[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 103 (Tuesday, July 12, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H4887-H4926]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   FLOOD INSURANCE REFORM ACT OF 2011

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 340 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 1309.

                              {time}  1503


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 1309) to extend the authorization of the national flood 
insurance program, to achieve reforms to improve the financial 
integrity and stability of the program, and to increase the role of 
private markets in the management of flood insurance risk, and for 
other purposes, with Mr. Landry (Acting Chair) in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, 
all time for general debate had expired.

[[Page H4888]]

  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose 
of amendment under the 5-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature 
of a substitute shall be considered as read.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
as follows:

                               H.R. 1309

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Flood 
     Insurance Reform Act of 2011''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.
Sec. 2. Extensions.
Sec. 3. Mandatory purchase.
Sec. 4. Reforms of coverage terms.
Sec. 5. Reforms of premium rates.
Sec. 6. Technical Mapping Advisory Council.
Sec. 7. FEMA incorporation of new mapping protocols.
Sec. 8. Treatment of levees.
Sec. 9. Privatization initiatives.
Sec. 10. FEMA annual report on insurance program.
Sec. 11. Actuarial rates for severe repetitive loss properties refusing 
              mitigation or purchase offers.
Sec. 12. Mitigation assistance.
Sec. 13. Grants for direct funding of mitigation activities for 
              individual repetitive claims properties.
Sec. 14. Notification to homeowners regarding mandatory purchase 
              requirement applicability and rate phase-ins.
Sec. 15. Notification of establishment of flood elevations.
Sec. 16. Notification to tenants of availability of contents insurance.
Sec. 17. Notification to policy holders regarding direct management of 
              policy by FEMA.
Sec. 18. Notice of availability of flood insurance and escrow in RESPA 
              good faith estimate.
Sec. 19. Reimbursement for costs incurred by homeowners obtaining 
              letters of map amendment.
Sec. 20. Treatment of swimming pool enclosures outside of hurricane 
              season.
Sec. 21. CDBG eligibility for flood insurance outreach activities and 
              community building code administration grants.
Sec. 22. Technical corrections.
Sec. 23. Report on Write-Your-Own Program.
Sec. 24. Studies of voluntary community-based flood insurance options.
Sec. 25. Report on inclusion of building codes in floodplain management 
              criteria.
Sec. 26. Study on graduated risk.
Sec. 27. No cause of action.

     SEC. 2. EXTENSIONS.

       (a) Extension of Program.--Section 1319 of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4026) is amended by 
     striking ``September 30, 2011'' and inserting ``September 30, 
     2016''.
       (b) Extension of Financing.--Section 1309(a) of such Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by striking ``September 30, 
     2011'' and inserting ``September 30, 2016''.

     SEC. 3. MANDATORY PURCHASE.

       (a) Authority To Temporarily Suspend Mandatory Purchase 
     Requirement.--
       (1) In general.--Section 102 of the Flood Disaster 
     Protection Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4012a) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(i) Authority To Temporarily Suspend Mandatory Purchase 
     Requirement.--
       ``(1) Finding by administrator that area is an eligible 
     area.--For any area, upon a request submitted to the 
     Administrator by a local government authority having 
     jurisdiction over any portion of the area, the Administrator 
     shall make a finding of whether the area is an eligible area 
     under paragraph (3). If the Administrator finds that such 
     area is an eligible area, the Administrator shall, in the 
     discretion of the Administrator, designate a period during 
     which such finding shall be effective, which shall not be 
     longer in duration than 12 months.
       ``(2) Suspension of mandatory purchase requirement.--If the 
     Administrator makes a finding under paragraph (1) that an 
     area is an eligible area under paragraph (3), during the 
     period specified in the finding, the designation of such 
     eligible area as an area having special flood hazards shall 
     not be effective for purposes of subsection (a), (b), and (e) 
     of this section, and section 202(a) of this Act. Nothing in 
     this paragraph may be construed to prevent any lender, 
     servicer, regulated lending institution, Federal agency 
     lender, the Federal National Mortgage Association, or the 
     Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, at the discretion of 
     such entity, from requiring the purchase of flood insurance 
     coverage in connection with the making, increasing, 
     extending, or renewing of a loan secured by improved real 
     estate or a mobile home located or to be located in such 
     eligible area during such period or a lender or servicer from 
     purchasing coverage on behalf of a borrower pursuant to 
     subsection (e).
       ``(3) Eligible areas.--An eligible area under this 
     paragraph is an area that is designated or will, pursuant to 
     any issuance, revision, updating, or other change in flood 
     insurance maps that takes effect on or after the date of the 
     enactment of the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011, become 
     designated as an area having special flood hazards and that 
     meets any one of the following 3 requirements:
       ``(A) Areas with no history of special flood hazards.--The 
     area does not include any area that has ever previously been 
     designated as an area having special flood hazards.
       ``(B) Areas with flood protection systems under 
     improvements.--The area was intended to be protected by a 
     flood protection system--
       ``(i) that has been decertified, or is required to be 
     certified, as providing protection for the 100-year frequency 
     flood standard;
       ``(ii) that is being improved, constructed, or 
     reconstructed; and
       ``(iii) for which the Administrator has determined 
     measurable progress toward completion of such improvement, 
     construction, reconstruction is being made and toward 
     securing financial commitments sufficient to fund such 
     completion.
       ``(C) Areas for which appeal has been filed.--An area for 
     which a community has appealed--
       ``(i) designation of the area as having special flood 
     hazards in a timely manner under section 1363; or
       ``(ii) any decertification or deaccreditation of a dam, 
     levee, or other flood protection system or the level of 
     protection afforded by a dam, levee, or system.
       ``(4) Extension of delay.--Upon a request submitted by a 
     local government authority having jurisdiction over any 
     portion of the eligible area, the Administrator may extend 
     the period during which a finding under paragraph (1) shall 
     be effective, except that--
       ``(A) each such extension under this paragraph shall not be 
     for a period exceeding 12 months; and
       ``(B) for any area, the cumulative number of such 
     extensions may not exceed 2.
       ``(5) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection may 
     be construed to affect the applicability of a designation of 
     any area as an area having special flood hazards for purposes 
     of the availability of flood insurance coverage, criteria for 
     land management and use, notification of flood hazards, 
     eligibility for mitigation assistance, or any other purpose 
     or provision not specifically referred to in paragraph (2).
       ``(6) Reports.--The Administrator shall, in each annual 
     report submitted pursuant to section 1320, include 
     information identifying each finding under paragraph (1) by 
     the Administrator during the preceding year that an area is 
     an area having special flood hazards, the basis for each such 
     finding, any extensions pursuant to paragraph (4) of the 
     periods of effectiveness of such findings, and the reasons 
     for such extensions.''.
       (2) No refunds.--Nothing in this subsection or the 
     amendments made by this subsection may be construed to 
     authorize or require any payment or refund for flood 
     insurance coverage purchased for any property that covered 
     any period during which such coverage is not required for the 
     property pursuant to the applicability of the amendment made 
     by paragraph (1).
       (b) Termination of Force-Placed Insurance.--Section 102(e) 
     of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 
     4012a(e)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``insurance.'' and 
     inserting ``insurance, including premiums or fees incurred 
     for coverage beginning on the date on which flood insurance 
     coverage lapsed or did not provide a sufficient coverage 
     amount.'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs 
     (5) and 6), respectively; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new 
     paragraphs:
       ``(3) Termination of force-placed insurance.--Within 30 
     days of receipt by the lender or servicer of a confirmation 
     of a borrower's existing flood insurance coverage, the lender 
     or servicer shall--
       ``(A) terminate the force-placed insurance; and
       ``(B) refund to the borrower all force-placed insurance 
     premiums paid by the borrower during any period during which 
     the borrower's flood insurance coverage and the force-placed 
     flood insurance coverage were each in effect, and any related 
     fees charged to the borrower with respect to the force-placed 
     insurance during such period.
       ``(4) Sufficiency of demonstration.--For purposes of 
     confirming a borrower's existing flood insurance coverage, a 
     lender or servicer for a loan shall accept from the borrower 
     an insurance policy declarations page that includes the 
     existing flood insurance policy number and the identity of, 
     and contact information for, the insurance company or 
     agent.''.
       (c) Use of Private Insurance to Satisfy Mandatory Purchase 
     Requirement.--Section 102(b) of the Flood Disaster Protection 
     Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4012a(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``lending institutions not to make'' and 
     inserting ``lending institutions--
       ``(A) not to make'';
       (B) in subparagraph (A), as designated by subparagraph (A) 
     of this paragraph, by striking ``less.'' and inserting 
     ``less; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) to accept private flood insurance as satisfaction of 
     the flood insurance coverage requirement under subparagraph 
     (A) if the coverage provided by such private flood insurance 
     meets the requirements for coverage under such 
     subparagraph.'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting after ``provided in 
     paragraph (1).'' the following new sentence: ``Each Federal 
     agency lender shall accept private flood insurance as 
     satisfaction of the flood insurance coverage requirement 
     under the preceding sentence if the flood insurance coverage 
     provided by such private flood insurance meets the 
     requirements for coverage under such sentence.'';

[[Page H4889]]

       (3) in paragraph (3), in the matter following subparagraph 
     (B), by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``The 
     Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home 
     Loan Mortgage Corporation shall accept private flood 
     insurance as satisfaction of the flood insurance coverage 
     requirement under the preceding sentence if the flood 
     insurance coverage provided by such private flood insurance 
     meets the requirements for coverage under such sentence.''; 
     and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Private flood insurance defined.--In this subsection, 
     the term `private flood insurance' means a contract for flood 
     insurance coverage allowed for sale under the laws of any 
     State.''.

     SEC. 4. REFORMS OF COVERAGE TERMS.

       (a) Minimum Deductibles for Claims.--Section 1312 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4019) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``The Director is'' and inserting the 
     following: ``(a) In General.--The Administrator is''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Minimum Annual Deductibles.--
       ``(1) Subsidized rate properties.--For any structure that 
     is covered by flood insurance under this title, and for which 
     the chargeable rate for such coverage is less than the 
     applicable estimated risk premium rate under section 
     1307(a)(1) for the area (or subdivision thereof) in which 
     such structure is located, the minimum annual deductible for 
     damage to or loss of such structure shall be $2,000.
       ``(2) Actuarial rate properties.--For any structure that is 
     covered by flood insurance under this title, for which the 
     chargeable rate for such coverage is not less than the 
     applicable estimated risk premium rate under section 
     1307(a)(1) for the area (or subdivision thereof) in which 
     such structure is located, the minimum annual deductible for 
     damage to or loss of such structure shall be $1,000.''.
       (b) Clarification of Residential and Commercial Coverage 
     Limits.--Section 1306(b) of the National Flood Insurance Act 
     of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4013(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by striking ``in the case of any residential property'' 
     and inserting ``in the case of any residential building 
     designed for the occupancy of from one to four families''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``shall be made available to every insured 
     upon renewal and every applicant for insurance so as to 
     enable such insured or applicant to receive coverage up to a 
     total amount (including such limits specified in paragraph 
     (1)(A)(i)) of $250,000'' and inserting ``shall be made 
     available, with respect to any single such building, up to an 
     aggregate liability (including such limits specified in 
     paragraph (1)(A)(i)) of $250,000''; and
       (2) in paragraph (4)--
       (A) by striking ``in the case of any nonresidential 
     property, including churches,'' and inserting ``in the case 
     of any nonresidential building, including a church,''; and
       (B) by striking ``shall be made available to every insured 
     upon renewal and every applicant for insurance, in respect to 
     any single structure, up to a total amount (including such 
     limit specified in subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1), 
     as applicable) of $500,000 for each structure and $500,000 
     for any contents related to each structure'' and inserting 
     ``shall be made available with respect to any single such 
     building, up to an aggregate liability (including such limits 
     specified in subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1), as 
     applicable) of $500,000, and coverage shall be made available 
     up to a total of $500,000 aggregate liability for contents 
     owned by the building owner and $500,000 aggregate liability 
     for each unit within the building for contents owned by the 
     tenant''.
       (c) Indexing of Maximum Coverage Limits.--Subsection (b) of 
     section 1306 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 4013(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and'';
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (7); and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(8) each of the dollar amount limitations under 
     paragraphs (2), (3), (4), (5), and (6) shall be adjusted 
     effective on the date of the enactment of the Flood Insurance 
     Reform Act of 2011, such adjustments shall be calculated 
     using the percentage change, over the period beginning on 
     September 30, 1994, and ending on such date of enactment, in 
     such inflationary index as the Administrator shall, by 
     regulation, specify, and the dollar amount of such adjustment 
     shall be rounded to the next lower dollar; and the 
     Administrator shall cause to be published in the Federal 
     Register the adjustments under this paragraph to such dollar 
     amount limitations; except that in the case of coverage for a 
     property that is made available, pursuant to this paragraph, 
     in an amount that exceeds the limitation otherwise applicable 
     to such coverage as specified in paragraph (2), (3), (4), 
     (5), or (6), the total of such coverage shall be made 
     available only at chargeable rates that are not less than the 
     estimated premium rates for such coverage determined in 
     accordance with section 1307(a)(1).''.
       (d) Optional Coverage for Loss of Use of Personal Residence 
     and Business Interruption.--Subsection (b) of section 1306 of 
     the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4013(b)), 
     as amended by the preceding provisions of this section, is 
     further amended by inserting after paragraph (4) the 
     following new paragraphs:
       ``(5) the Administrator may provide that, in the case of 
     any residential property, each renewal or new contract for 
     flood insurance coverage may provide not more than $5,000 
     aggregate liability per dwelling unit for any necessary 
     increases in living expenses incurred by the insured when 
     losses from a flood make the residence unfit to live in, 
     except that--
       ``(A) purchase of such coverage shall be at the option of 
     the insured;
       ``(B) any such coverage shall be made available only at 
     chargeable rates that are not less than the estimated premium 
     rates for such coverage determined in accordance with section 
     1307(a)(1); and
       ``(C) the Administrator may make such coverage available 
     only if the Administrator makes a determination and causes 
     notice of such determination to be published in the Federal 
     Register that--
       ``(i) a competitive private insurance market for such 
     coverage does not exist; and
       ``(ii) the national flood insurance program has the 
     capacity to make such coverage available without borrowing 
     funds from the Secretary of the Treasury under section 1309 
     or otherwise;
       ``(6) the Administrator may provide that, in the case of 
     any commercial property or other residential property, 
     including multifamily rental property, coverage for losses 
     resulting from any partial or total interruption of the 
     insured's business caused by damage to, or loss of, such 
     property from a flood may be made available to every insured 
     upon renewal and every applicant, up to a total amount of 
     $20,000 per property, except that--
       ``(A) purchase of such coverage shall be at the option of 
     the insured;
       ``(B) any such coverage shall be made available only at 
     chargeable rates that are not less than the estimated premium 
     rates for such coverage determined in accordance with section 
     1307(a)(1); and
       ``(C) the Administrator may make such coverage available 
     only if the Administrator makes a determination and causes 
     notice of such determination to be published in the Federal 
     Register that--
       ``(i) a competitive private insurance market for such 
     coverage does not exist; and
       ``(ii) the national flood insurance program has the 
     capacity to make such coverage available without borrowing 
     funds from the Secretary of the Treasury under section 1309 
     or otherwise;''.
       (e) Payment of Premiums in Installments for Residential 
     Properties.--Section 1306 of the National Flood Insurance Act 
     of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4013) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(d) Payment of Premiums in Installments for Residential 
     Properties.--
       ``(1) Authority.--In addition to any other terms and 
     conditions under subsection (a), such regulations shall 
     provide that, in the case of any residential property, 
     premiums for flood insurance coverage made available under 
     this title for such property may be paid in installments.
       ``(2) Limitations.--In implementing the authority under 
     paragraph (1), the Administrator may establish increased 
     chargeable premium rates and surcharges, and deny coverage 
     and establish such other sanctions, as the Administrator 
     considers necessary to ensure that insureds purchase, pay 
     for, and maintain coverage for the full term of a contract 
     for flood insurance coverage or to prevent insureds from 
     purchasing coverage only for periods during a year when risk 
     of flooding is comparatively higher or canceling coverage for 
     periods when such risk is comparatively lower.''.

