Disaster relief is a critical yet contested resource. It is often framed as an emergency response, yet its distribution is shaped by political and economic structures that sustain vulnerability. Based on 12 months of ethnographic fieldwork in Cavite, Philippines, this paper examines how relief functions as political capital, intersecting with electoral cycles, patronage networks, and public expectations of governance. Findings reveal two distinct but interconnected dynamics. On one hand, disaster response is often a highly visible process where aid distribution is publicized, branded, and used to project an image of responsiveness. Large-scale flood control projects are presented as progress, yet their effectiveness remains uneven, and rarely addresses the root causes of flooding. Meanwhile, residents develop their own ways of navigating this system. Some rely on established networks for relief, others resist them quietly, and many continue to adapt to cycles of flooding and recovery while questioning why permanent solutions remain out of reach. This paper situates these experiences into conversations with broader discussions on clientelism, governance, and the normalization of crisis. Disaster relief does not simply address immediate needs, but it also sustains the very conditions that make it necessary. In doing so, it considers what relief enables, what it obscures, and what it prevents.