolish the police?" 

 Schumaker tried to point out past tweets unrelated to the topic of the Congressional hearing were "not the topic of this conversation."

Kennedy then asked, "Should we do that before or after we get rid of fossil fuels?"

Sigh. 

The standards of political success now seem to be if you act like a patronizing, ignorant twit, you are politically victorious. Or something like that. 

This was all planned to shut Schumacher up, and anyone else who dares to speak out on climate change. 

The playbook is familiar:  Get some Republican Congress creature to do some performance art by asking irrelevant questions and try to make the witness look like a fool. Then post it on your social media, tag right wing "news" sites, and let the MAGA minions go on the attack against the target, in this case Schumacher. 

The point is to make a political opponent's life so miserable that they'll shut up, and scare any like minded person into keeping their mouth shut. 

Worried about climate change? Want to speak up about it?  Then prepare for the death threats against you and your family. 

This Instagram message Schumacher got was typical. "One easy way to minimize CO2 on Earth is of you to STOP BREATHING! Will you do that for us?"

Yep, that commenter wanted Schumacher to commit suicide for the high crime of being concerned about climate change. 

I wonder if Kennedy agrees that advocating suicide of your political opponents is a good idea. But I'm sure he won't answer that. Because ultimately, the bullies are wimps.

Of course, MAGA's attempts to shut up opponents, be it in climate issues or anything else, doesn't always work. Sometimes it backfires.  "They're not going to get to me," (Schumacher) said. "I'm happy to be able to talk about what I see at home and abroad. And I'm definitely motivated to continue it," he told the Alaska Beacon. 

 Schumacher gets what happened. "'In hindsight, the point was just to derail this hearing,' Schumacher said in a phone interview....'I was kind of thrown off, obviously, which was his goal.'"

As for Kennedy, he's part of the federal government as a congressman.  The government suppressing free speech is a First Amendment problem. I'm not sure whether he's legally culpable. I'm not a lawyer. But he's certainly violating the spirit of the First Amendment. 

 Kennedy is being  paid handsomely for his "work"  by the way.  Alaska Beacon reported that Kennedy collected $343,000 in oil and gas-industry-aligned contributions in the two years before his re-election in 2022. 

Looming Government Shutdown Could Threaten Or Delay Vermont Disaster Relief,And Funds For Other States.

Furniture and other items ruined by flood waters sit on the
edge of a road in Cambridge, Vermont after being removed
from a damaged home. A possible government shutdown
could interfere with help from FEMA. 

UPDATE SEPT 27

The Washington Post today came out with some receipts telling us to what extent the expected government shutdown is already affecting FEMA 

payments to disaster areas.

This, even though the shutdown hasn't been started yet. 

According to WaPo, FEMA has already suspended $2.8 billion in grants for disaster recovery across the United States.

They're doing this so that there would still be money available for fresh disasters that could happen during the government shutdown.

The Senate Tuesday night came up with a bipartisan temporary resolution to keep the government running at least into November. But House Republicans want to die on the hill of a government shutdown for reasons.  Given Republican intransigence in the House, who knows how long the shutdown will last? 

It's still hurricane season, and FEMA is afraid another such storm will make a landfall somewhere run the United States over the next month or two.  Hurricanes are notoriously expensive disasters, and they need a pot of money to meet immediate needs after such a storm. That's why they're withholding the $2.8 billion for now that had been earmarked for longer term recovery projects. 

There's no sign any hurricane would hit the United States in the coming few days, but that could change later in October. There's also the chance of wildfires in California, as they often happen in the fall. And you could get a random tornado outbreak or flood in the Midwest or Northeast.

If a disaster were to hit during the government shutdown, a barebones, unpaid FEMA staff would have to deal with it. Such a shortcoming could create preventable deaths in a worst case scenario, but apparently some Congress creatures don't concern themselves with such trifles. 

PREVIOUS DISCUSSION, SEPT 24

Among the many, many problems a looming - and exceedingly stupid likely government shut down is an interruption to relief from funding for recent disasters. 

That includes recovery from the huge floods in Vermont this summer. 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has already paused spending on some programs, like many long term recovery projects. 

That's due not to the government shutdown but the fact they agency ran through its budget. 

The pause had already raised fears in Vermont that long term projects to recover from this summer's floods and gird against future ones would be delayed or even canceled. 

That existing shortfall is because the overwhelming pace of disasters this year drained the agency's funds. And fast. The United States has suffered through 23 weather disasters costing $1 billion or more so far this year, the most in any year. And we still have three months to go in 2023. 

Now we have the potential government shutdown to perhaps make everything worse. 

Says CBS News:  

"A FEMA budget that's already tight and impasse in Congress over a bill to keep the government open beyond September 30 - when funding for federal agencies runs out - are threatening to slow aid to communities recovering from natural disasters."

Those communities include Maui, devastated by wildfires in August; northern Florida, smacked by Hurricane Idalia; and of course Vermont, trashed by catastrophic floods in July and early August.

Vermont Sen. Peter Welch acknowledge that money will eventually be restored even if there is a government shutdown. After all, much of it has already been allocated,  FEMA money is desperately needed by disaster-plagued communities now if not sooner. 