     SEC. 5. REFORMS OF PREMIUM RATES.

       (a) Increase in Annual Limitation on Premium Increases.--
     Section 1308(e) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 
     (42 U.S.C. 4015(e)) is amended by striking ``10 percent'' and 
     inserting ``20 percent''.
       (b) Phase-In of Rates for Certain Properties in Newly 
     Mapped Areas.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1308 of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4015) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a), in the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1), by inserting ``or notice'' after ``prescribe by 
     regulation'';
       (B) in subsection (c), by inserting ``and subsection (g)'' 
     before the first comma; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(g) 5-Year Phase-In of Flood Insurance Rates for Certain 
     Properties in Newly Mapped Areas.--
       ``(1) 50 percent rate for initial year.--Notwithstanding 
     subsection (c) or any other provision of law relating to 
     chargeable risk premium rates for flood insurance coverage 
     under this title, in the case of any area that was not 
     previously designated as an area having special flood hazards 
     and that, pursuant to any issuance, revision, updating, or 
     other change in flood insurance maps, becomes designated as 
     such an area, during the 12-month period that begins, except 
     as provided in paragraph (2), upon the date that such maps, 
     as issued, revised, updated, or otherwise changed, become 
     effective, the chargeable premium rate for flood insurance 
     under this title with respect to any covered property that is 
     located within such area shall be 50 percent of the 
     chargeable risk premium rate otherwise applicable under this 
     title to the property.
       ``(2) Applicability to preferred risk rate areas.--In the 
     case of any area described in paragraph (1) that consists of 
     or includes an area that, as of date of the effectiveness of 
     the flood insurance maps for such area referred to in 
     paragraph (1) as so issued, revised, updated, or changed, is 
     eligible for any reason for preferred risk rate method 
     premiums for flood insurance coverage and was eligible for 
     such premiums as of the enactment of the Flood Insurance 
     Reform Act of 2011, the 12-month period referred to in 
     paragraph (1) for such area eligible for preferred risk rate 
     method premiums shall

[[Page H4890]]

     begin upon the expiration of the period during which such 
     area is eligible for such preferred risk rate method 
     premiums.
       ``(3) Phase-in of full actuarial rates.--With respect to 
     any area described in paragraph (1), upon the expiration of 
     the 12-month period under paragraph (1) or (2), as 
     applicable, for such area, the Administrator shall increase 
     the chargeable risk premium rates for flood insurance under 
     this title for covered properties in such area by 20 percent, 
     and by 20 percent upon the expiration of each successive 12-
     month period thereafter until the chargeable risk premium 
     rates comply with subsection (c).
       ``(4) Covered properties.--For purposes of the subsection, 
     the term `covered property' means any residential property 
     occupied by its owner or a bona fide tenant as a primary 
     residence.''.
       (2) Regulation or notice.--The Administrator of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency shall issue an interim final rule 
     or notice to implement this subsection and the amendments 
     made by this subsection as soon as practicable after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act.
       (c) Phase-In of Actuarial Rates for Certain Properties.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1308(c) of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4015(c)) is amended--
       (A) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (7); and
       (B) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraphs:
       ``(2) Commercial properties.--Any nonresidential property.
       ``(3) Second homes and vacation homes.--Any residential 
     property that is not the primary residence of any individual.
       ``(4) Homes sold to new owners.--Any single family property 
     that--
       ``(A) has been constructed or substantially improved and 
     for which such construction or improvement was started, as 
     determined by the Administrator, before December 31, 1974, or 
     before the effective date of the initial rate map published 
     by the Administrator under paragraph (2) of section 1360(a) 
     for the area in which such property is located, whichever is 
     later; and
       ``(B) is purchased after the effective date of this 
     paragraph, pursuant to section 5(c)(3)(A) of the Flood 
     Insurance Reform Act of 2011.
       ``(5) Homes damaged or improved.--Any property that, on or 
     after the date of the enactment of the Flood Insurance Reform 
     Act of 2011, has experienced or sustained--
       ``(A) substantial flood damage exceeding 50 percent of the 
     fair market value of such property; or
       ``(B) substantial improvement exceeding 30 percent of the 
     fair market value of such property.
       ``(6) Homes with multiple claims.--Any severe repetitive 
     loss property (as such term is defined in section 
     1361A(b)).''.
       (2) Technical amendments.--Section 1308 of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4015) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (c)--
       (i) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``the limitations provided under paragraphs (1) and (2)'' and 
     inserting ``subsection (e)''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (1), by striking ``, except'' and all 
     that follows through ``subsection (e)''; and
       (B) in subsection (e), by striking ``paragraph (2) or (3)'' 
     and inserting ``paragraph (7)''.
       (3) Effective date and transition.--
       (A) Effective date.--The amendments made by paragraphs (1) 
     and (2) shall apply beginning upon the expiration of the 12-
     month period that begins on the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, except as provided in subparagraph (B) of this 
     paragraph.
       (B) Transition for properties covered by flood insurance 
     upon effective date.--
       (i) Increase of rates over time.--In the case of any 
     property described in paragraph (2), (3), (4), (5), or (6) of 
     section 1308(c) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 
     as amended by paragraph (1) of this subsection, that, as of 
     the effective date under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, 
     is covered under a policy for flood insurance made available 
     under the national flood insurance program for which the 
     chargeable premium rates are less than the applicable 
     estimated risk premium rate under section 1307(a)(1) of such 
     Act for the area in which the property is located, the 
     Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     shall increase the chargeable premium rates for such property 
     over time to such applicable estimated risk premium rate 
     under section 1307(a)(1).
       (ii) Amount of annual increase.--Such increase shall be 
     made by increasing the chargeable premium rates for the 
     property (after application of any increase in the premium 
     rates otherwise applicable to such property), once during the 
     12-month period that begins upon the effective date under 
     subparagraph (A) of this paragraph and once every 12 months 
     thereafter until such increase is accomplished, by 20 percent 
     (or such lesser amount as may be necessary so that the 
     chargeable rate does not exceed such applicable estimated 
     risk premium rate or to comply with clause (iii)).
       (iii) Properties subject to phase-in and annual 
     increases.--In the case of any pre-FIRM property (as such 
     term is defined in section 578(b) of the National Flood 
     Insurance Reform Act of 1974), the aggregate increase, during 
     any 12-month period, in the chargeable premium rate for the 
     property that is attributable to this subparagraph or to an 
     increase described in section 1308(e) of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 may not exceed 20 percent.
       (iv) Full actuarial rates.--The provisions of paragraphs 
     (2), (3), (4), (5), and (6) of such section 1308(c) shall 
     apply to such a property upon the accomplishment of the 
     increase under this subparagraph and thereafter.
       (d) Prohibition of Extension of Subsidized Rates to Lapsed 
     Policies.--Section 1308 of the National Flood Insurance Act 
     of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4015), as amended by the preceding 
     provisions of this Act, is further amended--
       (1) in subsection (e), by inserting ``or subsection (h)'' 
     after ``subsection (c)'';
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(h) Prohibition of Extension of Subsidized Rates to 
     Lapsed Policies.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law 
     relating to chargeable risk premium rates for flood insurance 
     coverage under this title, the Administrator shall not 
     provide flood insurance coverage under this title for any 
     property for which a policy for such coverage for the 
     property has previously lapsed in coverage as a result of the 
     deliberate choice of the holder of such policy, at a rate 
     less than the applicable estimated risk premium rates for the 
     area (or subdivision thereof) in which such property is 
     located.''.
       (e) Recognition of State and Local Funding for 
     Construction, Reconstruction, and Improvement of Flood 
     Protection Systems in Determination of Rates.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1307 of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4014) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (e)--
       (i) in the first sentence, by striking ``construction of a 
     flood protection system'' and inserting ``construction, 
     reconstruction, or improvement of a flood protection system 
     (without respect to the level of Federal investment or 
     participation)''; and
       (ii) in the second sentence--

       (I) by striking ``construction of a flood protection 
     system'' and inserting ``construction, reconstruction, or 
     improvement of a flood protection system''; and
       (II) by inserting ``based on the present value of the 
     completed system'' after ``has been expended''; and

       (B) in subsection (f)--
       (i) in the first sentence in the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1), by inserting ``(without respect to the level of Federal 
     investment or participation)'' before the period at the end;
       (ii) in the third sentence in the matter preceding 
     paragraph (1), by inserting ``, whether coastal or 
     riverine,'' after ``special flood hazard''; and
       (iii) in paragraph (1), by striking ``a Federal agency in 
     consultation with the local project sponsor'' and inserting 
     ``the entity or entities that own, operate, maintain, or 
     repair such system''.
       (2) Regulations.--The Administrator of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency shall promulgate regulations to 
     implement this subsection and the amendments made by this 
     subsection as soon as practicable, but not more than 18 
     months after the date of the enactment of this Act. Paragraph 
     (3) may not be construed to annul, alter, affect, authorize 
     any waiver of, or establish any exception to, the requirement 
     under the preceding sentence.

