Helene’s Aftermath: Unpacking FEMA Aid for Black Communities

By Darius Spearman (africanelements)

Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.

Hurricane Helene’s Heavy Hand

Hurricane Helene left a deep scar on North Carolina. The sheer scale of destruction was breathtaking. Rebuilding from this disaster has been estimated to cost around $60 billion (Trump Scales Back Emergency Funds as Hurricane Season Starts). This massive figure tells a story. It speaks to destroyed homes, damaged businesses, and lives turned upside down. Many communities, especially those that are historically under-resourced, faced immense challenges.

Initially, North Carolina received significant federal assistance. This aid was crucial for immediate relief efforts. For instance, the state benefited from a rare 100% federal cost share for Public Assistance (North Carolina Continues to Receive Historically High Emergency Assistance Under President Trump). This funding period, from September 29, 2024, to March 24, 2025, was one of the longest on record. It aimed to cover debris removal and infrastructure repairs fully. Yet, even with this initial support, the path to full recovery remains long and complicated for many of us.

Understanding Federal Assistance

To fully grasp the challenges, we must understand the players and programs involved. Federal emergency assistance comes through specific channels. These programs are designed to help states and local governments recover from disasters that overwhelm their own abilities. However, the details of these programs and their shifts can have a real impact on our communities.

One vital player is FEMA. FEMA, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. It steps in when local and state resources are not enough (Federal Emergency Management Agency – Wikipedia). FEMA coordinates federal responses, supporting efforts before, during, and after a disaster. This agency provides different types of aid. For example, Individual Assistance helps families directly. Public Assistance helps with community infrastructure. Hazard Mitigation works to prevent future damage. FEMA also gives grants for temporary housing and essential repairs. Furthermore, it manages programs like the National Flood Insurance Program.

The Shifting Sands of Policy

Despite the critical need, federal disaster relief policies have seen changes. President Trump has voiced concerns about FEMA’s operations. He even suggested he might “get rid of FEMA” if necessary (Trump Scales Back Emergency Funds as Hurricane Season Starts). These comments came during a visit to western North Carolina, a hurricane-affected area. Such statements raise serious questions. They create uncertainty for communities. They also make people wonder about future disaster relief efforts.

His administration has also faced criticism. Critics point to reductions in federal emergency funds. The administration has pushed states to bear more of the costs for disaster recovery (Trump Scales Back Emergency Funds as Hurricane Season Starts). FEMA has also proposed changes to disaster assistance policies. These changes could alter the disaster declaration process (Proposed Cuts to Federal Disaster Assistance Will Hit States Just as …). Such alterations might reduce federal support during future disasters. This is particularly concerning as significant personnel and policy issues have been reported within FEMA (Chaos at FEMA, NOAA as hurricane season starts).

Financial Burdens and Denied Requests

North Carolina has seen its share of challenges. The state moved from receiving an initial 100% federal share to a 90% cost share (North Carolina Continues to Receive Historically High Emergency Assistance Under President Trump). While 90% is still higher than the usual 75%, it places a greater financial load on the state. For many, this 10% difference can mean a huge struggle to find resources. It affects local governments directly. They must now find that extra 10% to cover the costs of rebuilding.

Further, North Carolina has recently faced denials of reimbursement requests from FEMA. Governor Josh Stein expressed concern about one such denial (Statement from Governor Josh Stein on FEMA’s Denial of North Carolina’s Reimbursement Request). Such denials can strain local resources significantly. This is especially true in areas with lower financial resilience. Our communities, often already feeling the pinch, need every dollar to recover. For example, the state has cleared over 12 million cubic yards of debris (Statement from Governor Josh Stein on FEMA’s Denial of North Carolina’s Reimbursement Request). This massive undertaking requires substantial funding. A denial of reimbursement jeopardizes these vital efforts.

The Uneven Weight of Recovery

When disasters like Hurricane Helene strike, African American communities often bear a disproportionate burden. This is not simply due to the storm itself. It is also because of pre-existing vulnerabilities (Federal Emergency Management Agency – Wikipedia). Many of our neighborhoods grapple with housing insecurity. Others face infrastructure disparities. These systemic issues make recovery harder. Denied reimbursement requests, for example, can hit predominantly African American areas particularly hard. Their financial resilience is often lower.

Policy changes, like reducing federal support, amplify these problems. A shift from 100% to 90% federal funding increases the financial burden on states. This burden then trickles down to localities. Historically underfunded areas, including many Black communities, struggle more with reduced federal contributions (About Us | FEMA.gov). Additionally, “chaos” within FEMA, as reported, could cause delays and inefficiencies in aid delivery (Federal Emergency Management Agency – Wikipedia). This further affects communities of color. Our reliance on dependable federal assistance becomes even more critical in such circumstances.

Facing Future Storms and Systemic Biases

The implications of these policy shifts extend far beyond immediate relief. Reduced federal support limits resources for long-term recovery efforts. This includes rebuilding infrastructure and revitalizing communities (Federal Emergency Management Agency – Wikipedia). Communities with already limited local infrastructure, often those with a higher share of African American residents, face increased challenges. They are less equipped to pick up the slack when federal aid dwindles. Our communities often rely on federal assistance for rebuilding. This is especially true for those lacking strong local tax bases.

Furthermore, how disaster relief funding is allocated can perpetuate existing inequalities. While decisions are based on damage extent and financial need, systemic biases may creep in (FEMA: What Does it Do and How Does it Work?). These biases can marginalize Black populations in the relief process. We must remain vigilant. We must advocate for fair and equitable access to necessary resources. Access to support should not depend upon wealth or political influence. Ultimately, the future well-being of our communities after a storm depends upon a reliable federal response. This commitment should prioritize those most vulnerable. Their stability is essential for everyone’s upliftment.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Darius Spearman has been a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College since 2007. He is the author of several books, including Between The Color Lines: A History of African Americans on the California Frontier Through 1890. You can visit Darius online at africanelements.org.