"We can't mess around with this bottom line. And it's absolutely inexcusable for us to not help the folks in Maui, to help the folks in Florida and to help the folks in this case, in Vermont" Welch said, as reported by CBS.

A shutdown would delay when those funds would be disbursed. "The pipeline of getting that money out is going to slowed down, because the people who logistically do the work of making sure all the paperwork is done on the federal side, some of those people will not be at their desks," U.S. Rep Becca Balint, D-VT told mychamplainvalley.com

The deadline for Vermonters to apply for individual assistance via FEMA is October 12. It's unknown whether a government shutdown would affect that deadline. I'm also not sure if there will be anybody to take applications to FEMA if the government shuts down after September 1. 

Among the communities worst hit in Vermont was Barre. Nicolas Storellicastro, Barre's City Manager told CBS a shutdown and even a temporary end to FEMA funding weighs heavily on him. "For us as a government, it would be devastating in the sense that we cannon, we absolutely cannot front the money to get us back to normal."

I'm being Vermont-centric here. But the reality is people all over the nation need FEMA disaster assistance. See those 23 billion dollar weather disasters cited above.

But of course we can't depend on some people in Congress to think about all the people that actually do need government services. They'd rather think of their political posturing, because to them, that's all there is. 

Disgusting! 

 

FEMA Funding Crisis Could Slow Vermont Flood Relief

Road crews begin flood repairs to Route 15 around the 
Wrong Way Bridge in Cambridge, Vermont on July 12.
Immediate funding from FEMA is not in danger, but
rebuilding money might be delayed as the federal
agency is running out of money for the fiscal year.

Is FEMA running out of money?

The apparent answer is yes, but that doesn't mean Vermonters won't get any help from the federal government. 

Money for immediate needs will flow in the Green Mountain State in counties that have been declared a disaster area. 

Vermonter who need help now if not sooner will get it. 

There's a chance the money shortage could slow eventual rebuilding, however. 

As Marketplace reports:

"The Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief fund is running low, and is likely to be in the red sometime next moth. That's before the end of the current fiscal year, and right in the middle of hurricane and wildfire season."

Congress can approve supplemental funding, and has in the past when this kind of thing happened. But of course, Congress is so dysfunctional these days I'd be surprised if half the members can tie their own shoelaces. 

If FEMA quote, unquote "runs out of money," it's not like they will immediately stop helping. At last report, the federal government has approved nearly $5 million in disaster payouts to Vermont, and that number will surely grow.

FEMA will do the same for the flood victims in Kentucky, and whichever disaster comes down the pike in the coming months 

Marketplace again:

"Craig Fugate was FEMA Administrator during the Obama administration, and he said the agency will make sure it has cash for a disaster like that. 

'But it means a lot of other programs, like the rebuilding, the mitigation programs, will either cease or slow down until they get more funding,' he said. 

It's rare for that to happen, but Ari Renoni, a deputy director of disaster recovery at Hagerty Consulting, said when it does, there are consequences. "This can really have this downstream effect where, you know, the states, the local communities affected by these events, it just further delays their ability to recover,' he said." 

The following is pretty much speculation on my part, but it's something to consider. After the extreme floods from Tropical Storm Irene in 2011, Vermont officials wanted to "build back better" to borrow a phrase from the current Biden administration.

With climate change becoming a bigger and bigger factor, Vermont officials wanted to rebuild culverts and bridges to accommodate larger future floods. 

However - and I'm over-simplifing a bit here - FEMA rules pretty much said you could only build back to the level you had before the disaster. Vermont officials fought this, and we got some funding for better culvert, road and bridge designs that would lessen the effects of future floods. 

When July's floods hit, Vermont's bridges and culverts did better than they did during Irene, although we know there was still a lot of damage. 

Federal spending, as we know, is controlled by Congress. We still have incredible pushback from Senate and House Republicans on even the idea of climate change. With that crowd around, it's going to be a lot harder for FEMA to receive funding if even someone whispers the phrase "climate change" in appropriations requests. v

I obviously don't know what the sausage making in Congress will end up doing

There is a bill in Congress that would supply $11.5 billion in supplemental funding for FEMA's disaster relief fund.  That doesn't necessarily mean that will happen quickly. 

According to Roll Call in an article earlier this month:

"However, political dynamics for the caps in the debt limit law could imperil the chances of swift passage of an emergency supplemental. Specifically, lawmakers in both parties are expected to eye any moving spending bill as an opportunity to fund their own priorities, from Ukraine military assistance to aid for migrants crossing the southern border."

Senators from hurricane-prone states, including, notably, Republicans, are trying to get a clean FEMA bill passed without extraneous add ons.  We'll see how that goes. 

The United States is just now getting into the time of year when particularly expensive disasters strike.  The heart of hurricane season starts any day now and lasts into early October. From now into the fall is when wildfires out west tend to be at their worst.

Plus, August, like July, is traditionally a month that features flash floods like we saw this summer in Vermont, Kentucky, New York and elsewhere. 

Let's hope Congress makes the right decision about funding upcoming weather disasters, whether or not climate change contributes to them.