FEMA Disaster Survivor Assistance Team members conduct outreach to provide local and FEMA resources to Charlotte County residents in Punta Gorda, Florida, on Oct. 22, 2024. (Photo courtesy of FEMA)

Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator Deanne Criswell told two U.S. House panels Tuesday that there is no evidence that an order to deny emergency relief to Donald Trump supporters went beyond a single rogue employee — though Criswell said she welcomed a robust investigation to confirm that.

A long line of Republicans denounced the action of a low-level agency supervisor working in Florida following Hurricane Milton. The supervisor told her team to avoid canvassing houses that displayed support for Trump, at the time the Republican nominee in the 2024 election and now the president-elect.

Republicans on the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee with oversight of FEMA and the House Oversight and Accountability Committee were largely congenial toward Criswell. They thanked her for terminating the employee while still questioning if a larger culture of political targeting plagued the agency.

Criswell repeatedly told the panels the incident appeared to be isolated. She added that the agency was conducting an internal investigation to determine if any other employees were involved.

The fired employee, Marn’i Washington, was not named during the morning’s Transportation and Infrastructure hearing but has openly discussed the matter with news media. Members of the Oversight Committee did name Washington during the afternoon hearing.

“The actions of this employee are unacceptable, and it is not indicative of the culture of FEMA, and I do not believe that there is a widespread cultural problem,” Criswell said at the Transportation and Infrastructure hearing. “I have directed ongoing investigations, working with the (Homeland Security inspector general), working with the Office of the Special Counsel, and if we find any other acts of similar behavior, we will take appropriate disciplinary measures.”

Criswell said the employee directed about 11 subordinates to skip houses with Trump signs. About 20 homes in Florida were passed over, she said.

Larger problem?

Pressed by Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee Chair Scott Perry, a Pennsylvania Republican, Criswell said she would request an inspector general investigation.

Perry and other GOP members said they would continue to probe allegations from Washington that her directions to avoid canvassing homes with Trump signs were part of a larger directive within the agency.

“If that is the case, more people at FEMA must be held accountable,” Perry said.

At the afternoon hearing of the Oversight Committee, Chair James Comer of Kentucky said a politicized civil service workforce was a problem throughout the federal bureaucracy.

“While today’s hearing will focus on FEMA, the issue at hand is part of a larger problem: the urgent need to hold the unelected, unaccountable federal workforce accountable to the American people and to the duly elected president of the United States,” he said. “In his first term, President Trump faced not only open insubordination from federal employees who refused to help implement his policies, but also subtler practices intended to thwart elements of his agenda.”

While the internal FEMA investigation is ongoing, Criswell could say only that she had “seen no evidence that this was anything beyond one person’s specific instructions to her team.”

She added that investigators had questioned “other personnel” in the employee’s chain of command and had found “no information at this point that there was anything beyond her direction to her employees to skip and bypass a home.”

She told House Oversight member Byron Donalds, a Florida Republican, that she would comply with any requests for information or agency communications the committee requested.

Republicans on both panels praised Criswell’s handling of the immediate situation.

“I think you did your job, and I think you did it well,” Minnesota Republican Pete Stauber told Criswell. “You terminated that employee who weaponized the federal government as quickly as you can. And I think we need to do more of that.”

Democrats warn of misinformation

Democrats on both panels also denounced Washington’s actions, while warning that misinformation has made FEMA workers’ jobs more difficult.

Nevada’s Dina Titus, the ranking Democrat on the Transportation and Infrastructure panel, said she was “very upset” to learn about the incident.

“I condemn the employee’s decision,” she said. “That should never be the case and Administrator Criswell immediately did the right thing when she learned about this incident, by firing the employee and referring the case to the Office of Special Counsel.”

Washington has defended her action partially by saying the agency has a policy to avoid confrontations when canvassing in the wake of a disaster.

Oversight ranking Democrat Jamie Raskin of Maryland called the judgment “a bad mistake, legally and constitutionally, which violated the core mission of FEMA and every federal agency to work on behalf of all Americans.”

“It’s plainly wrong and divisive to use a presidential campaign lawn sign as a proxy for someone’s dangerousness,” he said.

