‘Conditional’ Aid Comment Sends CNN Discussion Off the Rails [WATCH]

Republican strategist Scott Jennings and CNN host Abby Phillip engaged in a heated exchange Monday night over whether federal disaster relief for California’s wildfires should come with conditions requiring changes to state policies.

The discussion, which aired on CNN, highlighted differing perspectives on federal aid and accountability.

The recent wildfires have devastated areas around Los Angeles, including Pasadena, destroying thousands of buildings and claiming at least 24 lives.

Celebrate Trump’s Historic 2024 Victory with the Exclusive Trump 47th President Collection!

The disaster has drawn criticism of California’s Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, with President-elect Donald Trump renewing scrutiny of the state’s forest management practices.

Trump previously criticized California officials during his first term for what he described as a failure to engage in “proper Forest Management.”

His remarks have reignited debates about state-level responsibility in preventing and managing wildfires.

Phillip raised the issue of House Speaker Mike Johnson’s support for making federal aid to California conditional on policy changes, sparking a sharp response from Jennings.

“I said it the night that this started, I said on your show, there ought to be conditions on aid because obviously —” Jennings began before Phillip interrupted, asking, “So the next time Florida or Louisiana is dealing with a hurricane, you want that aid to be conditional upon Washington dictating policy decisions in those states?”

Jennings clarified his position, emphasizing that federal aid should be tied to implementing preventative measures.

“I want it to be conditional on knowing whether or not the state of California, in this case, is going to enact local policy decisions on forest management, on water resources management,” Jennings said. “So it doesn’t happen again.”

Phillip countered Jennings’ argument with a hypothetical scenario involving hurricane-prone states like Florida. “Okay, if the Democratic-controlled House decided, ‘You know what, in Florida, they really should not be building those houses on the water, climate change is happening. That aid that we give you is going to be conditional upon you preventing the building of anything along — in all those areas that are prone to hurricanes,’ you would be okay with that?” she asked.

Jennings responded, “If you could pass that through the United States Congress, more power to you.”

Arthur Aidala, a defense attorney and panelist on the show, intervened to provide legal context.

“Hold on, hold on, hold on. I’m the lawyer here. We have rules like that all the time,” Aidala said, citing building regulations in areas like Coney Island, Brooklyn, as examples of conditional funding tied to policy compliance.

Phillip pressed Jennings further, asking if he agreed with such conditional aid measures. Jennings reaffirmed his stance, saying, “I am not for a blank check to a state that has clearly failed and doesn’t know how to manage fires.”

Watch the video:

CNN Segment Goes Sideways Over ‘Conditional’ Wildfire Aid Comment…

Republican strategist Scott Jennings and CNN host Abby Phillip engaged in a heated exchange Monday night over whether federal disaster relief for California’s wildfires should come with conditions requiring… pic.twitter.com/SeltO6vg7d

— RVM News (@redvoicenews) January 14, 2025

The debate reflects a growing conversation about the role of federal aid in addressing state-level crises and the accountability required to ensure effective disaster management.

As California faces the challenge of rebuilding from the wildfires, the issue of conditional aid may continue to influence discussions in Congress about disaster relief and state responsibilities.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.