     SEC. 6. TECHNICAL MAPPING ADVISORY COUNCIL.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a council to be 
     known as the Technical Mapping Advisory Council (in this 
     section referred to as the ``Council'').
       (b) Membership.--
       (1) In general.--The Council shall consist of--
       (A) the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management 
     Agency (in this section referred to as the 
     ``Administrator''), or the designee thereof;
       (B) the Director of the United States Geological Survey of 
     the Department of the Interior, or the designee thereof;
       (C) the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and 
     Atmosphere, or the designee thereof;
       (D) the commanding officer of the United States Army Corps 
     of Engineers, or the designee thereof;
       (E) the chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service 
     of the Department of Agriculture, or the designee thereof;
       (F) the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife 
     Service of the Department of the Interior, or the designee 
     thereof;
       (G) the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries of the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the 
     Department of Commerce, or the designee thereof; and
       (H) 14 additional members to be appointed by the 
     Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, who 
     shall be--
       (i) an expert in data management;
       (ii) an expert in real estate;
       (iii) an expert in insurance;
       (iv) a member of a recognized regional flood and storm 
     water management organization;
       (v) a representative of a State emergency management agency 
     or association or organization for such agencies;
       (vi) a member of a recognized professional surveying 
     association or organization;
       (vii) a member of a recognized professional mapping 
     association or organization;
       (viii) a member of a recognized professional engineering 
     association or organization;
       (ix) a member of a recognized professional association or 
     organization representing flood hazard determination firms;
       (x) a representative of State national flood insurance 
     coordination offices;
       (xi) representatives of two local governments, at least one 
     of whom is a local levee flood manager or executive, 
     designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as 
     Cooperating Technical Partners; and
       (xii) representatives of two State governments designated 
     by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as Cooperating 
     Technical States.
       (2) Qualifications.--Members of the Council shall be 
     appointed based on their demonstrated

[[Page H4891]]

     knowledge and competence regarding surveying, cartography, 
     remote sensing, geographic information systems, or the 
     technical aspects of preparing and using flood insurance rate 
     maps. In appointing members under paragraph (1)(I), the 
     Administrator shall ensure that the membership of the Council 
     has a balance of Federal, State, local, and private members.
       (c) Duties.--
       (1) New mapping standards.--Not later than the expiration 
     of the 12-month period beginning upon the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Council shall develop and submit 
     to the Administrator and the Congress proposed new mapping 
     standards for 100-year flood insurance rate maps used under 
     the national flood insurance program under the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968. In developing such proposed standards 
     the Council shall--
       (A) ensure that the flood insurance rate maps reflect true 
     risk, including graduated risk that better reflects the 
     financial risk to each property; such reflection of risk 
     should be at the smallest geographic level possible (but not 
     necessarily property-by-property) to ensure that communities 
     are mapped in a manner that takes into consideration 
     different risk levels within the community;
       (B) ensure the most efficient generation, display, and 
     distribution of flood risk data, models, and maps where 
     practicable through dynamic digital environments using 
     spatial database technology and the Internet;
       (C) ensure that flood insurance rate maps reflect current 
     hydrologic and hydraulic data, current land use, and 
     topography, incorporating the most current and accurate 
     ground and bathymetric elevation data;
       (D) determine the best ways to include in such flood 
     insurance rate maps levees, decertified levees, and areas 
     located below dams, including determining a methodology for 
     ensuring that decertified levees and other protections are 
     included in flood insurance rate maps and their corresponding 
     flood zones reflect the level of protection conferred;
       (E) consider how to incorporate restored wetlands and other 
     natural buffers into flood insurance rate maps, which may 
     include wetlands, groundwater recharge areas, erosion zones, 
     meander belts, endangered species habitat, barrier islands 
     and shoreline buffer features, riparian forests, and other 
     features;
       (F) consider whether to use vertical positioning (as 
     defined by the Administrator) for flood insurance rate maps;
       (G) ensure that flood insurance rate maps differentiate 
     between a property that is located in a flood zone and a 
     structure located on such property that is not at the same 
     risk level for flooding as such property due to the elevation 
     of the structure;
       (H) ensure that flood insurance rate maps take into 
     consideration the best scientific data and potential future 
     conditions (including projections for sea level rise); and
       (I) consider how to incorporate the new standards proposed 
     pursuant to this paragraph in existing mapping efforts.
       (2) Ongoing duties.--The Council shall, on an ongoing 
     basis, review the mapping protocols developed pursuant to 
     paragraph (1), and make recommendations to the Administrator 
     when the Council determines that mapping protocols should be 
     altered.
       (3) Meetings.--In carrying out its duties under this 
     section, the Council shall consult with stakeholders through 
     at least 4 public meetings annually, and shall seek input of 
     all stakeholder interests including State and local 
     representatives, environmental and conservation 
     organizations, insurance industry representatives, advocacy 
     groups, planning organizations, and mapping organizations.
       (d) Prohibition on Compensation.--Members of the Council 
     shall receive no additional compensation by reason of their 
     service on the Council.
       (e) Chairperson.--The Administrator shall serve as the 
     Chairperson of the Council.
       (f) Staff.--
       (1) FEMA.--Upon the request of the Council, the 
     Administrator may detail, on a nonreimbursable basis, 
     personnel of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to 
     assist the Council in carrying out its duties.
       (2) Other federal agencies.--Upon request of the Council, 
     any other Federal agency that is a member of the Council may 
     detail, on a non-reimbursable basis, personnel to assist the 
     Council in carrying out its duties.
       (g) Powers.--In carrying out this section, the Council may 
     hold hearings, receive evidence and assistance, provide 
     information, and conduct research, as the Council considers 
     appropriate.
       (h) Termination.--The Council shall terminate upon the 
     expiration of the 5-year period beginning on the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 7. FEMA INCORPORATION OF NEW MAPPING PROTOCOLS.

       (a) New Rate Mapping Standards.--Not later than the 
     expiration of the 6-month period beginning upon submission by 
     the Technical Mapping Advisory Council under section 6 of the 
     proposed new mapping standards for flood insurance rate maps 
     used under the national flood insurance program developed by 
     the Council pursuant to section 6(c), the Administrator of 
     the Federal Emergency Management Agency (in this section 
     referred to as the ``Administrator'') shall establish new 
     standards for such rate maps based on such proposed new 
     standards and the recommendations of the Council.
       (b) Requirements.--The new standards for flood insurance 
     rate maps established by the Administrator pursuant to 
     subsection (a) shall--
       (1) delineate and include in any such rate maps--
       (A) all areas located within the 100-year flood plain;
       (B) areas of residual risk, including areas behind levees, 
     dams, and other man-made structures; and
       (C) areas subject to graduated and other risk levels, to 
     the maximum extent possible;
       (2) ensure that any such rate maps--
       (A) include levees, including decertified levees, and the 
     level of protection they confer;
       (B) reflect current land use and topography and incorporate 
     the most current and accurate ground level data;
       (C) take into consideration the impacts and use of fill and 
     the flood risks associated with altered hydrology;
       (D) differentiate between a property that is located in a 
     flood zone and a structure located on such property that is 
     not at the same risk level for flooding as such property due 
     to the elevation of the structure;
       (E) identify and incorporate natural features and their 
     associated flood protection benefits into mapping and rates; 
     and
       (F) identify, analyze, and incorporate the impact of 
     significant changes to building and development throughout 
     any river or costal water system, including all tributaries, 
     which may impact flooding in areas downstream; and
       (3) provide that such rate maps are developed on a 
     watershed basis.
       (c) Report.--If, in establishing new standards for flood 
     insurance rate maps pursuant to subsection (a) of this 
     section, the Administrator does not implement all of the 
     recommendations of the Council made under the proposed new 
     mapping standards developed by the Council pursuant to 
     section 6(c), upon establishment of the new standards the 
     Administrator shall submit a report to the Committee on 
     Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the 
     Senate specifying which such recommendations were not adopted 
     and explaining the reasons such recommendations were not 
     adopted.
       (d) Implementation.--The Administrator shall, not later 
     than the expiration of the 6-month period beginning upon 
     establishment of the new standards for flood insurance rate 
     maps pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, commence use 
     of the new standards and updating of flood insurance rate 
     maps in accordance with the new standards. Not later than the 
     expiration of the 5-year period beginning upon the 
     establishment of such new standards, the Administrator shall 
     complete updating of all flood insurance rate maps in 
     accordance with the new standards, subject to the 
     availability of sufficient amounts for such activities 
     provided in appropriation Acts.
       (e) Temporary Suspension of Mandatory Purchase Requirement 
     for Certain Properties.--
       (1) Submission of elevation certificate.--Subject to 
     paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subsection, subsections (a), 
     (b), and (e) of section 102 of the Flood Disaster Protection 
     Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4012a), and section 202(a) of such 
     Act, shall not apply to a property located in an area 
     designated as having a special flood hazard if the owner of 
     such property submits to the Administrator an elevation 
     certificate for such property showing that the lowest level 
     of the primary residence on such property is at an elevation 
     that is at least three feet higher than the elevation of the 
     100-year flood plain.
       (2) Review of survey.--The Administrator shall accept as 
     conclusive each elevation survey submitted under paragraph 
     (1) unless the Administrator conducts a subsequent elevation 
     survey and determines that the lowest level of the primary 
     residence on the property in question is not at an elevation 
     that is at least three feet higher than the elevation of the 
     100-year flood plain. The Administrator shall provide any 
     such subsequent elevation survey to the owner of such 
     property.
       (3) Determinations for properties on borders of special 
     flood hazard areas.--
       (A) Expedited determination.--In the case of any survey for 
     a property submitted to the Administrator pursuant to 
     paragraph (1) showing that a portion of the property is 
     located within an area having special flood hazards and that 
     a structure located on the property is not located within 
     such area having special flood hazards, the Administrator 
     shall expeditiously process any request made by an owner of 
     the property for a determination pursuant to paragraph (2) or 
     a determination of whether the structure is located within 
     the area having special flood hazards.
       (B) Prohibition of fee.--If the Administrator determines 
     pursuant to subparagraph (A) that the structure on the 
     property is not located within the area having special flood 
     hazards, the Administrator shall not charge a fee for 
     reviewing the flood hazard data and shall not require the 
     owner to provide any additional elevation data.
       (C) Simplification of review process.--The Administrator 
     shall collaborate with private sector flood insurers to 
     simplify the review process for properties described in 
     subparagraph (A) and to ensure that the review process 
     provides for accurate determinations.
       (4) Termination of authority.--This subsection shall cease 
     to apply to a property on the date on which the Administrator 
     updates the flood insurance rate map that applies to such 
     property in accordance with the requirements of subsection 
     (d).

     SEC. 8. TREATMENT OF LEVEES.

       Section 1360 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 
     (42 U.S.C. 4101) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(k) Treatment of Levees.--The Administrator may not issue 
     flood insurance maps, or make effective updated flood 
     insurance maps, that omit or disregard the actual protection 
     afforded by an existing levee, floodwall, pump or other flood 
     protection feature, regardless of the accreditation status of 
     such feature.''.

[[Page H4892]]

     SEC. 9. PRIVATIZATION INITIATIVES.

       (a) FEMA and GAO Reports.--Not later than the expiration of 
     the 18-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency and the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall each conduct a separate study to assess a broad 
     range of options, methods, and strategies for privatizing the 
     national flood insurance program and shall each submit a 
     report to the Committee on Financial Services of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 
     Urban Affairs of the Senate with recommendations for the best 
     manner to accomplish such privatization.
       (b) Private Risk-Management Initiatives.--
       (1) Authority.--The Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency may carry out such private risk-management 
     initiatives under the national flood insurance program as the 
     Administrator considers appropriate to determine the capacity 
     of private insurers, reinsurers, and financial markets to 
     assist communities, on a voluntary basis only, in managing 
     the full range of financial risks associated with flooding.
       (2) Assessment.--Not later than the expiration of the 12-
     month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the Administrator shall assess the capacity of the 
     private reinsurance, capital, and financial markets by 
     seeking proposals to assume a portion of the program's 
     insurance risk and submit to the Congress a report describing 
     the response to such request for proposals and the results of 
     such assessment.
       (3) Protocol for release of data.--The Administrator shall 
     develop a protocol to provide for the release of data 
     sufficient to conduct the assessment required under paragraph 
     (2).
       (c) Reinsurance.--The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 
     is amended--
       (1) in section 1331(a)(2) (42 U.S.C. 4051(a)(2)), by 
     inserting ``, including as reinsurance of insurance coverage 
     provided by the flood insurance program'' before ``, on such 
     terms'';
       (2) in section 1332(c)(2) (42 U.S.C. 4052(c)(2)), by 
     inserting ``or reinsurance'' after ``flood insurance 
     coverage'';
       (3) in section 1335(a) (42 U.S.C. 4055(a))--
       (A) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(a)''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) The Administrator is authorized to secure reinsurance 
     coverage of coverage provided by the flood insurance program 
     from private market insurance, reinsurance, and capital 
     market sources at rates and on terms determined by the 
     Administrator to be reasonable and appropriate in an amount 
     sufficient to maintain the ability of the program to pay 
     claims and that minimizes the likelihood that the program 
     will utilize the borrowing authority provided under section 
     1309.'';
       (4) in section 1346(a) (12 U.S.C. 4082(a))--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting ``, 
     or for purposes of securing reinsurance of insurance coverage 
     provided by the program,'' before ``of any or all of'';
       (B) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``estimating'' and inserting 
     ``Estimating''; and
       (ii) by striking the semicolon at the end and inserting a 
     period;
       (C) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by striking ``receiving'' and inserting ``Receiving''; 
     and
       (ii) by striking the semicolon at the end and inserting a 
     period;
       (D) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) by striking ``making'' and inserting ``Making''; and
       (ii) by striking ``; and'' and inserting a period;
       (E) in paragraph (4)--
       (i) by striking ``otherwise'' and inserting ``Otherwise''; 
     and
       (ii) by redesignating such paragraph as paragraph (5); and
       (F) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) Placing reinsurance coverage on insurance provided by 
     such program.''; and
       (5) in section 1370(a)(3) (42 U.S.C. 4121(a)(3)), by 
     inserting before the semicolon at the end the following: ``, 
     is subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities 
     Exchange Act of 1934, pursuant to section 13(a) or 15(d) of 
     such Act (15 U.S.C. 78m(a), 78o(d)), or is authorized by the 
     Administrator to assume reinsurance on risks insured by the 
     flood insurance program''.
       (d) Assessment of Claims-Paying Ability.--
       (1) Assessment.--Not later than September 30 of each year, 
     the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     shall conduct an assessment of the claims-paying ability of 
     the national flood insurance program, including the program's 
     utilization of private sector reinsurance and reinsurance 
     equivalents, with and without reliance on borrowing authority 
     under section 1309 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 
     1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016). In conducting the assessment, the 
     Administrator shall take into consideration regional 
     concentrations of coverage written by the program, peak flood 
     zones, and relevant mitigation measures.
       (2) Report.--The Administrator shall submit a report to the 
     Congress of the results of each such assessment, and make 
     such report available to the public, not later than 30 days 
     after completion of the assessment.

