President Donald Trump’s first weeks in office were marked by a slew of executive orders, including measures so drastic that 74 executive order-related lawsuits have been filed against him thus far [1]. From reshaping the government to resolving policies he considers representative of the “radical left”, President Trump is certainly taking advantage of his power [2]. Among the most controversial of his executive orders is his response to the recent Los Angeles wildfires, which, in total, burned over 40,000 acres [3]. While President Trump was quick to criticize the California state government, particularly Los Angeles (L.A.) Mayor Karen Bass, his rhetoric promises to become much more extreme. President Trump’s recent comments on the L.A. wildfires have been shocking, including arguments that voter I.D. laws are a necessary prerequisite for fire aid. Such threats are symptomatic of a greater cultural crisis: prioritizing partisanship over progress. 

Precedent Response to Natural Disaster and Crisis

It is atypical for disaster relief packages to fail, considering that crises are usually removed from partisan politics in Congress. Disaster relief and management have historically been bipartisan issues in the United States, with lawmakers from both parties often coming together to support recovery efforts after major catastrophes. In 2017, for example, Hurricane Harvey ravaged Texas and other areas in the South. The House’s proposed relief plan passed 419-3, a nearly unanimous vote that indicated immense bipartisan support [4]. Congressional voting patterns generally align with this trend, making disaster relief a matter of collective responsibility and cooperation. 

When delegating aid, Congress works closely with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Former President Jimmy Carter established FEMA in 1979 to delegate disaster aid in a bipartisan fashion. FEMA was critical in supplying victims of Hurricane Katrina with aid and is involved in numerous other natural disaster relief systems [5]. FEMA, for obvious reasons, remains non-partisan.

Trump, however, has already started to politicize FEMA by making polarizing and even misinformed claims about the agency. While running for the presidency, Trump and other members of his campaign team claimed that FEMA redirects disaster aid to illegal immigrants. Cameron Hamilton, the current acting administrator of FEMA, publically pushed this claim even before he was appointed by Trump. President Trump promises to worsen bipartisanship in crisis management, especially as he appoints adherents of his divisive rhetoric to positions of power. This casts doubt on how nonpartisan FEMA will remain, which puts the future of disaster aid at stake. 

The U.S. has already started to see this trend unfold. During Trump’s first term in 2019, lawmakers criticized him for continually stalling aid projects for Puerto Ricans suffering from Hurricane Maria—up to two years after the event happened. The House Majority Leader at the time, Steny Hoyer (D-MD), stated that Trump had an obvious lack of compassion for the Puerto Rican people’s suffering. Trump had already had a long history of political separation from the leaders of Puerto Rico, which led to his tired reasoning that Puerto Rico would not spend the disaster money wisely enough. Vitriol and rhetoric overtook progress in delegating Puerto Rico’s aid. 

This growing trend of partisanship within government aid organizations like FEMA seems to be coming to a head in the aftermath of the California wildfires. 

Trump’s Response to the Los Angeles Wildfires

In recent dealings with the State of California, Trump has made pushing his agenda a priority. He recently presented two key contingencies to California in order for them to receive fire relief from the federal government, an unprecedented prerequisite to helping victims of natural disasters. 

Firstly, Trump demands that California install voter identification policies [7]. Voter identification, or Voter I.D., refers to a policy that requires voters to bring a government-issued form of identification to the polls in order to be able to vote. 15 states do not have the formal Voter I.D. policy Trump advocates for. Among these states, polling procedures vary: some require provisional ballots, which are used to hold off on counting contested ballots until identity is verified, while others require forms swearing one’s identity without further confirmation [8]. 

California’s current Voter I.D. policy necessitates checks on citizenship and residency, but no verification of an actual photo I.D.. However, certain Republican-leaning areas like Huntington Beach succeeded in mandating Voter I.D. checks within their district [9]. Despite Democrats’ discontent with Huntington Beach’s ruling, Trump hopes to enshrine their local policy into state-wide law.  

While Trump’s Voter I.D. policy goal aligns logically with his anti-immigration rhetoric and concerns over voter fraud, it has little to do with the L.A. wildfires. Wildfire aid is meant to assist people who have been affected by natural disasters, regardless of their political affiliation, race, or background. By conditioning essential aid on Voter I.D. implementation, Trump is overtly exploiting a natural disaster for political gain. Not only is Trump distracting from the real struggles L.A. residents are facing by starting a divisive policy debate, but he is also deliberately delaying their rehabilitation. 

President Trump’s second demand seeks to reform water management within the state. In 2020, Trump published an executive order that increased water transport from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in Northern California to areas of the Central Valley and Southern California. The State of California shut down this order on the grounds that it would strip the Delta of necessary environmental protections, among broader claims of federal overreach. Trump challenged the California Department of Water Resources’ management of the Delta, heavily implying that they were hoarding water. 

With the greater necessity for water supplies after the L.A. wildfires, Trump has found new arguments against the water management of the Delta. Since the state has not modified southern water flow to his liking, Trump blamed their water policies for the severity and spread of the fire [10]. Fact-checkers quickly rebuked this fallacy. As California Governor Gavin Newsom’s spokesperson relayed in a public statement, “Trump is either unaware of how water is stored in California or is deliberately misleading the public” [11]. The flow of water outlined in Trump’s plan would not only have arrived after 100 percent containment of the fire, but would not have reached L.A. at all [12]. Trump’s representation of the relationship between the water supply and the wildfires is either seriously misinformed or deliberately manipulated for political gain. In either case, Trump is not using an accurate conception of the Delta’s importance. He is simply using an unrelated event to attack an established political adversary in Governor Newsom. 

Acting out of anger from his past political slight with the Delta, Trump demanded that California divert water flow from the Delta to other parts of the state before receiving fire aid. However, Trump does not wish for it to go to Southern California, but rather to agribusiness in the Central Valley, a region of California that consistently votes for his party. His contingency for the fires does not even somewhat help the actual victims, showing a blatant disregard for the water needs of L.A. and California as a whole. 

Greater Danger for Modern Politics

While technical issues are present in Trump’s conditions, it is critical to recognize how polarization is now intertwined with disaster relief. Governor Newsom was quick to call out Trump’s conditioning of aid, emphasizing that disaster relief should be entirely separate from political or ideological differences [13].

Trump has a long history of criticizing leaders in states suffering from disaster. After an American Airlines flight collided with a U.S. Army helicopter over the Potomac River, killing the 67 passengers aboard both, Trump suggested that diversity, equity, and inclusion (D.E.I.) hiring policies within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) compromised air traffic control standards, contributing to the crash [14]. Such contentions do not align with the fact that the FAA maintains high standards for hiring, including comprehensive exams and interview processes. President Trump, as evidenced, has a pattern of attempting to criticize, ridicule, or subdue ideas that challenge his rhetoric.

President Trump’s recent failures follow a greater trend in American politics. With growing gaps in college degrees and racial demographics between Republicans and Democrats, the country is growing more polarized by the day as Americans feel increasingly disconnected and alienated from representatives of the other party [15]. Americans are forced to funnel themselves into “ideological silos,” with diminishing hope for compromise [16]. Examples include higher education, where students perpetually self-censor to avoid judgment for their political views [17]. Considering the rise in polarization, the U.S. is forced away from a reasonable separation of politics and civility. 

President Trump’s ultimatums, in defying precedent crisis management norms, exemplify growing trends of polarization in American society. Partisanship is disrupting learning, progress, and discussion. Starting with fire-related policy, the American people must turn the tide against rising polarization and encourage bipartisanship amongst themselves.