[MUSIC]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. Now we turn to our climate story of the week, which we're doing on the show every Tuesday all this year. Today, climate and the politics of hurricanes. After Hurricane Helene hit the southern United States last month, a wave of conspiracy theories flooded social media about the storm and the response by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA. The misinformation was fueled, as we know, by Republican candidate for President Donald Trump.

Since Hurricane Helene made landfall on September 24, Trump has been falsely claiming repeatedly that FEMA money is being redirected from Americans who have been devastated by the back-to-back hurricanes to migrants. A new CBS poll from over the weekend shows on Trump's claim that FEMA's hurricane funds are going to people in the US illegally. 83% of his supporters say that is certainly or probably true. Among Harris supporters, 90% think those claims are certainly or probably false.

On this program, we try to balance coverage and debunking of false things that Donald Trump and others say without giving oxygen to conspiracy theories. This particular wave of misinformation is having very real-world consequences, so we're deciding to cover it in our climate story of the week.

In an email to his constituents on Wednesday, Republican Congressman Chuck Edwards, who represents the hardest-hit part of North Carolina, wrote, "These conspiracy theories, while certainly frustrating, have done more harm than most people realize. The spreading of falsehoods has diverted state, local, and federal resources from helping North Carolina's 11th congressional district recover toward refuting hearsay and repeatedly trying to set the record straight." That from the republican congressmen in that area of North Carolina.

Joining us now to talk about what FEMA is seeing on the ground while battling falsehoods, it's Maxine Joselow, who covers climate change and the environment with a focus on US climate policy and politics for The Washington Post. Hi, Maxine. Welcome back to WNYC.

Maxine Joselow: Hi, Brian. Thanks for having me again.

Brian Lehrer: Before we dispel some of the rumors, can we first start with the work that FEMA actually does in response to natural disasters?

Maxine Joselow: Absolutely. Brian, I think FEMA is one of those agencies where when you ask the average American if they're familiar with it, they say, "Yes, yes, I think so," but when you press them, they're not actually sure what, in fact, FEMA does.

Just to briefly explain what's true and what FEMA does actually do, they're the main federal agency that responds in the wake of a disaster, not just a hurricane, but a fire, a flood, a tornado, even the COVID-19 pandemic. In the case of hurricanes Helene and Milton, they have been sending over 1,500 federal personnel to the affected areas of the southeast and sending millions of meals, water, generators, tarps, other supplies that states and local governments might need to rebuild. They've also been offering hurricane victims, both individuals and households, federal assistance to help rebuild their lives.

Brian Lehrer: There is a widespread claim that FEMA is giving hurricane relief money to undocumented migrants instead of disaster victims. It's spreading so widely that FEMA itself set up a website to debunk it, as well as other falsehoods. Can you break that down for us and why it's not true how we know?

Maxine Joselow: Absolutely. I think it's important to say at the very outset that this is categorically false. I certainly don't want to be in the position of amplifying this false claim for your listeners, so let's just get that out of the way. Essentially, former President Donald Trump has been one of the people who has been repeating this claim and baselessly asserting at his campaign rallies on his social media platform, Truth Social, that FEMA is illegally diverting disaster relief funds to help migrants who have recently arrived in the country from the southern border and who are in the country illegally.

There is no evidence to suggest that is the case. Where the former president seems to be getting this from is that FEMA is part of DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, and DHS does have funding, of course, earmarked for the response at the southern border, but that funding sits in a separate account. Congress has not authorized DHS to transfer that money so that FEMA can use it to use its disaster relief money on its migrant programs. That is not true, but it is certainly spreading and gaining traction online.

Brian Lehrer: One of the most immediate sources of relief is $750 in individual assistance. That's been spun out of context by former President Trump, who was saying at his rallies, that's the only assistance people will get. Here's Trump at a campaign rally early this month. Seven seconds.

Donald Trump: They send hundreds of billions of dollars to foreign nations, and you know what they're giving our people? $750.

Brian Lehrer: Is that true or is that false?

Maxine Joselow: That is false. This one is a little bit more nuanced because it is true that FEMA does offer $750 in what's called serious needs assistance for hurricane victims. That covers the cost of everyday essential supplies, such as food, medication, breastfeeding supplies, other emergency essentials that you might have lost when you are affected by a disaster. That is not the only assistance that FEMA provides for disaster victims. It's one of several types of assistance that they can apply for that total tens of thousands of dollars, not just $750.

Brian Lehrer: They've also implied, Trump and his people, that disaster relief money is not going to these hard-hit areas because they vote Republican, those that do vote Republican, or are run by republican lawmakers. Is that true?

