Most states do not factor global warming into their hazard preparedness plans

The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is petitioning the federal government and FEMA to make states take into account the impact of global warming when planning for future natural hazards. According to this post from the NRDC staff blog, currently the vast majority of state plans either underestimate or completely ignore the effect that climate change will have on their flooding and drought risks. Few states have voluntarily taken this into account, but the NRDC wants to make it mandatory for all states in order to be eligible to receive hazard mitigation funding from FEMA. 

This map from the NRDC shows projecte water supply sustainability for the year 2050. The southwest isn't looking so good.

This is especially important given that this July the U.S. Department of Agriculture declared that more than 1,000 counties in 26 states were drought disaster areas – the largest such declaration in history, as published by Bloomberg news. In the future droughts caused by global warming are predicted to affect 1/3 of all counties in the lower 48 states, according to an NRDC study. 

One reason that immediately came to my mind as to why states are not factoring global warming into their hazard plans is because global warming is controversial. I think certain states are so opposed to acknowledging climate change that they would rather have insufficient hazard plans. They are putting a political ideology ahead of people's lives. Or maybe they are just lazy because they know they will get money from FEMA regardless of how accurate their hazard plans are.