     SEC. 10. FEMA ANNUAL REPORT ON INSURANCE PROGRAM.

       Section 1320 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 
     (42 U.S.C. 4027) is amended--
       (1) in the section heading, by striking ``report to the 
     president'' and inserting ``annual report to congress'';
       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``biennially'';
       (B) by striking ``the President for submission to''; and
       (C) by inserting ``not later than June 30 of each year'' 
     before the period at the end;
       (3) in subsection (b), by striking ``biennial'' and 
     inserting ``annual''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Financial Status of Program.--The report under this 
     section for each year shall include information regarding the 
     financial status of the national flood insurance program 
     under this title, including a description of the financial 
     status of the National Flood Insurance Fund and current and 
     projected levels of claims, premium receipts, expenses, and 
     borrowing under the program.''.

     SEC. 11. ACTUARIAL RATES FOR SEVERE REPETITIVE LOSS 
                   PROPERTIES REFUSING MITIGATION OR PURCHASE 
                   OFFERS.

       Subsection (h) of section 1361A of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4102a(h)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``150 percent'' and 
     all that follows through ``paragraph (3)'' and inserting 
     ``the applicable estimated risk premium rate for such 
     coverage for the area (or subdivision thereof) determined in 
     accordance with section 1307(a), subject to phase-in of such 
     rates in the same manner provided under paragraph (2) of 
     section 1308(g) for properties described in paragraph (1) of 
     such section''; and
       (B) by inserting after and below subparagraph (B) the 
     following:

     ``An offer to take action under paragraph (1) or (2) of 
     subsection (c) shall be considered to be made for purposes of 
     this paragraph with respect to a severe repetitive loss 
     property regardless of the time that the offer was made and 
     regardless of whether the Administrator has transferred 
     financial assistance under this section to the State or 
     community making the offer for funding such action, but only 
     if the owner of the property is provided a reasonable period 
     of time, not to exceed 15 days, to respond to the offer.'';
       (2) by striking paragraphs (2) and (3); and
       (3) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (6) as 
     paragraphs (2) through (4), respectively.

     SEC. 12. MITIGATION ASSISTANCE.

       Subsection (e) of section 1366 of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4104c(e)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Eligibility of demolition and rebuilding of 
     properties.--The Administrator shall consider as an eligible 
     activity the demolition and rebuilding of properties to at 
     least base flood levels or higher, if required by the 
     Administrator or if required by any State or local ordinance, 
     and in accordance with project implementation criteria 
     established by the Administrator.''.

     SEC. 13. GRANTS FOR DIRECT FUNDING OF MITIGATION ACTIVITIES 
                   FOR INDIVIDUAL REPETITIVE CLAIMS PROPERTIES.

       (a) Direct Grants to Owners.--Section 1323 of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4030) is amended--
       (1) in the section heading, by inserting ``DIRECT'' before 
     ``GRANTS''; and
       (2) in subsection (a), in the the matter preceding 
     paragraph (1)--
       (A) by inserting ``, to owners of such properties,'' before 
     ``for mitigation actions''; and
       (B) by striking ``1'' and inserting ``two''.
       (b) Availability of Funds.--Paragraph (9) of section 
     1310(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 4017(a)) is amended by inserting ``which shall remain 
     available until expended,'' after ``any fiscal year,''.

     SEC. 14. NOTIFICATION TO HOMEOWNERS REGARDING MANDATORY 
                   PURCHASE REQUIREMENT APPLICABILITY AND RATE 
                   PHASE-INS.

       Section 201 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 
     (42 U.S.C. 4105) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(f) Annual Notification.--The Administrator, in 
     consultation with affected communities, shall establish and 
     carry out a plan to notify residents of areas having special 
     flood hazards, on an annual basis--
       ``(1) that they reside in such an area;
       ``(2) of the geographical boundaries of such area;
       ``(3) of whether section 1308(h) of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 applies to properties within such area;
       ``(4) of the provisions of section 102 requiring purchase 
     of flood insurance coverage for properties located in such an 
     area, including the date on which such provisions apply with 
     respect to such area, taking into consideration section 
     102(i); and
       ``(5) of a general estimate of what similar homeowners in 
     similar areas typically pay for flood insurance coverage, 
     taking into consideration section 1308(g) of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968.''.

     SEC. 15. NOTIFICATION OF ESTABLISHMENT OF FLOOD ELEVATIONS.

       Section 1360 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 
     (42 U.S.C. 4101), as amended by the preceding provisions of 
     this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(l) Notification to Members of Congress of Map 
     Modernization.--Upon any revision or update of any floodplain 
     area or flood-risk zone pursuant to subsection (f), any 
     decision pursuant to subsection (f)(1) that such revision or 
     update is necessary, any issuance of preliminary maps for 
     such revision or updating, or any other significant action 
     relating to any such revision or update, the Administrator 
     shall notify the Senators for each State affected, and each 
     Member of the House of Representatives for each congressional 
     district affected, by such revision or update in writing of 
     the action taken.''.

     SEC. 16. NOTIFICATION TO TENANTS OF AVAILABILITY OF CONTENTS 
                   INSURANCE.

       The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 is amended by 
     inserting after section 1308 (42 U.S.C. 4015) the following 
     new section:

[[Page H4893]]

     ``SEC. 1308A. NOTIFICATION TO TENANTS OF AVAILABILITY OF 
                   CONTENTS INSURANCE.

       ``(a) In General.--The Administrator shall, upon entering 
     into a contract for flood insurance coverage under this title 
     for any property--
       ``(1) provide to the insured sufficient copies of the 
     notice developed pursuant to subsection (b); and
       ``(2) require the insured to provide a copy of the notice, 
     or otherwise provide notification of the information under 
     subsection (b) in the manner that the manager or landlord 
     deems most appropriate, to each such tenant and to each new 
     tenant upon commencement of such a tenancy.
       ``(b) Notice.--Notice to a tenant of a property in 
     accordance with this subsection is written notice that 
     clearly informs a tenant--
       ``(1) whether the property is located in an area having 
     special flood hazards;
       ``(2) that flood insurance coverage is available under the 
     national flood insurance program under this title for 
     contents of the unit or structure leased by the tenant;
       ``(3) of the maximum amount of such coverage for contents 
     available under this title at that time; and
       ``(4) of where to obtain information regarding how to 
     obtain such coverage, including a telephone number, mailing 
     address, and Internet site of the Administrator where such 
     information is available.''.

     SEC. 17. NOTIFICATION TO POLICY HOLDERS REGARDING DIRECT 
                   MANAGEMENT OF POLICY BY FEMA.

       Part C of chapter II of the National Flood Insurance Act of 
     1968 (42 U.S.C. 4081 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new section:

     ``SEC. 1349. NOTIFICATION TO POLICY HOLDERS REGARDING DIRECT 
                   MANAGEMENT OF POLICY BY FEMA.

       ``(a) Notification.--Not later than 60 days before the date 
     on which a transferred flood insurance policy expires, and 
     annually thereafter until such time as the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency is no longer directly administering such 
     policy, the Administrator shall notify the holder of such 
     policy that--
       ``(1) the Federal Emergency Management Agency is directly 
     administering the policy;
       ``(2) such holder may purchase flood insurance that is 
     directly administered by an insurance company; and
       ``(3) purchasing flood insurance offered under the National 
     Flood Insurance Program that is directly administered by an 
     insurance company will not alter the coverage provided or the 
     premiums charged to such holder that otherwise would be 
     provided or charged if the policy was directly administered 
     by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
       ``(b) Definition.--In this section, the term `transferred 
     flood insurance policy' means a flood insurance policy that--
       ``(1) was directly administered by an insurance company at 
     the time the policy was originally purchased by the policy 
     holder; and
       ``(2) at the time of renewal of the policy, direct 
     administration of the policy was or will be transferred to 
     the Federal Emergency Management Agency.''.

     SEC. 18. NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF FLOOD INSURANCE AND ESCROW 
                   IN RESPA GOOD FAITH ESTIMATE.

       Subsection (c) of section 5 of the Real Estate Settlement 
     Procedures Act of 1974 (12 U.S.C. 2604(c)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new sentence: ``Each such 
     good faith estimate shall include the following conspicuous 
     statements and information: (1) that flood insurance coverage 
     for residential real estate is generally available under the 
     national flood insurance program whether or not the real 
     estate is located in an area having special flood hazards and 
     that, to obtain such coverage, a home owner or purchaser 
     should contact the national flood insurance program; (2) a 
     telephone number and a location on the Internet by which a 
     home owner or purchaser can contact the national flood 
     insurance program; and (3) that the escrowing of flood 
     insurance payments is required for many loans under section 
     102(d) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, and may 
     be a convenient and available option with respect to other 
     loans.''.

     SEC. 19. REIMBURSEMENT FOR COSTS INCURRED BY HOMEOWNERS 
                   OBTAINING LETTERS OF MAP AMENDMENT.

       (a) In General.--Section 1360 of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4101), as amended by the 
     preceding provisions of this Act, is further amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(m) Reimbursement.--
       ``(1) Requirement upon bona fide offer.--If an owner of any 
     property located in an area described in section 102(i)(3) of 
     the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 obtains a letter of 
     map amendment due to a bona fide error on the part of the 
     Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the 
     Administrator shall reimburse such owner, or such entity or 
     jurisdiction acting on such owner's behalf, for any 
     reasonable costs incurred in obtaining such letter.
       ``(2) Reasonable costs.--The Administrator shall, by 
     regulation or notice, determine a reasonable amount of costs 
     to be reimbursed under paragraph (1), except that such costs 
     shall not include legal or attorneys fees. In determining the 
     reasonableness of costs, the Administrator shall only 
     consider the actual costs to the owner of utilizing the 
     services of an engineer, surveyor, or similar services.''.
       (b) Regulations.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency shall issue the regulations or 
     notice required under section 1360(m)(2) of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as added by the amendment made 
     by subsection (a) of this section.

     SEC. 20. TREATMENT OF SWIMMING POOL ENCLOSURES OUTSIDE OF 
                   HURRICANE SEASON.

       Chapter I of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 4001 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 1325. TREATMENT OF SWIMMING POOL ENCLOSURES OUTSIDE OF 
                   HURRICANE SEASON.

       ``In the case of any property that is otherwise in 
     compliance with the coverage and building requirements of the 
     national flood insurance program, the presence of an enclosed 
     swimming pool located at ground level or in the space below 
     the lowest floor of a building after November 30 and before 
     June 1 of any year shall have no effect on the terms of 
     coverage or the ability to receive coverage for such building 
     under the national flood insurance program established 
     pursuant to this title, if the pool is enclosed with non-
     supporting breakaway walls.''.

     SEC. 21. CDBG ELIGIBILITY FOR FLOOD INSURANCE OUTREACH 
                   ACTIVITIES AND COMMUNITY BUILDING CODE 
                   ADMINISTRATION GRANTS.

