Blue states hit hardest by Trump disaster aid denials, analysis says 54%

7/16/2026, 7:43:04 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Confirmation Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 13.7% saturation with 146 hits. Analysis detected 1,291 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,069 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 52.1% and a BS Rank of 54% (10,212 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 53.30% of the article peer group.

When major disasters strike, Americans are routinely waiting weeks  or even months  to receive presidential approval for aid. 
And if they live in a state that didn't support President Donald Trump, chances are greater that aid will be denied. 
Since taking office last year, Trump has approved about 65 requests for major disaster declarations and denied more than two dozen others from states, tribes or territories seeking federal financial assistance following hurricanes, tornadoes, storms, floods and fires. 
Trump has taken longer on average to approve disaster requests than any other president, according to an Associated Press analysis of data dating back to 1989, when a federal law setting new parameters for disaster determinations was implemented. 
And no other president has such a disparity in denials between states that supported him politically and those that did not. 
RELATED STORY | DHS boss rescinds restrictive $100,000 approval process, giving hope to FEMA relief efforts 
The delays and denials come as Trump's administration contemplates a makeover of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which administers disaster aid. 
Major disaster declarations are intended for events that are beyond the resources of state and local governments. 
Trump is saying yes to Republicans more than Democrats 
During his second term, Trump has denied a greater percentage of disaster requests than any president dating to 1989. 
Those denials have not been evenly distributed among states. 
Trump has approved 80% of the disaster requests from Republican governors but only about 60% from Democratic governors, according to the AP's analysis of FEMA data. 
The discrepancy is even more apparent when analyzing major disaster declarations based on presidential elections. 
Trump has approved more than three-fourths of the requests from states that voted for him in the 2024 election but less than half the requests from states that did not. 
Although there are federal criteria for disaster aid, decisions ultimately are at the president’s discretion. 
A batch of denials earlier this month included four Democratic states  Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island  seeking federal aid for a February snowstorm. 
“The President’s denial is part of a pattern of extreme partisanship as he tries to shift a heavier economic burden onto blue states. 
Disaster aid should be merit-based, not politicized,” Rhode Island's Democratic U.S. 
Senate and House members said in a joint statement. 
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement that “there is no politicization to the President’s decisions on disaster relief.” 
During his first term, Trump actually approved a greater share of requests from states that had opposed him than those that supported him. 
Yet no other president had such a wide partisan divide in disaster declarations as currently exists under Trump. 
Obama approved 87% of the disaster requests from Democratic governors during his second term and 79% from Republican governors, but Obama's approval rate was identical for states that voted for and against him. 
When requests are denied, individuals, insurers and local governments are left to shoulder the costs themselves. 
Trump is waiting longer to declare disasters 
Since Trump assumed office last year, it’s taken him an average of a month and a half to approve major disaster declarations after receiving a request from the governor or chief executive of a state, territory or tribe, the AP found. 
Because it can take several weeks after a disaster for officials to inspect the damage and submit a request, the total wait time often has exceeded two months. 
By comparison, Trump approved major disaster requests in an average of about three weeks during his first term, a pace similar to President Joe Biden. 
Their predecessors  Presidents Barack Obama, George W. 
Bush, Bill Clinton and George H.W. 
Bush  all had average disaster approval times of less than two weeks. 
RELATED STORY | Federal judge orders FEMA to restore billions in canceled disaster mitigation funding 
All presidents have taken longer to approve some requests. 
But that’s become the norm in Trump’s second term. 
Of Trump’s approvals, 70% have taken at least a month  up from about one-quarter of requests during Trump’s first term and Biden’s administration, and fewer than 10% under their predecessors. 
Jackson said that Trump conducts a more thorough review than any administration before him, “ensuring American tax dollars are used appropriately and efficiently by the states to supplement  not substitute  their obligation to respond to and recover from disasters.” 
The longer the approval process takes, the longer people must wait to receive federal aid for daily living expenses, temporary lodging and home repairs. 
Delays in major disaster declarations also can hamper recovery efforts by local officials uncertain whether they will receive federal reimbursement for cleaning up debris and rebuilding infrastructure. 
FEMA nominee is pledging faster decisions 
FEMA has had four different temporary leaders since Trump took office in January 2025. 
One of those, Cameron Hamilton, is awaiting Senate confirmation as the agency's permanent director. 
During a Senate committee hearing last month, Hamilton said he would try to speed up disaster declaration decisions and reimbursements. 
He also pledged to ensure that FEMA is objective, fair and reasonable in reviewing disaster declaration requests and making recommendations to the president. 
Hamilton, a former Navy SEAL, had been fired as FEMA's acting director in May 2025 after publicly disagreeing with Trump's idea of dismantling the agency. 
His reemergence signals that Trump now may support changes to FEMA instead of an outright elimination of the agency. 
Panel's recommendations could lead to more denials 
A council appointed by Trump has recommended a series of changes to FEMA that would shift greater responsibility to states, potentially reducing the number of major disaster declarations and the amount of federal money paid out. 
The council suggested revised criteria to qualify for presidential declarations, including a prerequisite of annual minimum expenditures by states, territories and tribes. 
Another recommendation, which would require congressional approval, would reduce the federal government's share of the disaster aid from a minimum of 75% to 50% of the costs, leaving state and local governments more to cover. 
For governments approved for assistance, federal funding could get there quicker  within 30 days of a federal disaster declaration, instead of waiting months or years for reimbursements that are based on proof of expenditures. 
For individuals, the council recommended consolidating several different types of aid into one payment targeted for those whose homes are uninhabitable. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.4%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Confirmation Bias8.4%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Availability Heuristic1.9%This article: 2.3%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Representativeness Heuristic2.3%This article: 1.8%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Hindsight Bias1.8%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 3.6%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Framing Effect3.6%This article: 4.8%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Loss Aversion4.8%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.5%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Optimism Bias7.5%This article: 0.7%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Pessimism Bias0.7%This article: 7.6%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Negativity Bias7.6%This article: 4.1%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Self-Serving Bias4.1%This article: 2.3%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Fundamental Attribution Error2.3%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 2.8%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%In-Group Bias2.8%This article: 2.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias2.0%This article: 3.8%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Halo Effect3.8%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.8%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Recency Bias6.8%This article: 1.2%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Primacy Effect1.2%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 13.7%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Appeal to Authority13.7%This article: 5.8%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%False Dilemma5.8%This article: 1.8%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Slippery Slope1.8%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.9%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Hasty Generalization8.9%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.9%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Appeal to Emotion5.9%This article: 2.2%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Begging the Question2.2%This article: 6.5%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.5%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 3.3%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Composition/Division3.3%This article: 1.9%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Anecdotal1.9%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.8%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Middle Ground0.8%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 3.8%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Special Pleading3.8%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.2%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Quote-first Misdirection2.2%This article: 2.5%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Biased Writer Voice2.5%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%FOX 17 West Michigan News (WXMI): 0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1069 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers11%attributed speech953writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageRhode Island's Democratic U.S. • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageAbigail Jackson • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageAbigail Jackson • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageCameron Hamilton • 20 words • 0.0% coverageCameron Hamilton • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
11 attributed words9.5% of attributed speech66% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Biased Writer Voice-2.8 ptsWriter: 2.8%Rhode Island's Democratic U.S.: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-2.4 ptsWriter: 2.4%Rhode Island's Democratic U.S.: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.