2010 Ron Paul 41:1
Mr. PAUL.
Mr. Chair, the Flood Insurance
Reform Priorities Act makes a number of
changes to the National Flood Insurance Program.
Some of these changes are in the interests
of taxpayers, such as the new restrictions
on subsidies for second houses and vacation
homes, while others, particularly the coverage
limits, are in the interest of those who own
property in flood plains. However, taken in its
entirety this bill is not really in the interest of
taxpayers or property owners because it creates
new federal programs that appear to
serve no useful purpose and it continues to
allow the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) to impose unnecessary costs
on local communities.
2010 Ron Paul 41:2
At a time when the flood insurance program
is running a deficit of 2 billion dollars this legislation
wastes millions of taxpayer dollars on
“outreach” and “education” programs designed
to make sure people living in flood
prone areas are aware of the need for flood
insurance. Madame Speaker, as a homeowner
in a flood plain, I can assure you that property
ownership these areas are very aware of the
need for flood insurance and do not need any
outreach or reminders of the need for flood insurance.
2010 Ron Paul 41:3
Many critics of flood insurance have pointed
out that federally-subsidized insurance encourages
people to develop land in areas where
under a free market system flood insurance
would be prohibitively expensive. This is a
valid point; however, it is also true that the
flood insurance program often imposes flood
insurance mandates on property owners in
areas where there is little actual risk of flooding.
Much of the controversy over the redrawing
of the flood plain maps revolves around
concerns that FEMA may force local communities
to spend millions of dollars refurbishing
levees and dams even though these structures
were constructed specifically to protect
against the worst conceivable storms.
2010 Ron Paul 41:4
In some cases, FEMA is even demanding
that communities spend money to alter levies
that were constructed after consultation with
the Corp of Engineers! While I am pleased the
bill at least provides a phase-in of the flood insurance
mandate for property owners living in
the newly-mapped flood plains, I am concerned
that it does not do enough to ensure
communities and individuals are not forced to
incur needless expenses simply to satisfy
FEMA bureaucrats. At the least, Congress
should not give FEMA the ability to impose
new flood maps without adequate oversight.
Yet, under this bill, it would be five years before
Congress seriously re-examines the flood
program.
2010 Ron Paul 41:5
The basic problem with the flood insurance
program is that it assumes government officials
are capable of knowing who should and
who should not be required to purchase flood
insurance, and also determine the premiums
for every individual living in a flood-prone
area. However, there is no way that government
bureaucrats can determine correct
amounts of coverage and premium prices for
millions of individual homeowners.
2010 Ron Paul 41:6
If flood insurance were allowed to be provided
by the market, private insurance could
do an accurate job of pricing risk so that those
who wished to live in flood-prone areas could
do so as long as they were willing to pay for
the risk. Under this market system, property
owners and insurance companies would have
incentives that are lacking when the program
is subsidized by the government; i.e., incentives
to adopt innovative ways to mitigate the
damage from floods.
2010 Ron Paul 41:7
My district has experienced numerous
storms and floods, including Hurricane Ike in
2008. After each incident, my office inevitably
receives complaints from my constituents regarding
FEMAís failure to provide them with
timely assistance and compensation. My constituentsí
dissatisfaction with FEMA, along with
the shameful way extension of the flood insurance
program was held hostage last month in
order to blackmail representatives into supporting
adding billions more to the national
debt, has strengthened my conviction that private
markets, local communities, and states
can more efficiently and humanely deal with
the demand for flood insurance than the federal
government.
2010 Ron Paul 41:8
The Flood Insurance Reform Priorities Act
does take some steps toward fixing some of
the problems with the flood insurance system,
but it also needlessly spends taxpayer money
and does not adequately address concerns
that FEMA may impose unnecessary costs on
local communities—communities which do
have plenty of incentive to make sure they are
adequately prepared for a flood. Therefore, I
must oppose this bill.