       Section 105(a) of the Housing and Community Development Act 
     of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5305(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (24), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (25), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting a semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(26) supplementing existing State or local funding for 
     administration of building code enforcement by local building 
     code enforcement departments, including for increasing 
     staffing, providing staff training, increasing staff 
     competence and professional qualifications, and supporting 
     individual certification or departmental accreditation, and 
     for capital expenditures specifically dedicated to the 
     administration of the building code enforcement department, 
     except that, to be eligible to use amounts as provided in 
     this paragraph--
       ``(A) a building code enforcement department shall provide 
     matching, non-Federal funds to be used in conjunction with 
     amounts used under this paragraph in an amount--
       ``(i) in the case of a building code enforcement department 
     serving an area with a population of more than 50,000, equal 
     to not less than 50 percent of the total amount of any funds 
     made available under this title that are used under this 
     paragraph;
       ``(ii) in the case of a building code enforcement 
     department serving an area with a population of between 
     20,001 and 50,000, equal to not less than 25 percent of the 
     total amount of any funds made available under this title 
     that are used under this paragraph; and
       ``(iii) in the case of a building code enforcement 
     department serving an area with a population of less than 
     20,000, equal to not less than 12.5 percent of the total 
     amount of any funds made available under this title that are 
     used under this paragraph;

     except that the Secretary may waive the matching fund 
     requirements under this subparagraph, in whole or in part, 
     based upon the level of economic distress of the jurisdiction 
     in which is located the local building code enforcement 
     department that is using amounts for purposes under this 
     paragraph, and shall waive such matching fund requirements in 
     whole for any recipient jurisdiction that has dedicated all 
     building code permitting fees to the conduct of local 
     building code enforcement; and
       ``(B) any building code enforcement department using funds 
     made available under this title for purposes under this 
     paragraph shall empanel a code administration and enforcement 
     team consisting of at least 1 full-time building code 
     enforcement officer, a city planner, and a health planner or 
     similar officer; and
       ``(27) provision of assistance to local governmental 
     agencies responsible for floodplain management activities 
     (including such agencies of Indians tribes, as such term is 
     defined in section 4 of the Native American Housing 
     Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 
     4103)) in communities that participate in the national flood 
     insurance program under the National Flood Insurance Act of 
     1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), only for carrying out outreach 
     activities to encourage and facilitate the purchase of flood 
     insurance protection under such Act by owners and renters of 
     properties in such communities and to promote educational 
     activities that increase awareness of flood risk reduction; 
     except that--
       ``(A) amounts used as provided under this paragraph shall 
     be used only for activities designed to--
       ``(i) identify owners and renters of properties in 
     communities that participate in the national flood insurance 
     program, including owners of residential and commercial 
     properties;
       ``(ii) notify such owners and renters when their properties 
     become included in, or when they are excluded from, an area 
     having special flood hazards and the effect of such inclusion 
     or exclusion on the applicability of the mandatory flood 
     insurance purchase requirement under section 102 of the Flood 
     Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4012a) to such 
     properties;
       ``(iii) educate such owners and renters regarding the flood 
     risk and reduction of this risk in their community, including 
     the continued flood risks to areas that are no longer subject 
     to the flood insurance mandatory purchase requirement;
       ``(iv) educate such owners and renters regarding the 
     benefits and costs of maintaining or acquiring flood 
     insurance, including, where applicable, lower-cost preferred 
     risk policies under this title for such properties and the 
     contents of such properties;

[[Page H4894]]

       ``(v) encourage such owners and renters to maintain or 
     acquire such coverage;
       ``(vi) notify such owners of where to obtain information 
     regarding how to obtain such coverage, including a telephone 
     number, mailing address, and Internet site of the 
     Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (in 
     this paragraph referred to as the `Administrator') where such 
     information is available; and
       ``(vii) educate local real estate agents in communities 
     participating in the national flood insurance program 
     regarding the program and the availability of coverage under 
     the program for owners and renters of properties in such 
     communities, and establish coordination and liaisons with 
     such real estate agents to facilitate purchase of coverage 
     under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and increase 
     awareness of flood risk reduction;
       ``(B) in any fiscal year, a local governmental agency may 
     not use an amount under this paragraph that exceeds 3 times 
     the amount that the agency certifies, as the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Administrator, shall require, that the 
     agency will contribute from non-Federal funds to be used with 
     such amounts used under this paragraph only for carrying out 
     activities described in subparagraph (A); and for purposes of 
     this subparagraph, the term `non-Federal funds' includes 
     State or local government agency amounts, in-kind 
     contributions, any salary paid to staff to carry out the 
     eligible activities of the local governmental agency 
     involved, the value of the time and services contributed by 
     volunteers to carry out such services (at a rate determined 
     by the Secretary), and the value of any donated material or 
     building and the value of any lease on a building;
       ``(C) a local governmental agency that uses amounts as 
     provided under this paragraph may coordinate or contract with 
     other agencies and entities having particular capacities, 
     specialties, or experience with respect to certain 
     populations or constituencies, including elderly or disabled 
     families or persons, to carry out activities described in 
     subparagraph (A) with respect to such populations or 
     constituencies; and
       ``(D) each local government agency that uses amounts as 
     provided under this paragraph shall submit a report to the 
     Secretary and the Administrator, not later than 12 months 
     after such amounts are first received, which shall include 
     such information as the Secretary and the Administrator 
     jointly consider appropriate to describe the activities 
     conducted using such amounts and the effect of such 
     activities on the retention or acquisition of flood insurance 
     coverage.''.

     SEC. 22. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.

       (a) Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973.--The Flood 
     Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4002 et seq.) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``Director'' each place such term appears, 
     except in section 102(f)(3) (42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)(3)), and 
     inserting ``Administrator''; and
       (2) in section 201(b) (42 U.S.C. 4105(b)), by striking 
     ``Director's'' and inserting ``Administrator's''.
       (b) National Flood Insurance Act of 1968.--The National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``Director'' each place such term appears 
     and inserting ``Administrator''; and
       (2) in sections 1363 (42 U.S.C. 4104), by striking 
     ``Director's'' each place such term appears and inserting 
     ``Administrator's''.
       (c) Federal Flood Insurance Act of 1956.--Section 15(e) of 
     the Federal Flood Insurance Act of 1956 (42 U.S.C. 2414(e)) 
     is amended by striking ``Director'' each place such term 
     appears and inserting ``Administrator''.

     SEC. 23. REPORT ON WRITE-YOUR-OWN PROGRAM.

       Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency shall submit to Congress a report 
     describing procedures and policies that the Administrator can 
     implement to limit the percentage of flood insurance polices 
     directly managed by the Agency to not more than 10 percent, 
     if possible, of all flood insurance policies issued in 
     accordance with the National Flood Insurance Program.

     SEC. 24. STUDIES OF VOLUNTARY COMMUNITY-BASED FLOOD INSURANCE 
                   OPTIONS.

       (a) Studies.--The Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency and the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall each conduct a separate study to assess options, 
     methods, and strategies for offering voluntary community-
     based flood insurance policy options and incorporating such 
     options into the national flood insurance program. Such 
     studies shall take into consideration and analyze how the 
     policy options would affect communities having varying 
     economic bases, geographic locations, flood hazard 
     characteristics or classifications, and flood management 
     approaches.
       (b) Reports.--Not later than the expiration of the 18-month 
     period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     and the Comptroller General of the United States shall each 
     submit a report to the Committee on Financial Services of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Banking, 
     Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate on the results and 
     conclusions of the study such agency conducted under 
     subsection (a), and each such report shall include 
     recommendations for the best manner to incorporate voluntary 
     community-based flood insurance options into the national 
     flood insurance program and for a strategy to implement such 
     options that would encourage communities to undertake flood 
     mitigation activities.

     SEC. 25. REPORT ON INCLUSION OF BUILDING CODES IN FLOODPLAIN 
                   MANAGEMENT CRITERIA.

       Not later than the expiration of the 6-month period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     shall conduct a study and submit a report to the Committee on 
     Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the 
     Senate regarding the impact, effectiveness, and feasibility 
     of amending section 1361 of the National Flood Insurance Act 
     of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4102) to include widely used and 
     nationally recognized building codes as part of the 
     floodplain management criteria developed under such section, 
     and shall determine--
       (1) the regulatory, financial, and economic impacts of such 
     a building code requirement on homeowners, States and local 
     communities, local land use policies, and the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency;
       (2) the resources required of State and local communities 
     to administer and enforce such a building code requirement;
       (3) the effectiveness of such a building code requirement 
     in reducing flood-related damage to buildings and contents;
       (4) the impact of such a building code requirement on the 
     actuarial soundness of the National Flood Insurance Program;
       (5) the effectiveness of nationally recognized codes in 
     allowing innovative materials and systems for flood-resistant 
     construction;
       (6) the feasibility and effectiveness of providing an 
     incentive in lower premium rates for flood insurance coverage 
     under such Act for structures meeting whichever of such 
     widely used and nationally recognized building code or any 
     applicable local building code provides greater protection 
     from flood damage;
       (7) the impact of such a building code requirement on rural 
     communities with different building code challenges than more 
     urban environments; and
       (8) the impact of such a building code requirement on 
     Indian reservations.

     SEC. 26. STUDY ON GRADUATED RISK.

       (a) Study.--The National Academy of Sciences shall conduct 
     a study exploring methods for understanding graduated risk 
     behind levees and the associated land development, insurance, 
     and risk communication dimensions, which shall--
       (1) research, review, and recommend current best practices 
     for estimating direct annualized flood losses behind levees 
     for residential and commercial structures;
       (2) rank such practices based on their best value, 
     balancing cost, scientific integrity, and the inherent 
     uncertainties associated with all aspects of the loss 
     estimate, including geotechnical engineering, flood frequency 
     estimates, economic value, and direct damages;
       (3) research, review, and identify current best floodplain 
     management and land use practices behind levees that 
     effectively balance social, economic, and environmental 
     considerations as part of an overall flood risk management 
     strategy;
       (4) identify examples where such practices have proven 
     effective and recommend methods and processes by which they 
     could be applied more broadly across the United States, given 
     the variety of different flood risks, State and local legal 
     frameworks, and evolving judicial opinions;
       (5) research, review, and identify a variety of flood 
     insurance pricing options for flood hazards behind levees 
     which are actuarially sound and based on the flood risk data 
     developed using the top three best value approaches 
     identified pursuant to paragraph (1);
       (6) evaluate and recommend methods to reduce insurance 
     costs through creative arrangements between insureds and 
     insurers while keeping a clear accounting of how much 
     financial risk is being borne by various parties such that 
     the entire risk is accounted for, including establishment of 
     explicit limits on disaster aid or other assistance in the 
     event of a flood; and
       (7) taking into consideration the recommendations pursuant 
     to paragraphs (1) through (3), recommend approaches to 
     communicating the associated risks to community officials, 
     homeowners, and other residents.
       (b) Report.--Not later than the expiration of the 12-month 
     period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the National Academy of Sciences shall submit a report to the 
     Committees on Financial Services and Science, Space, and 
     Technology of the House of Representatives and the Committees 
     on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and Commerce, Science 
     and Transportation of the Senate on the study under 
     subsection (a) including the information and recommendations 
     required under such subsection.

     SEC. 27. NO CAUSE OF ACTION.

       No cause of action shall exist and no claim may be brought 
     against the United States for violation of any notification 
     requirement imposed upon the United States by this Act or any 
     amendment made by this Act.

  The Acting CHAIR. No amendment to the committee amendment in the 
nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in House 
Report 112-138, and amendments en bloc described in section 3 of House 
Resolution 340. Each amendment printed in the report may be offered 
only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, 
shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided 
and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject 
to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
question.
  It shall be in order at any time for the chair of the Committee on 
Financial Services or his designee to offer

[[Page H4895]]

amendments en bloc consisting of amendments printed in the report not 
earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc shall be considered as read, 
shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the 
chair and ranking minority member of the committee or their designees, 
shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand 
for division of the question. The original proponent of an amendment 
included in such amendments en bloc may insert a statement in the 
Congressional Record immediately before the disposition of the 
amendments en bloc.


               Amendments En Bloc Offered by Mrs. Biggert

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 340, I offer 
amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc consisting of amendments numbered 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 
12, 15, 18, 21, 22, and 24 printed in House Report 112-138 offered by 
Mrs. Biggert:


                amendment no. 1 offered by mrs. biggert

       Page 38, line 23, strike ``5-year'' and insert ``10-year''.
       Page 39, line 18 strike ``survey'' and insert 
     ``certificate''.
       Page 39, line 19 strike ``survey'' and insert 
     ``certificate''.
       Page 50, line 7, strike ``1308(h)'' and insert ``1308(g)''.
       Page 50, lines 20 and 21 strike ``OF ESTABLISHMENT OF FLOOD 
     ELEVATIONS'' and insert ``TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS OF FLOOD MAP 
     REVISIONS AND UPDATES''.
       Page 55, line 11, strike ``offer'' and insert ``error''.
       Page 64, line 16, strike ``sections'' and insert 
     ``section''.


                 amendment no. 6 offered by ms. matsui

       Page 20, line 3, strike ``50 percent rate for initial 
     year'' and insert ``5-year phase-in period''.
       Page 20, line 11, strike ``12-month period'' and insert 
     ``5-year period''.
       Page 20, lines 17 through 19, strike ``50 percent of the 
     chargeable risk premium rate otherwise applicable under this 
     title to the property'' and insert ``the rate described in 
     paragraph (3)''.
       Page 21, line 4, strike ``12-month period'' and insert ``5-
     year period''.
       Page 21, strike lines 11 through 18, and insert the 
     following:
       ``the chargeable risk premium rate for flood insurance 
     under this title for a covered property that is located in 
     such area shall be--
       ``(A) for the first year of the 5-year period referred to 
     in paragraph (1), the greater of--
       ``(i) 20 percent of the chargeable risk premium rate 
     otherwise applicable under this title to the property; and
       ``(ii) in the case of any property that, as of the 
     beginning of such first year, is eligible for preferred risk 
     rate method premiums for flood insurance coverage, such 
     preferred risk rate method premium for the property;
       ``(B) for the second year of such 5-year period, 40 percent 
     of the chargeable risk premium rate otherwise applicable 
     under this title to the property;
       ``(C) for the third year of such 5-year period, 60 percent 
     of the chargeable risk premium rate otherwise applicable 
     under this title to the property;
       ``(D) for the fourth year of such 5-year period, 80 percent 
     of the chargeable risk premium rate otherwise applicable 
     under this title to the property; and
       ``(E) for the fifth year of such 5-year period, 100 percent 
     of the chargeable risk premium rate otherwise applicable 
     under this title to the property.''.