Maxine Joselow: That is also not true. It's interesting because Trump himself actually has faced allegations of doing just that, of putting politics over disaster response and recovery needs, when he was in the White House and famously said that he was considering withholding disaster relief funding for wildfires in California until his advisors told him that, in fact, the county affected had voted Republican and not Democrat. It's interesting to see Trump leveling these false claims that, in fact, trace back to his own time in office.

Brian Lehrer: MSNBC reported over the weekend that some disaster survivors, hurricane survivors, are refusing to take FEMA money at all thinking they'll never get their homes back if they do. Have you heard of any real-life consequences from taking FEMA money or real-life consequences of the disinformation?

Maxine Joselow: I think this is a prime example of the real-life negative consequences of the disinformation. There is a persistent and false rumor that I've heard circulating that if you accept money from FEMA, there's fine print that says that they can take over your home and you'll never get it back. That's absolutely not true but that has been gaining traction. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis actually warned people in a press conference against believing that misinformation as Hurricane Milton was barreling toward Florida. I think that's just one example of many. I can list others of this misinformation having real negative effects on the ground and preventing people from seeking aid that they desperately need.

Brian Lehrer: I wonder if anybody's listening right now from areas affected by Hurricane Helene or Hurricane Milton. Have you heard these false claims about FEMA and money and your homes? Anything related? Has any of it given you pause in terms of what you're going to do to access disaster relief that you're eligible for? Or do you know of any of your neighbors who are questioning these things or even refusing to take FEMA aid, as in the example we were just discussing? Or any questions or comments about the politics of hurricanes, particularly in this presidential campaign?

212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692 for Maxine Joselow, who covers climate change and the environment with a focus on US climate policy and politics, for The Washington Post, here on our climate story of the week. Call or text 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692. You also recently reported on FEMA officials receiving death threats. Can you tell us more on how this information, this misinformation, I should say, is hampering relief efforts or how widespread the death threats are?

Maxine Joselow: Brian, we were just talking about the real-world consequences of this misinformation spreading online. That's a really sobering example. There have been death threats against several FEMA officials saying that they should be shot or that they should be targeted by an armed militia. Those threats have circulated online in their inboxes on social media more broadly.

We saw on Sunday that FEMA actually had to pause some of its recovery efforts in western North Carolina, which was one of the most hard-hit areas by Hurricane Helene because of reports that there were truckloads of armed militias targeting those FEMA officials. Those reports turned out to be not quite accurate. In fact, there was one man who was arrested Monday and named publicly by the authorities for targeting FEMA officials, but that had real implications for people in North Carolina who were seeking that help to rebuild their lives and couldn't get that help from FEMA while they were responding to those threats against them.

Brian Lehrer: You recently wrote, "Republicans in storm-battered states appear torn between the need to curb misinformation and fear of drawing a rebuke from Trump just weeks before the election." How are some republican lawmakers walking that fine line?

Maxine Joselow: I did have that story recently, and there is a clear distinction between the responses of some republican lawmakers and officials. There's been one camp of officials that has sought to push back on the misinformation that's being spread by Trump and by others in their party, but without specifically naming Trump or rebuking the former president because they fear drawing a rebuke back from Trump just weeks before the election.

I would say that Congressman Chuck Edwards, a Republican of North Carolina, fits into that camp. He sent an email to his constituents pushing back on many of the false rumors, warning that it undermined the recovery efforts, but not mentioning Trump by name. Then there's other Republicans who have doubled down on Trump's false claims. That includes House Speaker Mike Johnson, who has repeated the false claims that FEMA has used some disaster relief funds to help migrants. You're seeing how the party is being divided by this misinformation.

Brian Lehrer: Here's a question about consequences for people who spread the misinformation from Craig and Westchester. Craig, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Craig: Hi, Brian. Thank you so much. I was hoping you and your guest could probably answer this, or may be able to answer this. Since Trump's misinformation has resulted in real-world damage that can be quantified in dollars, plus, there are people who are clearly suffering because of his misinformation, what legal action can or should be taken against him? The reason why I'm asking is he's essentially yelling fire in a crowded movie theater, and that's illegal because it endangers people.

Additionally, Trump is a convicted felon. While I believe in freedom of speech, he's a criminal. Why is he allowed to continue perpetrating harm without any consequences against him? I'd love to hear your opinion. Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: Craig, thank you very much. Well, even convicted felons have free speech in this country. To Craig's first point, could there be potential civil suits against Donald Trump and others who are spreading these lies because they're doing real-world harm to real-world individuals and families?