Democrats on both panels decried an environment of misinformation that could foment hostility toward federal aid workers.

“I was disgusted with the ridiculous rumors that were floating around cautioning people that government was going to bulldoze over their communities, seize their homes and divert disaster aid to other programs,” Titus said.

Raskin said FEMA aid workers encountered “a cloud of propaganda and lies concocted to erode public trust in FEMA.”

“Because of this disinformation, many victims of hurricanes have rejected federal assistance, and others have even harassed and threatened FEMA workers,” he said.

Trump retribution

New Jersey’s Jeff Van Drew, a Republican member of Transportation and Infrastructure, told Democrats to be wary about FEMA aid being denied to opponents of a presidential administration.

“People on the other side of the aisle should know: If it happened to us, it could happen to them,” he said.

Democrats noted that Trump had threatened to withhold FEMA aid based on political affiliation during his first term.

Rep. Maxwell Frost, a Florida Democrat, criticized “hypocrisy” from Republicans on the Oversight panel who denounced political targeting of Trump supporters without acknowledging Trump reportedly had to be convinced to send aid to disaster-struck areas he thought were heavily Democratic. 

Illustration by Diana Ejaita

A survey of a small segment of incarcerated residents in Wisconsin over the year 2024  showed 35% identified as independents, and if they could vote in the upcoming Nov. 5 presidential election 45% would vote for Republican former President Donald Trump while 33% would vote for Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris.

The data is a result of The Marshall Project’s 2024 Political Survey. The survey, a partnership between The Marshall Project and Columbia University, reached approximately 54,000 incarcerated people in roughly 400 prisons and jails across 45 states and the District of Columbia.

However, even with 54,000 responding, the survey organizers say the sample size is not sufficient to be representative of the over 2 million who are incarcerated in the U.S.

The survey was conducted twice in 2024 with residents responding to questions on a tablet:

• Between June 4-July 17 when President Joe Biden (Democrat) was still in the race.
• Between August 8-22 after Harris became the Democratic candidate.

Nationwide, as in Wisconsin, the largest share of respondents — 35% — stated their party affiliation was independent. Most incarcerated Wisconsinites favored Trump in the presidential race: 45% for Trump vs. 20% for Biden among a sample of  105 respondents,  and 45% for Trump vs. 33% for Harris among a sample of  219 respondents.

Nationwide, with 11,695 taking both surveys, most chose Trump. Trump garnered more than 46% vs. Biden with 20%. But when Harris entered the race, Trump support dropped to 44% and Harris garnered 35%. (But in a survey of 25,092 who just responded to the Trump/Harris contest, 46% supported Trump to 33% for Harris.)

During a zoom call with The Marshall Project and The Journalist’s Resource on Tuesday, Oct 29, Nicole Lewis, engagement editor of The Marshall Project, noted that Biden in the national survey was not the favorite of Black respondents and she credits that to Biden’s support of the 1994 Crime Bill that drove an increase of incarceration, especially for Black men.

But 49% of Black respondents in the national survey said they supported Harris compared with only  30% for Trump. In contrast,  60% of white respondents supported Trump vs. 21% for Harris.

In the related article by The Marshall Project (“Trump remains very popular here”: We surveyed 54,000 people behind bars about the election, by Lewis, Shannon Hefferman and Anna Flagg) reviewing its nationwide survey, the authors noted that Trump has support from a majority of incarcerated Americans, especially white men, even though his policies “are at odds with most criminal justice reformers,” and that he supports the death penalty for convicted drug dealers and “has been critical of efforts to curb police violence and has repeatedly made racist comments about crime.”

The article attributes Trump support to how racial segregation in prison and jails often results in white men tending to watch right-leaning Fox News and Newsmax, while Black inmates tend to watch more liberal-leaning CNN and MSNBC.

The article also noted that some inmates believe because of Trump’s troubles with the law, including 34 felony convictions, he is now more sympathetic to those who have been incarcerated.

Wisconsin prison and jail survey

In the Badger State, 291 incarcerated residents responded to The Marshall Project surveys, and of those, 87% were in county jails and not the state prison system.