                  amendment no. 7 offered by mr. terry

       Page 19, after line 8, insert the following new subsection:
       (f) Effective Date of Policies Covering Properties Affected 
     by Floods in Progress.--Paragraph (1) of section 1306(c) of 
     the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4013(c)) 
     is amended by adding after the period at the end the 
     following: ``With respect to any flood that has commenced or 
     is in progress before the expiration of such 30-day period, 
     such flood insurance coverage for a property shall take 
     effect upon the expiration of such 30-day period and shall 
     cover damage to such property occurring after the expiration 
     of such period that results from such flood, but only if the 
     property has not suffered damage or loss as a result of such 
     flood before the expiration of such 30-day period.''.


                 amendment no. 8 offered by ms. waters

       Page 23, line 17, strike ``section 1361A(b)'' and insert 
     ``section 1366(j)''.
       Strike line 10 on page 47 and all that follows through page 
     48, line 15.
       Strike line 16 on page 48 and all that follows through page 
     49, line 19 and insert the following new section:

     SEC. 12. MITIGATION ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Mitigation Assistance Grants.--Section 1366 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4104c) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking the last sentence and 
     inserting the following: ``Such financial assistance shall be 
     made available--
       ``(1) to States and communities in the form of grants under 
     this section for carrying out mitigation activities;
       ``(2) to States and communities in the form of grants under 
     this section for carrying out mitigation activities that 
     reduce flood damage to severe repetitive loss structures; and
       ``(3) to property owners in the form of direct grants under 
     this section for carrying out mitigation activities that 
     reduce flood damage to individual structures for which 2 or 
     more claim payments for losses have been made under flood 
     insurance coverage under this title if the Administrator, 
     after consultation with the State and community, determines 
     that neither the State nor community in which such a 
     structure is located has the capacity to manage such 
     grants.''.
       (2) by striking subsection (b);
       (3) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking ``flood risk'' and inserting ``multi-
     hazard'';
       (B) by striking ``provides protection against'' and 
     inserting ``examines reduction of''; and
       (C) by redesignating such subsection as subsection (b);
       (4) by striking subsection (d);
       (5) in subsection (e)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking the paragraph designation 
     and all that follows through the end of the first sentence 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Requirement of consistency with approved mitigation 
     plan.--Amounts provided under this section may be used only 
     for mitigation activities that are consistent with mitigation 
     plans that are approved by the Administrator and identified 
     under subparagraph (4).'';
       (B) by striking paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) and inserting 
     the following new paragraphs:
       ``(2) Requirements of technical feasibility, cost 
     effectiveness, and interest of nfif.--The Administrator may 
     approve only mitigation activities that the Administrator 
     determines are technically feasible and cost-effective and in 
     the interest of, and represent savings to, the National Flood 
     Insurance Fund. In making such determinations, the 
     Administrator shall take into consideration recognized 
     benefits that are difficult to quantify.
       ``(3) Priority for mitigation assistance.--In providing 
     grants under this section for mitigation activities, the 
     Administrator shall give priority for funding to activities 
     that the Administrator determines will result in the greatest 
     savings to the National Flood Insurance Fund, including 
     activities for--
       ``(A) severe repetitive loss structures;
       ``(B) repetitive loss structures; and
       ``(C) other subsets of structures as the Administrator may 
     establish.'';
       (C) in paragraph (5)--
       (i) by striking all of the matter that precedes 
     subparagraph (A) and inserting the following:
       ``(4) Eligible activities.--Eligible activities may 
     include--'';
       (ii) by striking subparagraphs (E) and (H);
       (iii) by redesignating subparagraphs (D), (F), and (G) as 
     subparagraphs (F), (H), and (I);
       (iv) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new 
     subparagraphs:
       ``(D) demolition and rebuilding of properties to at least 
     base flood elevation or greater, if required by the 
     Administrator or if required by any State regulation or local 
     ordinance, and in accordance with criteria established by the 
     Administrator;
       ``(E) elevation, relocation, and floodproofing of utilities 
     (including equipment that serve structures);'';
       (v) by inserting after subparagraph (F), as so redesignated 
     by clause (iii) of this subparagraph, the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(G) the development or update of State, local, or Indian 
     tribal mitigation plans which meet the planning criteria 
     established by the Administrator, except that the amount from 
     grants under this section that may be used under this 
     subparagraph may not exceed $50,000 for any mitigation plan 
     of a State or $25,000 for any mitigation plan of a local 
     government or Indian tribe;'';
       (vi) in subparagraph (I); as so redesignated by clause 
     (iii) of this subparagraph, by striking ``and'' at the end; 
     and
       (vii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
       ``(J) other mitigation activities not described in 
     subparagraphs (A) through (H) or the regulations issued under 
     subparagraph (I), that are described in the mitigation plan 
     of a State, community, or Indian tribe; and
       ``(K) personnel costs for State staff that provide 
     technical assistance to communities to identify eligible 
     activities, to develop grant applications, and to implement 
     grants awarded under this section, not to exceed $50,000 per 
     State in any Federal fiscal year, so long as the State 
     applied for and was awarded at least $1,000,000 in grants 
     available under this section in the prior Federal fiscal 
     year; the requirements of subsections (d)(1) and (d)(2) shall 
     not apply to the activity under this subparagraph.''; and
       (D) by redesignating such subsection as subsection (c);
       (6) by striking subsections (f), (g), and (h) and inserting 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Matching Requirement.--The Administrator may provide 
     grants for eligible mitigation activities as follows:
       ``(1) Severe repetitive loss structures.--In the case of 
     mitigation activities to severe repetitive loss structures, 
     in an amount up to 100 percent of all eligible costs.

[[Page H4896]]

       ``(2) Repetitive loss structures.--In the case of 
     mitigation activities to repetitive loss structures, in an 
     amount up to 90 percent of all eligible costs.
       ``(3) Other mitigation activities.-- In the case of all 
     other mitigation activities, in an amount up to 75 percent of 
     all eligible costs.'';
       (7) in subsection (i)--
       (A) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by striking ``certified under subsection (g)'' and 
     inserting ``required under subsection (d)''; and
       (ii) by striking ``3 times the amount'' and inserting ``the 
     amount''; and
       (B) by redesignating such subsection as subsection (e);
       (8) in subsection (j)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Riegle Community 
     Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994'' and 
     inserting ``Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011'';
       (B) by redesignating such subsection as subsection (f); and
       (9) by striking subsections (k) and (m) and inserting the 
     following new subsections:
       ``(g) Failure to Make Grant Award Within 5 Years.--For any 
     application for a grant under this section for which the 
     Administrator fails to make a grant award within 5 years of 
     the date of application, the grant application shall be 
     considered to be denied and any funding amounts allocated for 
     such grant applications shall remain in the National Flood 
     Mitigation Fund under section 1367 of this title and shall be 
     made available for grants under this section.
       ``(h) Limitation on Funding for Mitigation Activities for 
     Severe Repetitive Loss Structures.--The amount used pursuant 
     to section 1310(a)(8) in any fiscal year may not exceed 
     $40,000,000 and shall remain available until expended.
       ``(i) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the 
     following definitions shall apply:
       ``(1) Community.--The term `community' means--
       ``(A) a political subdivision that--
       ``(i) has zoning and building code jurisdiction over a 
     particular area having special flood hazards, and
       ``(ii) is participating in the national flood insurance 
     program; or
       ``(B) a political subdivision of a State, or other 
     authority, that is designated by political subdivisions, all 
     of which meet the requirements of subparagraph (A), to 
     administer grants for mitigation activities for such 
     political subdivisions.
       ``(2) Repetitive loss structure.--The term `repetitive loss 
     structure' has the meaning given such term in section 1370.
       ``(3) Severe repetitive loss structure.--The term `severe 
     repetitive loss structure' means a structure that--
       ``(A) is covered under a contract for flood insurance made 
     available under this title; and
       ``(B) has incurred flood-related damage--
       ``(i) for which 4 or more separate claims payments have 
     been made under flood insurance coverage under this title, 
     with the amount of each such claim exceeding $15,000, and 
     with the cumulative amount of such claims payments exceeding 
     $60,000; or
       ``(ii) for which at least 2 separate claims payments have 
     been made under such coverage, with the cumulative amount of 
     such claims exceeding the value of the insured structure.''.
       (b) Elimination of Grants Program for Repetitive Insurance 
     Claims Properties.--Chapter I of the National Flood Insurance 
     Act of 1968 is amended by striking section 1323 (42 U.S.C. 
     4030).
       (c) Elimination of Pilot Program for Mitigation of Severe 
     Repetitive Loss Properties.--Chapter III of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 is amended by striking section 
     1361A (42 U.S.C. 4102a).
       (d) National Flood Insurance Fund.--Section 1310(a) of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4017(a)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (6), by inserting ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (7), by striking the semicolon and 
     inserting a period; and
       (3) by striking paragraphs (8) and (9).
       (e) National Flood Mitigation Fund.--Section 1367 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4104d) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(1) in each fiscal year, from the National Flood 
     Insurance Fund in amounts not exceeding $90,000,000 to remain 
     available until expended, of which--
       ``(A) not more than $40,000,000 shall be available pursuant 
     to subsection (a) of this section only for assistance 
     described in section 1366(a)(1);
       ``(B) not more than $40,000,000 shall be available pursuant 
     to subsection (a) of this section only for assistance 
     described in section 1366(a)(2); and
       ``(C) not more than $10,000,000 shall be available pursuant 
     to subsection (a) of this section only for assistance 
     described in section 1366(a)(3).''.
       (B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``section 1366(i)'' and 
     inserting ``section 1366(e)'';
       (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``sections 1366 and 
     1323'' and inserting ``section 1366'';
       (3) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections 
     (f) and (g), respectively; and
       (4) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new 
     subsections:
       ``(d) Prohibition on Offsetting Collections.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, amounts 
     made available pursuant to this section shall not be subject 
     to offsetting collections through premium rates for flood 
     insurance coverage under this title.
       ``(e) Continued Availability and Reallocation.--Any amounts 
     made available pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of 
     subsection (b)(1) that are not used in any fiscal year shall 
     continue to be available for the purposes specified in such 
     subparagraph of subsection (b)(1) pursuant to which such 
     amounts were made available, unless the Administrator 
     determines that reallocation of such unused amounts to meet 
     demonstrated need for other mitigation activities under 
     section 1366 is in the best interest of the National Flood 
     Insurance Fund.''.
       (f) Increased Cost of Compliance Coverage.--Section 
     1304(b)(4) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 4011(b)(4)) is amended--
       (1) by striking subparagraph (B); and
       (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E) as 
     subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D), respectively.


                 amendment no. 9 offered by mr. palazzo

       Page 32, line 6, before the period insert the following: 
     ``, and includes an adequate number of representatives from 
     the States with coastline on the Gulf of Mexico and other 
     States containing areas identified by the Administrator of 
     the Federal Emergency Management Agency as at high-risk for 
     flooding or special flood hazard areas''.


           amendment no. 12 offered by mr. burton of indiana

       Page 50, line 20, insert ``TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS'' after 
     ``NOTIFICATION''.
       Page 51, after line 11, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 16. NOTIFICATION AND APPEAL OF MAP CHANGES; NOTIFICATION 
                   TO COMMUNITIES OF ESTABLISHMENT OF FLOOD 
                   ELEVATIONS.

       Section 1363 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 
     (42 U.S.C. 4104) is amended by striking the section 
     designation and all that follows through the end of 
     subsection (a) and inserting the following:
       ``Sec. 1363. (a) In establishing projected flood elevations 
     for land use purposes with respect to any community pursuant 
     to section 1361, the Director shall first propose such 
     determinations--
       ``(1) by providing the chief executive officer of each 
     community affected by the proposed elevations, by certified 
     mail, with a return receipt requested, notice of the 
     elevations, including a copy of the maps for the elevations 
     for such community and a statement explaining the process 
     under this section to appeal for changes in such elevations;
       ``(2) by causing notice of such elevations to be published 
     in the Federal Register, which notice shall include 
     information sufficient to identify the elevation 
     determinations and the communities affected, information 
     explaining how to obtain copies of the elevations, and a 
     statement explaining the process under this section to appeal 
     for changes in the elevations;
       ``(3) by publishing in a prominent local newspaper the 
     elevations, a description of the appeals process for flood 
     determinations, and the mailing address and telephone number 
     of a person the owner may contact for more information or to 
     initiate an appeal; and
       ``(4) by providing written notification, by first class 
     mail, to each owner of real property affected by the proposed 
     elevations of--
       ``(A) the status of such property, both prior to and after 
     the effective date of the proposed determination, with 
     respect to flood zone and flood insurance requirements under 
     this Act and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973;
       ``(B) the process under this section to appeal a flood 
     elevation determination; and
       ``(C) the mailing address and phone number of a person the 
     owner may contact for more information or to initiate an 
     appeal.''.


                amendment no. 15 offered by mr. cuellar

       Page 56, after line 9, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 20. ENHANCED COMMUNICATION WITH CERTAIN COMMUNITIES 
                   DURING MAP UPDATING PROCESS.