Maxine Joselow: Thanks, Craig, for the question. I have not heard of the potential for any civil suits being brought against Trump on the basis of the misinformation that he's spreading. My sense is that Trump opponents are hoping that the court of public opinion will decide and that Vice President Kamala Harris will win in November and in part because of her response to the hurricanes. I have not heard of any legal action being considered at this time.

Brian Lehrer: Here's a text message from a listener with a question. Maybe the answer to this is so obvious, it's been implied in everything that we've been discussing. Since the listener asked the question, maybe not. Listener writes, "I'm so happy to hear that WNYC is debunking a lot of the rumors and misinformation from the Trump campaign, but I think it would be even more helpful to your listeners to understand why he wants Americans to think the things he is alleging and his rumors and disinformation. Any comments on that?" Writes this listener in a text?

I guess the simple answer is because he thinks this is going to help him get elected. [chuckles] Is there anything to add?

Maxine Joselow: [chuckles] I think that's right, Brian. I don't think it's that complicated. At the risk of stating the obvious, we're in a very, very close election where a handful of swing states, including North Carolina, which was really heavily affected by Hurricane Helene, could decide the outcome. It seems as though Trump and his advisors and allies are betting that by making Americans believe false claims about the Biden-Harris administration's mishandling of this disaster that that will help give him an edge in the polls.

Brian Lehrer: Going to play a clip here of the House Speaker Mike Johnson. Congress is on recess until November 12 after election Day. President Biden said last week that he would call a session, I guess a session to deal with a disaster relief. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson says he won't. Here he is on Fox News Sunday on October 6.

House Speaker Mike Johnson: Look, we'll be back in session immediately after the election. That's 30 days from now. The thing about these hurricanes and disasters of this magnitude is it takes a while to calculate the actual damages, and the states are going to need some time to do that.

Brian Lehrer: This isn't about misinformation. This is about a different aspect of the politics of this post-Hurricane Helene, Hurricane Milton, period. Do I have that right? President Biden wanted Speaker Johnson to call a special session of Congress here during this run-up to the election to deal with specifically this, and Johnson in that clip there is saying, "No need. It takes time to assess this anyway and we can deal with it after the election"?

Maxine Joselow: That's mostly right, Brian. I think when President Biden made those comments about the potential special emergency session of Congress, he was saying he might want to call Congress back early. They're currently on recess before the election, campaigning back in their districts. I don't think he was saying that he had made a decision to definitely call them back early.

Certainly, House Speaker Mike Johnson has given no indication that he plans to call them back early. You just heard him making the argument that it's going to take some time to figure out the true costs of these disasters and how much money FEMA and other agencies need in disaster refunding. It seems right now that it's unlikely that Congress will come back before the election to make those decisions.

Brian Lehrer: You wrote in The Washington Post about how there is precedent for Congress coming back early. Congress passed a disaster funding package "by unanimous consent, soon after Hurricane Katrina devastated Louisiana in 2005." You write, "The politics of disasters have grown much more polarizing since then."

Does the misinformation feed into this, too? Like, is Johnson wrong? Is there something that Congress could be doing? FEMA exists. Its procedures exist, its funding exists. They seem to have a shortage of bodies at FEMA right now. I dont know if that's something that could be addressed by coming back between now and election day. You tell me. What's the difference between Katrina and now and the polarized politics?

Maxine Joselow: Well, I absolutely think that the politics of disasters have, like many other issues in our country, just gotten much, much more polarized and polarizing in the last decade or so. When Hurricane Katrina hit, George W. Bush faced a lot of criticism, and his administration faced a lot of criticism over their handling of Katrina. There was the infamous photo of Bush in a helicopter peering out the window, looking at the damage that many of his critics seized on to portray him as uncaring and insensitive toward the plight of victims of that hurricane.

Since then, we've just seen the response to disasters really become seized on by both parties to undermine their opponents. In terms of your question, though, Brian, about funding, I'm not sure that the funding question is as much about misinformation as about a fundamental disagreement between the Biden administration and House Speaker Johnson over how dire the funding situation really is. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, and the Small Business Administration, or SBA, have both warned that they're running out of disaster relief funds and could run out before the end of hurricane season, which technically ends in November.

Speaker Johnson has said that we need to take some time to really assess how much money they have left in those accounts and that if we come back before the election and do that at that time, then the agency should be okay. SBA has pushed back and said Congress needs to come back sooner than that because they could be forced to pause issuing their disaster wounds at all.

