Is a new era in federal natural disaster relief something Mississippi can easily navigate?

• Columnist Sid Salter points out that historically, Mississippi has been a natural disaster magnet.

Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee was President Donald Trump’s White House press secretary during his first term in office. Today, she is appealing her former boss’s denial of a federal disaster declaration request after an outbreak of severe storms and tornadoes ripped through her state.

The same scenario is also playing out in Washington state, North Carolina, and Kentucky.

As the Trump Administration begins to move toward changing federal disaster relief policies to shift more responsibility for natural disaster response and recovery away from the federal government and toward state and local governments, Mississippi’s historical status as a “frequent flyer” in seeking federal disaster declarations due to the frequency and severity of such disasters leaves local and state officials nervous.

The denial of the Arkansas request on April 11 said the Trump administration had “determined that the damage from this event was not of such severity and magnitude as to be beyond the capabilities of the state, affected local governments, and voluntary agencies. Accordingly, we have determined that supplemental federal assistance is not necessary.”

Should the change in federal disaster declaration policy make Mississippi state and local officials and taxpayers give pause? In a word, yes. Historically, Mississippi has been a natural disaster magnet.

As a matter of record, a WalletHub.com report relying on Census and National Centers for Environmental Information ranked Mississippi first among states most impacted by natural disasters from 1980 to 2023. That same report ranked Mississippi 10th for the most climate disasters, causing $1 billion in damage, tied for first with four other states.

Mississippi has been at least part of the scene of some of the greatest natural disasters in U.S. history – the Great Flood of 1927, Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Camille in 1969, Cheniere Caminada in 1893, and two of the worst tornadoes in U.S. history in Natchez in 1840 and Tupelo in 1936.

With documented evidence, much has been made of the amazing resilience of Mississippi survivors of natural disasters. From the movement of refugees from the flood waters of the Mississippi River and Yazoo River basins in 1937 to Tupelo’s recovery and rebuilding after a major tornado during the Depression, to Mississippians helping themselves and others after Hurricane Katrina.

A February 2025 Associated Press story identified Mississippi as a disaster-heavy state that a former Federal Emergency Management Agency leader called “frequent fliers” for federal aid. About two-thirds of the top 15 states in total FEMA funds, FEMA spending per person and number of federally declared disasters include Florida, Louisiana, Alaska, Tennessee, Oklahoma and Mississippi.

Is there any doubt about Mississippi’s status as a so-called “frequent flier” for disaster relief? Flooding is a constant threat from hurricanes in the Gulf and river basin flooding. The state is famously located in the nation’s “Tornado Alley.” Much of the impoverished Mississippi Delta encompasses some of the poorest counties in the nation.

The White House counters the objections to his reforms by pointing out what he says are the “failures” of FEMA, saying the agency botched recovery efforts in North Carolina after hurricanes Helene and Milton.

A Democratic Florida congressman with FEMA expertise disagreed, telling the Washington Post last month: “Eliminating FEMA will dramatically hurt red states. It will hurt rural areas. It will hurt cities. Places will not recover,” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Florida) said, adding that FEMA should be reformed but not eliminated.

Moskowitz, formerly Florida’s emergency management director, told the newspaper that FEMA’s existence and functions are written into laws, so it’s unclear how the administration could halt them without congressional approval.

For many in Congress, like Moscowitz, the fear is that if states are forced by federal disaster relief shortfalls to make up the difference from state funds, those cuts will come from essential programs like education, Medicaid and mental health programs.