       Section 1360 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 
     (42 U.S.C. 4101), as amended by the preceding provisions of 
     this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(n) Enhanced Communication With Certain Communities 
     During Map Updating Process.--In updating flood insurance 
     maps under this section, the Administrator shall communicate 
     with communities located in areas where flood insurance rate 
     maps have not been updated in 20 years or more and the 
     appropriate State emergency agencies to resolve outstanding 
     issues, provide technical assistance, and disseminate all 
     necessary information to reduce the prevalence of outdated 
     maps in flood-prone areas.''.


                amendment no. 18 offered by mr. palazzo

       Page 57, after line 2, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 21. INFORMATION REGARDING MULTIPLE PERILS CLAIMS.

       Section 1345 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 
     (42 U.S.C. 4081) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(d) Information Regarding Multiple Perils Claims.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), if an insured 
     having flood insurance coverage

[[Page H4897]]

     under a policy issued under the program under this title by 
     the Administrator or a company, insurer, or entity offering 
     flood insurance coverage under such program (in this 
     subsection referred to as a `participating company') has wind 
     or other homeowners coverage from any company, insurer, or 
     other entity covering property covered by such flood 
     insurance, in the case of damage to such property that may 
     have been caused by flood or by wind, the Administrator and 
     the participating company, upon the request of the insured, 
     shall provide to the insured, within 30 days of such 
     request--
       ``(A) a copy of the estimate of structure damage;
       ``(B) proofs of loss;
       ``(C) any expert or engineering reports or documents 
     commissioned by or relied upon by the Administrator or 
     participating company in determining whether the damage was 
     caused by flood or any other peril; and
       ``(D) the Administrator's or the participating company's 
     final determination on the claim.
       ``(2) Timing.--Paragraph (1) shall apply only with respect 
     to a request described in such paragraph made by an insured 
     after the Administrator or the participating company, or 
     both, as applicable, have issued a final decision on the 
     flood claim involved and resolution of all appeals with 
     respect to such claim.''.


              amendment no. 21 offered by mr. luetkemeyer

       Page 70, after line 5, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 27. REPORT ON FLOOD-IN-PROGRESS DETERMINATION.

       The Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management 
     Agency shall review the processes and procedures for 
     determining that a flood event has commenced or is in 
     progress for purposes of flood insurance coverage made 
     available under the national flood insurance program under 
     the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and for providing 
     public notification that such an event has commenced or is in 
     progress. In such review, the Administrator shall take into 
     consideration the effects and implications that weather 
     conditions, such as rainfall, snowfall, projected snowmelt, 
     existing water levels, and other conditions have on the 
     determination that a flood event has commenced or is in 
     progress. Not later than the expiration of the 6-month period 
     beginning upon the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Administrator shall submit a report to the Congress setting 
     forth the results and conclusions of the review undertaken 
     pursuant to this section and any actions undertaken or 
     proposed actions to be taken to provide for a more precise 
     and technical determination that a flooding event has 
     commenced or is in progress.


                amendment no. 22 offered by mr. canseco

       On page 70, after line 5, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 27. STUDY ON REPAYING FLOOD INSURANCE DEBT.

       Not later than the expiration of the 6-month period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     shall submit a report to the Congress setting forth a plan 
     for repaying within 10 years all amounts, including any 
     amounts previously borrowed but not yet repaid, owed pursuant 
     to clause (2) of subsection (a) of section 1309 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)(2)).


           amendment no. 24 offered by mr. walz of minnesota

       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 28. AUTHORITY FOR THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS TO PROVIDE 
                   SPECIALIZED OR TECHNICAL SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, upon the request of a State or local government, the 
     Secretary of the Army may evaluate a levee system that was 
     designed or constructed by the Secretary for the purposes of 
     the National Flood Insurance Program established under 
     chapter 1 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 4011 et seq.).
       (b) Requirements.--A levee system evaluation under 
     subsection (a) shall--
       (1) comply with applicable regulations related to areas 
     protected by a levee system;
       (2) be carried out in accordance with such procedures as 
     the Secretary, in consultation with the Administrator of the 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency, may establish; and
       (3) be carried out only if the State or local government 
     agrees to reimburse the Secretary for all cost associated 
     with the performance of the activities.


                      Amendment No. 8, as Modified

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that amendment 
No. 8 be modified in the form I have placed at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 23, line 17, strike ``section 1361A(b)'' and insert 
     ``section 1366(j)''.
       Strike line 10 on page 47 and all that follows through page 
     48, line 15.
       Strike line 16 on page 48 and all that follows through page 
     49, line 19 and insert the following new section:

     SEC. 12. MITIGATION ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Mitigation Assistance Grants.--Section 1366 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4104c) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking the last sentence and 
     inserting the following: ``Such financial assistance shall be 
     made available--
       ``(1) to States and communities in the form of grants under 
     this section for carrying out mitigation activities;
       ``(2) to States and communities in the form of grants under 
     this section for carrying out mitigation activities that 
     reduce flood damage to severe repetitive loss structures; and
       ``(3) to property owners in the form of direct grants under 
     this section for carrying out mitigation activities that 
     reduce flood damage to individual structures for which 2 or 
     more claim payments for losses have been made under flood 
     insurance coverage under this title if the Administrator, 
     after consultation with the State and community, determines 
     that neither the State nor community in which such a 
     structure is located has the capacity to manage such 
     grants.''.
       (2) by striking subsection (b);
       (3) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking ``flood risk'' and inserting ``multi-
     hazard'';
       (B) by striking ``provides protection against'' and 
     inserting ``examines reduction of''; and
       (C) by redesignating such subsection as subsection (b);
       (4) by striking subsection (d);
       (5) in subsection (e)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking the paragraph designation 
     and all that follows through the end of the first sentence 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Requirement of consistency with approved mitigation 
     plan.--Amounts provided under this section may be used only 
     for mitigation activities that are consistent with mitigation 
     plans that are approved by the Administrator and identified 
     under subparagraph (4).'';
       (B) by striking paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) and inserting 
     the following new paragraphs:
       ``(2) Requirements of technical feasibility, cost 
     effectiveness, and interest of nfif.--The Administrator may 
     approve only mitigation activities that the Administrator 
     determines are technically feasible and cost-effective and in 
     the interest of, and represent savings to, the National Flood 
     Insurance Fund. In making such determinations, the 
     Administrator shall take into consideration recognized 
     benefits that are difficult to quantify.
       ``(3) Priority for mitigation assistance.--In providing 
     grants under this section for mitigation activities, the 
     Administrator shall give priority for funding to activities 
     that the Administrator determines will result in the greatest 
     savings to the National Flood Insurance Fund, including 
     activities for--
       ``(A) severe repetitive loss structures;
       ``(B) repetitive loss structures; and
       ``(C) other subsets of structures as the Administrator may 
     establish.'';
       (C) in paragraph (5)--
       (i) by striking all of the matter that precedes 
     subparagraph (A) and inserting the following:
       ``(4) Eligible activities.--Eligible activities may 
     include--'';
       (ii) by striking subparagraphs (E) and (H);
       (iii) by redesignating subparagraphs (D), (F), and (G) as 
     subparagraphs (E), (G), and (H);
       (iv) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(D) elevation, relocation, and floodproofing of utilities 
     (including equipment that serve structures);'';
       (v) by inserting after subparagraph (E), as so redesignated 
     by clause (iii) of this subparagraph, the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(F) the development or update of State, local, or Indian 
     tribal mitigation plans which meet the planning criteria 
     established by the Administrator, except that the amount from 
     grants under this section that may be used under this 
     subparagraph may not exceed $50,000 for any mitigation plan 
     of a State or $25,000 for any mitigation plan of a local 
     government or Indian tribe;'';
       (vi) in subparagraph (H); as so redesignated by clause 
     (iii) of this subparagraph, by striking ``and'' at the end; 
     and
       (vii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
       ``(I) other mitigation activities not described in 
     subparagraphs (A) through (G) or the regulations issued under 
     subparagraph (H), that are described in the mitigation plan 
     of a State, community, or Indian tribe; and
       ``(J) personnel costs for State staff that provide 
     technical assistance to communities to identify eligible 
     activities, to develop grant applications, and to implement 
     grants awarded under this section, not to exceed $50,000 per 
     State in any Federal fiscal year, so long as the State 
     applied for and was awarded at least $1,000,000 in grants 
     available under this section in the prior Federal fiscal 
     year; the requirements of subsections (d)(1) and (d)(2) shall 
     not apply to the activity under this subparagraph.'';
       (D) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Eligibility of demolition and rebuilding of 
     properties.--The Administrator shall consider as an eligible 
     activity the demolition and rebuilding of properties to at 
     least base flood elevation or greater, if required by the 
     Administrator or if required by any State regulation or local 
     ordinance, and in accordance with criteria established by the 
     Administrator.''; and

[[Page H4898]]

       (E) by redesignating such subsection as subsection (c);
       (6) by striking subsections (f), (g), and (h) and inserting 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Matching Requirement.--The Administrator may provide 
     grants for eligible mitigation activities as follows:
       ``(1) Severe repetitive loss structures.--In the case of 
     mitigation activities to severe repetitive loss structures, 
     in an amount up to 100 percent of all eligible costs.
       ``(2) Repetitive loss structures.--In the case of 
     mitigation activities to repetitive loss structures, in an 
     amount up to 90 percent of all eligible costs.
       ``(3) Other mitigation activities.-- In the case of all 
     other mitigation activities, in an amount up to 75 percent of 
     all eligible costs.'';
       (7) in subsection (i)--
       (A) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by striking ``certified under subsection (g)'' and 
     inserting ``required under subsection (d)''; and
       (ii) by striking ``3 times the amount'' and inserting ``the 
     amount''; and
       (B) by redesignating such subsection as subsection (e);
       (8) in subsection (j)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Riegle Community 
     Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994'' and 
     inserting ``Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011'';
       (B) by redesignating such subsection as subsection (f); and
       (9) by striking subsections (k) and (m) and inserting the 
     following new subsections:
       ``(g) Failure to Make Grant Award Within 5 Years.--For any 
     application for a grant under this section for which the 
     Administrator fails to make a grant award within 5 years of 
     the date of application, the grant application shall be 
     considered to be denied and any funding amounts allocated for 
     such grant applications shall remain in the National Flood 
     Mitigation Fund under section 1367 of this title and shall be 
     made available for grants under this section.
       ``(h) Limitation on Funding for Mitigation Activities for 
     Severe Repetitive Loss Structures.--The amount used pursuant 
     to section 1310(a)(8) in any fiscal year may not exceed 
     $40,000,000 and shall remain available until expended.
       ``(i) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the 
     following definitions shall apply:
       ``(1) Community.--The term `community' means--
       ``(A) a political subdivision that--
       ``(i) has zoning and building code jurisdiction over a 
     particular area having special flood hazards, and
       ``(ii) is participating in the national flood insurance 
     program; or
       ``(B) a political subdivision of a State, or other 
     authority, that is designated by political subdivisions, all 
     of which meet the requirements of subparagraph (A), to 
     administer grants for mitigation activities for such 
     political subdivisions.
       ``(2) Repetitive loss structure.--The term `repetitive loss 
     structure' has the meaning given such term in section 1370.
       ``(3) Severe repetitive loss structure.--The term `severe 
     repetitive loss structure' means a structure that--
       ``(A) is covered under a contract for flood insurance made 
     available under this title; and
       ``(B) has incurred flood-related damage--
       ``(i) for which 4 or more separate claims payments have 
     been made under flood insurance coverage under this title, 
     with the amount of each such claim exceeding $15,000, and 
     with the cumulative amount of such claims payments exceeding 
     $60,000; or
       ``(ii) for which at least 2 separate claims payments have 
     been made under such coverage, with the cumulative amount of 
     such claims exceeding the value of the insured structure.''.
       (b) Elimination of Grants Program for Repetitive Insurance 
     Claims Properties.--Chapter I of the National Flood Insurance 
     Act of 1968 is amended by striking section 1323 (42 U.S.C. 
     4030).
       (c) Elimination of Pilot Program for Mitigation of Severe 
     Repetitive Loss Properties.--Chapter III of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 is amended by striking section 
     1361A (42 U.S.C. 4102a).
       (d) National Flood Insurance Fund.--Section 1310(a) of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4017(a)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (6), by inserting ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (7), by striking the semicolon and 
     inserting a period; and
       (3) by striking paragraphs (8) and (9).
       (e) National Flood Mitigation Fund.--Section 1367 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4104d) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(1) in each fiscal year, from the National Flood 
     Insurance Fund in amounts not exceeding $90,000,000 to remain 
     available until expended, of which--
       ``(A) not more than $40,000,000 shall be available pursuant 
     to subsection (a) of this section only for assistance 
     described in section 1366(a)(1);
       ``(B) not more than $40,000,000 shall be available pursuant 
     to subsection (a) of this section only for assistance 
     described in section 1366(a)(2); and
       ``(C) not more than $10,000,000 shall be available pursuant 
     to subsection (a) of this section only for assistance 
     described in section 1366(a)(3).''.
       (B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``section 1366(i)'' and 
     inserting ``section 1366(e)'';
       (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``sections 1366 and 
     1323'' and inserting ``section 1366'';
       (3) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections 
     (f) and (g), respectively; and
       (4) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new 
     subsections:
       ``(d) Prohibition on Offsetting Collections.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, amounts 
     made available pursuant to this section shall not be subject 
     to offsetting collections through premium rates for flood 
     insurance coverage under this title.
       ``(e) Continued Availability and Reallocation.--Any amounts 
     made available pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of 
     subsection (b)(1) that are not used in any fiscal year shall 
     continue to be available for the purposes specified in such 
     subparagraph of subsection (b)(1) pursuant to which such 
     amounts were made available, unless the Administrator 
     determines that reallocation of such unused amounts to meet 
     demonstrated need for other mitigation activities under 
     section 1366 is in the best interest of the National Flood 
     Insurance Fund.''.
       (f) Increased Cost of Compliance Coverage.--Section 
     1304(b)(4) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 4011(b)(4)) is amended--
       (1) by striking subparagraph (B); and
       (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E) as 
     subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D), respectively.

