this post was submitted on 08 May 2026
112 points (100.0% liked)

politics

29715 readers
2975 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

FEMA dramatically slowed its distribution of these grants last summer, according to a Post analysis of public data through May 4. The agency went from awarding roughly $91 million per month between February and June in 2025 to about $3 million per month for the rest of the year, the analysis shows. After facing legal scrutiny for holding up disaster-related funds, the agency reversed course and released $760 million in grant funding in March alone, of a total of $1.1 billion so far this year.

But two states facing heightened wildfire risk this year — California and Colorado — have received scarcely any of the money since last July, The Post’s analysis found. The delay has affected about 20 wildfire-related projects across the West, according to internal records, most of those in California and Colorado.

Never mind that the fire-prone areas are full of Republicans; it's just pure revenge at the state level.

Access options

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 9 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Can we PLEASE stop supporting these shitty, neo-liberal, billionaire owned media sources?

There are 10k other sources for this article. We don't need to filter our understanding of the world through Jeff Bezo's opinion of how the world should be.

[–] meowmeow@quokk.au 4 points 4 days ago (2 children)

You could suggest another article link

[–] I_Jedi@lemmy.today 2 points 4 days ago

I claim your source is a liar, and made things up.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world -1 points 4 days ago

So can you. And more importantly, so can op. I didn't post it.

[–] I_Jedi@lemmy.today 2 points 4 days ago (2 children)

It's easy to fabricate the contents of paywalled media sources as well. If only a handful of people can prove you wrong, your version of the article becomes the truth.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

Something I hadn't considered. If we're posting things to comment on and have conversations around, it makes sense to me that any content needs to be open-access to users, otherwise how can we expect to have a conversation?

[–] Watermark710@piefed.social 1 points 3 days ago

If only something like https://www.removepaywall.com/ existed.

[–] Watermark710@piefed.social 0 points 3 days ago

There are 10k other sources for this article.

So post one.

[–] I_Jedi@lemmy.today 4 points 4 days ago

I looked into this source some more thanks to that archive today link. As I figured, the title is a misrepresentation of the situation.

The actual thing that the article is talking about is the withholding of FEMA funds for certain states (California and Colorado in particular), which just so happen to include fire prevention. The article title would have you believe that the feds are holding back fire prevention funds specifically.

Here are some actual (not paywalled) sources that corroborate my interpretation of OP's source:

Denied FEMA aid for Colorado

Newsom asks for disaster funds extension

[–] DevDave@piefed.social 1 points 3 days ago

My partner plus several of my friends work for FEMA and the sentiment is kind of fatalistic these days. Americans have really fucked these people over. Latest "Fuck you" from not just MAGA was the absolute apathy over the furlough except to get upset when TSA tried to halt the precheck lines.

Before that, DHS started firing people by not renewing their contracts on New years eve, barely a peep on the news or social media.

Also DHS handed down a decree that supervisors are not allowed to give anyone a rating higher than 3 (out of 5) for future annual evaluations. Basically a solid 3 out of 5 is a foundation for firing people.

When there is a major "temporal atmospheric deviation" (they're not allowed to say "climate change") at least we might have the national guard but as for FEMA, it feels effectively dead.