With over 20,000 people in Wisconsin state prisons and another 12,000 in county jails, the 291 respondents offer a non-representative sample of the total incarcerated population in the state – the data collected does not statistically identify any meaningful trends.

Even though it is not statistically representative, the surveys offer a rare peek at  political preferences for incarcerated people.

Because most of the Wisconsin respondents for the survey were in jail, it’s possible they were in confinement, charged and waiting for a court date, but not convicted, so even if they had been charged with a felony but not convicted on Nov. 5, they would still be eligible to vote, while convicted felons are not eligible to vote.

And if they are in confinement serving a misdemeanor sentence, they are still eligible to vote in Wisconsin because a misdemeanor conviction doesn’t make one ineligible.

There may be some in jail due to a revocation violation of the conditions for felony supervision ­– probation, parole or extended supervision. Supervision is served after the incarcerated portion of a sentence, and those on felony supervision are not eligible to vote, and if they violate any conditions of their supervision they could land back in jail pending a revocation hearing and eventual return to prison.

In Wisconsin it’s estimated over 45,000 people have served the incarcerated portion of their felony sentence and are out in open society but are still ineligible to vote because they are under supervision – parole, probation or extended supervision (often referred to as “being on paper”).

Of 101 who responded to whether they were eligible to vote in Wisconsin, 58 said they were not, 27/ said they were eligible and 15 were not sure.

Lewis noted for incarcerated or formerly incarcerated persons there is often uncertainty over whether they are eligible to vote and many fear attempting to vote  and being charged with a violation and re-incarcerated.

In Wisconsin, the Department of Corrections (DOC) is supposed to keep the Wisconsin Elections Commission updated on the status of felons and whether they are eligible to vote, and then the Election Commission in turn is supposed to inform municipal clerks.

Of 99 who responded to the question of how likely they were to vote in the November election, 48 said they “definitely will not vote” and 24 chose “probably will not vote,” with 14 choosing “probably will vote” and 12 saying they “definitely will vote.”

Clark Merrfield, senior editor of The Journalist Resource, noted in the Zoom call that even in the states of Maine and Vermont where a felony conviction never leads to a loss to voting, in 2018 only one third of incarcerated people registered to vote and only 8% with felonies voted in Vermont and just 6% with a felony voted in Maine.

Lewis said any run-in with the law often leads to disenfranchisement.

“There is some research already that shows that any contact, no matter how small, even a traffic stop, can actually depress people’s civic participation and interest in their civic life,” she said, “so imagine if you’re taken from a population and incarcerated for a period of years. Like what impact is that going to have?”

Concerning their political party affiliation, of the 291 people incarcerated in Wisconsin who responded, 35% chose “Independent” followed by 22% “Democrat,” 21% “Other” and 18% “Republican.”

In the national survey on party affiliation, more chose Republican than those in Wisconsin: 22% nationally versus 18% in Wisconsin.  

In both the national and state surveys, Independents garnered 35%.

Lewis said that independent leaning might represent a distrust of both major parties.

Regarding Harris’s record on crime, of the 208 responding, 58% had “no opinion,” 25% said she was “tough on crime” 12% said she was “just right on crime” and 5% said Harris was “not tough enough on crime.”

To the question how should Trump be punished for the crimes for which he has been convicted, of the 90 responding, 42% said he should be “incarcerated” and 36% said he should be “fined” and 21% said Trump should be “fined and put on probation.”

And to the questions whether the U.S. was ready to elect a woman president, of the 209 responding, 53% chose “yes” and 24% chose “no” while  22% selected “not sure.”

For more details from the survey, search Wisconsin at: https://observablehq.com/@themarshallproject/survey3-state-summaries.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

President of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Sean O’Brien speaks on stage on the first day of the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee on July 15, 2024. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters declined to endorse a candidate for president Wednesday, although both parties sought the support of the nation’s largest union.

The group’s General Executive Board voted Wednesday to abstain from an endorsement, citing a split among members and a lack of firm commitments from either major party candidate, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump, on labor issues.

