[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 173 (Thursday, November 8, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2368]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 H.R. 3355, THE HOMEOWNERS' DEFENSE ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. EARL BLUMENAUER

                               of oregon

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, November 8, 2007

  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, I voted against H.R. 2255, which would 
create a Federally-backed national catastrophe risk consortium and 
provide below-market catastrophic loans to State reinsurance and 
insurance plans.
  I appreciate the efforts of my colleagues from Florida to raise 
awareness about the increasing costs of natural disasters on their 
constituents and the insurance industry. This is made worse because the 
number of people who live in harm's way is expanding dramatically; some 
estimates say that 75 percent of Americans are at risk for some type of 
disaster. Climate change will only compound the problem with 
predictions of increased frequency of extreme weather events and rising 
sea levels.
  However, at its core, this legislation continues the trend of 
disguising the risks associated with living in hazardous areas. The 
Federal Government is already facing a huge financial liability 
associated with the impacts of Hurricane Katrina on the National Flood 
Insurance Program. Yet we have refused to take steps to address the 
root causes of the problem: more development and more expensive 
development in harm's way. I am concerned that this bill will increase 
our liability, without requiring communities to take meaningful steps 
to reduce their own vulnerability to natural hazards. This bill could 
potentially dramatically expand Federal liability before we come to 
grips with the problems of the National Flood Insurance Program and our 
natural disaster policies. We can't afford to take this leap.
  The Federal Government has a special opportunity and responsibility 
to help communities prepare for and prevent damages from natural 
disasters. Instead of making it easier to develop in these areas, we 
should be taking steps to reduce property damage and loss of life, save 
taxpayer dollars, and protect the environment. Mitigation works: recent 
studies have shown that 1 dollar spent by FEMA on hazard mitigation 
saves 4 dollars in future disaster spending.
  Until we deal meaningfully with prevention and mitigation, I must 
oppose this legislation.

                          ____________________