Some conservatives have been proposing cutting back on weather forecasting as well as adaption measures that deal with the changing climate (of course this is consistent with some of them as many ignore the science and don't believe climate change is occurring).
One of the consequences of more energy in the atmosphere is the potential for more and or larger storms. The mechanisms aren't understood, but it is generally felt that huge "100 or 1000 year" storms will become more frequent and the number of very large hurricanes will increase. Tornados are a more difficult call, but some researchers suspect the conditions that favor their creation may become more common in the US midwest and South and their range may expand.
It is not possible to say a given storm is the result of global warming - rather we are talking about things like increases of category 3, 4 and 5 hurricanes and possibly an increase in large tornados and large tornado outbreaks. Time will tell how this plays out.
Mitigation would probably be the best step, but we're beyond that. We will get a significant increase in temperature due to the existing carbon dioxide and methane we've added to the atmosphere. Making sure that doesn't continue to increase at a faster rate seems prudent, but is politically unlikely - we're in a business as usual path.
Adaptation and preparing for the consequences is usually more expensive than mitigation, but is less painful and less expensive than doing nothing. Conservatives seem to be leading the way on ignoring both of these steps.
Comments