In Wisconsin, however, the Teamsters’ statewide organization broke with the parent union and unanimously endorsed Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. Teamsters Joint Council 39 represents 15,000 Teamsters in Wisconsin in three locals.

In endorsing Harris they joined with Teamsters groups in Michigan, Nevada and Philadelphia as well as local unions across the country with more than half a million members, according to the Harris-Walz campaign.

“As Vice President of the most pro-union administration ever, Kamala Harris worked with the Teamsters and other union workers to pass the historic Butch Lewis Act which has saved the pensions of over a million retirees to date,” the Wisconsin council stated in a press release Wednesday afternoon. Wisconsin Teamsters retirees were among those active in the campaign to salvage the pension fund.

The national union’s refusal to endorse can be viewed as a loss for Harris, the Democrat. The union has endorsed the Democrat in every presidential election since 2000, including Trump’s opponents, Joe Biden in 2020 and Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Each campaign sought the endorsement of the 1.3-million-member union, hoping it would buoy their candidate in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin — the closely contested industrial states considered crucial to an Electoral College victory in November.

And the union’s leaders held in-person meetings with each candidate, seeking to extract policy commitments. But those commitments were not forthcoming, according to a statement from the union explaining the decision not to endorse.

“Unfortunately, neither major candidate was able to make serious commitments to our union to ensure the interests of working people are always put before Big Business,”  Teamsters General President Sean M. O’Brien said in the statement.

“We sought commitments from both Trump and Harris not to interfere in critical union campaigns or core Teamsters industries — and to honor our members’ right to strike — but were unable to secure those pledges.”

The Wisconsin council’s announcement contrasted sharply with O’Brien’s statement. Bill Carroll, council president, expressed confidence that Harris would work with Congress to pass the PRO Act, legislation removing barriers to union organizing, “ending  some of the most egregious union busting tactics once and for all,” Carroll said in a statement.

Carroll lashed out at Trump’s first-term record as hostile to labor and proposals in Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation agenda whose authors have included numerous Trump advisors, which he said would attack union organizing further. He tied the Wisconsin Teamsters to union supporters who have signed on to organize and campaign for Harris and Walz this fall.

O’Brien, meanwhile, encouraged the union’s politically diverse membership to remain active during the election season.

“Democrats, Republicans, and Independents proudly call our union home, and we have a duty to represent and respect every one of them,” O’Brien added. “We strongly encourage all our members to vote in the upcoming election, and to remain engaged in the political process. But this year, no candidate for President has earned the endorsement of the Teamsters’ International Union.”

However, by Wednesday night, locals in the battleground states Nevada and Michigan, in addition to Wisconsin, announced they would back Harris, along with other locals that had earlier issued endorsements. “Along with these locals, the Vice President has received the overwhelming support of organized labor because, while she has spent her entire career championing labor, Donald Trump celebrated firing striking workers and his Project 2025 agenda would fundamentally undermine the right to organize,” the campaign said in a statement.

Teamsters Joint Council 32 representing members in Minnesota, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin also endorsed Harris.

Trump preferred in member poll

In an electronic poll the union released Wednesday, rank-and-file Teamsters preferred Trump, the Republican, over Harris 59.6% to 34%.

In a statement, the Trump campaign touted the poll results.

“While the Executive Board of the Teamsters is making no formal endorsement, the vast majority of rank-and-file working men and women in this important organization want President Donald Trump back in the White House,” the unsigned statement read.

The electronic poll’s results were a reversal from a previous straw poll that showed members supported President Joe Biden to Trump 44.3% to 36.3%. Biden dropped out of the race and endorsed Harris in July.

The mere question of whom Teamsters would endorse marks a significant shift toward Republicans. Unions, including Teamsters, have historically backed Democrats.

Trump’s populist appeal appears to have upset that tradition.

O’Brien had a prime-time speaking role at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee this summer, though he did not endorse Trump. It was the first appearance by a Teamsters president at a Republican National Convention in the group’s 121-year history.

Harris’ running mate Walz was a teachers union member before entering politics.

This report has been updated with the endorsement of the Harris-Walz campaign by local and state Teamster organizations, including in Wisconsin.

The Wisconsin Examiner’s Erik Gunn contributed to this report.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE