[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 47 (Tuesday, March 14, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H3119-H3121]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING FEDERAL DISASTER RELIEF
Mr. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 39) expressing
the sense of the Congress regarding Federal disaster relief, and ask
for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
Mr. MINETA. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I would like
to yield to the gentleman from Missouri to explain the request that is
now before us.
Mr. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, as Members know, we will soon consider fiscal year 1995
budget rescissions to pay for $5.36 billion in emergency supplemental
appropriations for last year's Northridge, CA, earthquake. Combined
with the $8.6 billion we appropriated last year, the cost to the
Federal Government alone from this tragic disaster will be almost $14
billion. It has now been reported as of yesterday that an additional $2
billion in damages have occurred, with that number growing daily.
[[Page H3120]] I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to offer this resolution
expressing the sense of the Congress to address the serious issue of
reforming our Federal disaster policy, and I outline a number of
measures that should be taken to reform our Federal disaster policy.
Mr. MINETA. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, I
thank the gentleman for his fine explanation and I comment him for
bringing this important issue before the House.
Everyone is familiar with our recent legacy of natural disasters.
Hugo, Andrew, Iniki, Loma Prieta, Northridge. The names alone are
sufficient to conjure images of death and destruction. But experts tell
us that these are but a prelude to future events which could be even
more catastrophic. Whether it be Missouri or Tennessee or Washington
State or California, the point is that natural disasters are going to
happen and it is our responsibility as homeowners, Government leaders,
and as businessmen and women, to prepare for them.
To do that, a new partnership is urgently needed, so that more of the
disaster relief burden can be borne by insurance and less by the
Federal Government. That is what this resolution urges us to do, and
that is the cornerstone of H.R. 2873, the Natural Disaster Protection
Partnership Act, which I proposed in the last Congress.
That bill was the subject of hearings and wide-ranging discussions
among homeowners, consumer groups, the insurance industry, realtors,
labor unions, firefighters, and countless others.
What began as a modest proposal became, in the eyes of more than 160
of our colleagues, the nexus for solving the crisis facing millions of
Americans affected by the likelihood of a natural disaster touching
their lives.
Last September, the Public Works and Transportation Committee--which
I had the privilege to chair--approved H.R. 2873 without opposition. We
knew we couldn't get the bill enacted into law so close to the end of
that Congress, but we also knew that we had to begin to force the issue
and chip away at the apathy which says that we can worry about this
crisis some other time. We can't.
This country simply must begin to stop the fear of what may come
tomorrow, and we do that by forging a consensus where none has been
possible in the past. That consensus is becoming possible because of
the nature of the partnership proposed in H.R. 2873.
The partnership would lower the cost of coverage for natural
disasters such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and windstorms by
spreading the financial risks and requiring that coverage in all
policies.
We would enable homeowners to continue to rely on private insurance
by creating two new funding backstops to cover the cost of claims which
a State insurance pool or private insurance company could not cover on
its own.
The first backstop would be a private, nongovernmental corporation.
The corporation would become a reinsurance pool to be tapped into when
either an insurance company or a State has reached the limits of its
financial resources.
The second backstop would be a new Federal Disaster Trust Fund. This
trust fund would provide short-term loans if the reinsurance pool is
temporarily depleted.
And since we are talking about Federal loans, it is important to
remember that this partnership would not increase the Federal deficit;
the bill requires that the Treasury be reimbursed, with interest, after
the crisis ends.
But more than these backstops, we would take actions up front, such
as requiring States to adopt one of several model building codes, and
the enforcement to go with it. What we all saw in Florida after
Hurricane Andrew, for example, was a code which had not been enforced--
and roofs that flew around the citrus State like flies in an orange
grove. In other words, there must be a partnership in preventive
medicine before disaster strikes as well as in financial surgery after
the fact.
A bipartisan House Task Force on Natural Disasters--cochaired by the
gentleman from Missouri whom, again, I want to commend for bringing
vision and leadership to that effort--endorsed many of the principles
embodied in H.R. 2873 when it issued its report last year.
Mr. Speaker, obviously, what was a Democratic leadership agenda in
the 103d Congress is now Republican in the 104th. Legislation dealing
with the Contract With America has preoccupied the House in these first
100 days.
Given this, the task force report in December, the reality of scores
of new Members, the legislative schedule, and my own desire to tackle
as many disaster insurance-related problems as possible in my
legislation, I decided not to simply reintroduce the same bill that my
committee approved last fall.
Working with the gentleman from Missouri, we are now looking at
issues ranging from unfunded mandates to commercial losses.
Our goal is to get the legislation as right and as complete as
possible so that we can do even better than the 162 cosponsors from
last year, and quicken the pace from the time the bill is introduced to
the time the House approves it.
I expect that the new legislation will be about 90 percent or more of
what we reported last year, and that the bill will be ready in a few
weeks.
House Concurrent Resolution 39, which I cosponsor, supports that
effort. If it is the most we can do at this time to address the issue
of preparing for natural disasters; it is the very least we must do.
As the resolution states, ``* * * a fundamental overhaul of Federal
disaster policies should be undertaken to reduce costs to taxpayers and
encourage more effective partnerships between private sector and
government at all levels in anticipation of future catastrophes.''
Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the resolution.
Mr. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield further, I just
wish to take this time to thank the very distinguished gentleman from
California [Mr. Mineta] for his leadership in this subject area, both
in the last Congress as the chairman of the then Public Works and
Transportation Committee and for his leadership in this Congress as the
ranking member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
and also the role that he played, most constructively, in the
Bipartisan Task Force on Natural Disasters, which rendered, I think, a
very fine bipartisan set of recommendations that will be transformed
into legislative language using the gentleman's bill from the last
Congress as a base. I hope, together with the gentleman, to move
forward very expeditiously in this Congress with passage of this much
needed legislation.
Mr. MINETA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Missouri, and I
withdraw my reservation of objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:
H. Con. Res. 39
Whereas catastrophic natural disasters are occurring with
greater frequency, a trend that is likely to continue for
several decades according to prominent scientists;
Whereas the Federal Government has responded to disasters
by appropriating relief funds, which provide only short-term
assistance to victims but long-term burdens to tax-payers;
and
Whereas the increasing reliance on Federal disaster relief
has overshadowed the need to perform more comprehensive
disaster planning and rely on private insurance for
protection against disaster risks: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that--
(1) persons who live in areas at high risk to natural
disasters should assume more responsibility for their actions
by insuring against such risks in order to minimize the
rising cost of Federal disaster relief;
(2) sensible, cost-effective disaster mitigation programs
should be encouraged and enhanced at the State and local
level;
(3) insurers should create a privately funded pooling
mechanism for the spreading of disaster risk in order to
encourage the continued availability and affordability of
private insurance in all parts of the Nation; and
(4) a fundamental overhaul of Federal disaster policies
should be undertaken to reduce costs to tax-payers and
encourage more effective partnerships between the private
sector and government at all levels in anticipation of future
catastrophes.
The House concurrent resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
[[Page H3121]] GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks on House Concurrent Resolution 39; the concurrent resolution
just agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
____________________