Brian Lehrer: In fact, didn't Johnson say, this wasn't in the clip, but I think he said in the longer statement that the clip was excerpted from, that FEMA was being too slow to respond. He was saying, FEMA's being too slow but then on the other hand, he was saying, "Oh, we have time for Congress to deal with this until after the election." Did he say that first part?

Maxine Joselow: Yes. Yes. He did, in that same breath, accuse FEMA of responding too slowly to these disasters. Of course, he, as we've discussed, is making that comment in the context of an election year in which his party believes that criticizing the federal government's response could help Trump in the polls.

Brian Lehrer: On Trump's lie that FEMA is using money that should go to hurricane victims and spending it on undocumented migrants instead, here's a text message that we got from a listener that tries to flip the script. It says, "No, Biden didn't take FEMA relief money to use on migrants, but Trump did. Again, Trump is just projecting." Sure enough, your colleagues at The Washington Post write that Trump actually did move money from FEMA to US Immigration and Customs during his time as president. What did he use that money for?

Maxine Joselow: That is correct, and your listener is correct to point that out. Trump, when he was in the White House, diverted nearly $10 million in funding from disaster relief money to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, to use for detention programs. That was in 2018. In 2019, the Trump administration redirected millions more from the disaster relief fund to ICE, including $38 million right in the middle of hurricane season.

Brian Lehrer: One more call. Jeff, in Long Island City, Queens, you're on WNYC. Hi, Jeff.

Jeff: Hi, Brian. Good morning to you and to your guest. I appreciate what I'm about to share is historical and perhaps anecdotal, but in 1992, my mom and my grandfather still lived in Miami, Florida. I came home from college for the summer and ended up having an extended summer because at the end of that was something called Hurricane Andrew.

My grandfather was retired military and lived just off of base at what was then Homestead Air Force Base, which was one of the hardest hit areas. All of this background, just to say that FEMA came in, and certainly my recollection and certainly my family's personal experience was that fortunately, my mom and I, we were relatively okay, or her home was relatively okay, but my grandfather's home was completely destroyed.

It was ruled the total, and they didn't rebuild. FEMA gave him housing for, when I say months, was it six months? Was it eight months? Was it 18 months? At this point, I honestly don't remember. They really took care of him and he did well. There were no issues and certainly no complaints. I don't remember any sort of broadly being in the Miami area that there were any sort of complaints about FEMA and its ability to get down there and to act. I feel like people were very thankful to have them.

I don't know what's happened in the intervening 25, 35 odd years that FEMA would go from this respected, if not beloved federal government agency to one that is now being overly politicized and looked upon negatively. It is just an interesting contrast. Maybe it is just another sign of our politics today.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you, Jeff. What is that historical-- Well, that's really what you've been reporting on, right? Part of what you've been reporting on, on the politics of hurricanes and particularly surrounding FEMA, the polarization. The lies have changed the reputation of the agency in some parts of the country that are hard hit by hurricanes from what they were once upon a time, as Jeff was describing there, right?

Maxine Joselow: Absolutely, and thank you, Jeff, for sharing that story. I think it is really illustrative of the shift that I've been documenting in my reporting.

Brian Lehrer: Let me go out with a text message. Let's see if I can find this because they're going by so quickly. Well, I'm going to have to paraphrase it. Listener wrote that they were canvassing in North Carolina for Democrats. I think this was phone banking for Democrats in North Carolina. That about 5%, they quote the number 5% of people who they were talking to seem to believe some version of these lies. Does that sound about right to you, or how would you put that number in context? That means 95% of people don't, if that little unscientific sample is reflective of the larger population, but that's still a lot of people.

Maxine Joselow: 5% is still a lot of people. I don't think I have seen any studies or data or widespread polling on this, so I don't feel qualified to give you a different number, Brian. What I can say is that because of social media and platforms like X that allow this information or misinformation to reach large audiences, that means that even that 5% can seem like an even bigger percentage sometimes when these posts are getting a lot of views and likes and retweets and gaining prevalence online, let alone in the real world.

Brian Lehrer: Here's one more text I'll throw in. Listener writes, "This whole campaign is based on the idea that government does not work. Now he's taking it to the level of government is the outright enemy." We will let that stand as a final comment from a listener, as that's all the time we have for our climate story of the week. Maxine Joselow covers climate change and the environment with a focus on us climate policy and politics with The Washington Post. Thanks for coming on with us.

Maxine Joselow: Thanks so much for having me again.

Copyright © 2024 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.