  Mrs. BIGGERT (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent to dispense with the reading of the modification.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is modified.
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentlewoman 
from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Capuano) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Illinois.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, this is a bipartisan package of 
amendments that we are accepting. I urge my colleagues to support the 
amendments en bloc.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to 
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui).
  Ms. MATSUI. I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for yielding me 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to commend Chairwoman Biggert and Ranking Member 
Waters for their leadership and their support for my amendment to phase 
in higher flood insurance rates when preferred risk policies are no 
longer available in a community.
  I represent the city of Sacramento, which is home to both the 
American and Sacramento rivers. After New Orleans, we are the most at-
risk river city in our Nation.
  Since Hurricane Katrina, more than 25,000 homeowners in my district 
have been remapped, and for them flood insurance is now mandatory.
  Their flood insurance costs increased from the PRP rate of $350 to 
over $1,350 overnight.

                              {time}  1510

  The sticker shock to a homeowner, whether it be a senior citizen on a 
fixed income or a family struggling to make ends meet, is unreasonable.
  My amendment would simply raise the cost of flood insurance from 
remapped areas from the PRP rate to the full price rate over a period 
of 5 years. Specifically, my amendment would start the phase-in for 
homeowners at their current PRP rate. Each year after that, the price 
of flood insurance would rise by 20 percent until it reaches its full 
price in year 5.
  My amendment will save the average policyholder in a remapped area 
about $843 over 5 years while not impacting the solvency of the NFIP. I 
believe this to be a fair and equitable way forward, especially in 
these trying economic times.
  Again, I thank Chairwoman Biggert and Ranking Member Waters for their 
leadership. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this 
amendment.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, this en bloc amendment is perfectly fine 
with us, and I urge its adoption.
  I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo).

[[Page H4899]]

  Mr. PALAZZO. I would like to thank Chairwoman Biggert for yielding 
and for her leadership on this issue.
  I rise today in support of the reauthorization of the National Flood 
Insurance Reform Act. As a representative of the Katrina-devastated 
Mississippi gulf coast, I understand both the importance of the 
National Flood Insurance Program but also the need for its reform.
  I have introduced two amendments to the bill which will be a part of 
the en bloc amendment. The first calls for the newly created Technical 
Mapping Advisory Council to include members from coastal or other high-
risk flood areas. This assures that the advisory council has members 
that are not just technical experts but have experienced firsthand the 
hardship and heartbreak catastrophic flooding and damage causes 
families and communities.
  My other amendment allows any claimant to obtain from the 
administrator any engineering reports or other documents relied on in 
determining whether the damage was caused by flood or any other peril. 
When the FEMA administrator or participating company have the task of 
determining whether a home's damage was caused by wind or by water, the 
policyholder would now have the right to request those documents relied 
upon in making that determination.
  It is my belief that transparency in government is important, 
especially for policyholders. For those who may have lost their 
property, they have the right to know the details in the determination 
of their claim.
  I urge your support of both of my amendments as well as the full 
passage of H.R. 1309.
  Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of Representatives 
Terry and Berg's amendment to H.R. 1309.
  As you may know, the Missouri River Basin is in the midst of record 
flooding. In order to determine a trigger date for a flood-in-progress, 
FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program sent an examiner to Garrison 
Dam in North Dakota at the end of May on a fact-finding mission. After 
looking at the dam and both sides of the river, the adjuster determined 
a flood was in progress and declared June 1st as the trigger date for 
the entire Missouri River Basin.
  The flooding along the Missouri River stretches more than one 
thousand miles and is affecting multiple states. Very few homes in 
South Dakota were underwater on June 1st, yet this trigger date is used 
to determine if flood insurance policies are valid, regardless of 
location and when flooding actually began.
  Not all my constituents along the Missouri River have flood 
insurance. Some, however, had the foresight to purchase a policy prior 
to being underwater, and, more importantly, prior to FEMA's declaration 
that June 1st was the universal flood-in-progress date. Flood insurance 
requires a 30-day wait period before the policy becomes effective. 
Individuals who purchased flood insurance on May 1st will be covered 
for their losses in this flood, but those who waited until May 2nd are 
out of luck. This amendment rectifies this problem. It would allow for 
reasonable flexibility for policy holders when a universal trigger date 
is used for such a vast multi-state event.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I urge support for the amendments en bloc.
  I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc, as 
modified, offered by the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).
  The amendments en bloc, as modified, were agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Schock

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mr. SCHOCK. Mr. Chairman, as the designee for Mr. Bachus, I offer an 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 7, strike the dash in line 3 and all that follows 
     through line 10 and insert ``designation of the area as 
     having special flood hazards in a timely manner under section 
     1363.''.
       Page 7, after line 21 insert the following:
       ``(5) Additional extension for communities making more than 
     adequate progress on flood protection system.--
       ``(A) Extension.--
       ``(i) Authority.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     in the case of an eligible area for which the Administrator 
     has, pursuant to paragraph (4), extended the period of 
     effectiveness of the finding under paragraph (1) for the 
     area, upon a request submitted by a local government 
     authority having jurisdiction over any portion of the 
     eligible area, if the Administrator finds that more than 
     adequate progress has been made on the construction of a 
     flood protection system for such area, as determined in 
     accordance with the last sentence of section 1307(e) of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4014(e)), the 
     Administrator may, in the discretion of the Administrator, 
     further extend the period during which the finding under 
     paragraph (1) shall be effective for such area for an 
     additional 12 months.
       ``(ii) Limit.--For any eligible area, the cumulative number 
     of extensions under this subparagraph may not exceed 2.
       ``(B) Exclusion for new mortgages.--
       ``(i) Exclusion.--Any extension under subparagraph (A) of 
     this paragraph of a finding under paragraph (1) shall not be 
     effective with respect to any excluded property after the 
     origination, increase, extension, or renewal of the loan 
     referred to in clause (ii)(II) for the property.
       ``(ii) Excluded properties.--For purposes of this 
     subparagraph, the term `excluded property' means any improved 
     real estate or mobile home--

       ``(I) that is located in an eligible area; and
       ``(II) for which, during the period that any extension 
     under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph of a finding under 
     paragraph (1) is otherwise in effect for the eligible area in 
     which such property is located--

       ``(aa) a loan that is secured by the property is 
     originated; or
       ``(bb) any existing loan that is secured by the property is 
     increased, extended, or renewed.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Schock) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. SCHOCK. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of amendment No. 
2, drafted by the chairman and my friend, Mr. Bachus, to help solve a 
problem that is prevalent in my district as well as many rural 
districts across the heartland.
  As you know, this flood insurance issue affects every town, but 
especially those along the riverbanks. And FEMA's new requirements that 
require many of these small towns to make necessary improvements in 
their upgrades of their levees and dams require significant investment, 
investment that America's small businesses, family farms, and private 
properties will have to come up with the revenue to pay for.
  This amendment in no way seeks to get anyone off the hook but, 
rather, to give them the necessary time given the large investments 
that many of these small towns will have to make, given the economic 
times that we are in right now, and recognizing that many of these 
small towns will require more than the 3 years as is allowed in the 
underlying bill to make the necessary improvements.
  It does require, however, in years 4 and 5, which this amendment 
allows for an extension of the years 4 and 5, to allow to make the 
improvements. But those communities have to show stated improvement or 
at least progress toward the final necessary improvements in years 4 
and 5 in order for them to get the necessary extension.
  So I think it makes sense. It's a pretty commonsense amendment.
  And I just want to say thank you personally to Chairman Bachus for 
his work with other members of my delegation in Illinois and, I know, 
those along the Mississippi and other waterways whose towns are feeling 
the pain of many of these new unfunded mandates put forward by FEMA.
  With that, I would urge passage of amendment No. 2.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, 
though I am not opposed.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CAPUANO. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Let me thank my friend Mr. Capuano for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to first thank the chair of the 
subcommittee, the gentlelady from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert), and also the 
ranking member, Maxine Waters, as well as Chairman Bachus and Ranking 
Member Frank of the full committee, and also my friend Mr. Schock and 
Mr. Shimkus from Illinois. We all worked on this amendment together. 
It's a good amendment.

[[Page H4900]]

  As I think Mr. Schock just explained, the Bachus amendment gives the 
administrator the authority to allow for a possible fourth and fifth 
suspension of the mandatory purchase for certain communities that are 
making adequate progress in construction of the flood protection 
system.
  It's a commonsense amendment. It's a bipartisan agreement. I urge its 
adoption, and I not only support the amendment but the underlying bill 
as well.
  Mr. SCHOCK. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
author of the amendment, the chairman of the committee, Spencer Bachus.
  Mr. BACHUS. I appreciate the remarks of the gentleman from Illinois.
  I believe this is a noncontroversial amendment. It will encourage 
local governments to undertake repairs and remedial efforts. And I 
believe it is a fair, equitable change in the bill to reward local and 
State governments for their efforts.
  With that, I would recommend passage of the amendment.
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Schock).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Ms. Speier

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 11, after line 22, insert the following new 
     subsection:
       (d) Penalties for Requiring Purchase of Coverage Exceeding 
     Minimum Mandatory Purchase Requirement.--Paragraph (2) of 
     section 102(f) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 
     (42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)(2)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)(iii), by striking ``or'' at the 
     end;
       (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) in connection with the making, increasing, extending, 
     servicing, or renewing of any loan, requiring the purchase of 
     flood insurance coverage under the National Flood Insurance 
     Act of 1968, or purchasing such coverage pursuant to 
     subsection (e)(2), in an amount in excess of the minimum 
     amount required under subsections (a) and (b) of this 
     section.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Speier) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.

                              {time}  1520

  Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to present this amendment. 
This actually was adopted by a voice vote in the Financial Services 
Committee in 2010; and my good friend and colleague, Congresswoman 
Biggert, may recall it. It was something that came up in my district 
where an elderly woman, living on Social Security, had a mortgage 
balance on her home of $13,000; but because she was being included in a 
newly mapped flood zone, her bank required her to purchase the full 
$250,000 in flood insurance at a cost of more than $2,400 per year.
  I would venture to say that we don't see ourselves as being in the 
insurance business by choice. We are in the flood insurance business 
out of necessity, and it would seem to me that it doesn't make a lot of 
sense to impose an obligation on homeowners to purchase insurance that 
exceeds the actual cost of their mortgage, especially when we note that 
the average flood damage claims are anywhere from $25,000 to $35,000. 
So to require someone who has a $13,000 loan balance to purchase flood 
insurance for $250,000 and pay a fee, a yearly premium of $2,400, is 
just, I think, unacceptable; and I would think my colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle would like to do something for those people who have 
been responsible, pay down their mortgages, and have small balances.
  This particular amendment makes it a violation for a lender, whose 
only interest in the property is the amount of the outstanding mortgage 
indebtedness, to use the National Flood Insurance Program to require a 
homeowner to purchase more than the legally required amount of flood 
insurance, an amount equal to the outstanding principal balance. 
Nothing, however, would prohibit a homeowner who wished to purchase 
more coverage from doing so, and nothing would preclude a mortgage 
lender from including such a requirement in the mortgage contract up 
front, as long as it was fully disclosed. In both cases, the homeowner 
would be able to make a choice, and this would be full disclosure as 
well.
  In California, where we have mandatory auto insurance, once a car 
owner has discharged their debt on the car, they are no longer 
obligated to carry coverage for the damage to their own car, only the 
liability insurance if they crash into someone else's car. This 
amendment is very consistent with giving people a choice as well. 
Again, I offer this amendment and ask for its support.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I claim time in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Illinois is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  This amendment would impose penalties against lenders who require 
borrowers to maintain flood insurance in an amount greater than the 
outstanding principal balance of the loan.
  Limiting the amount of coverage to the unpaid principal balance 
leaves consumers at risk of having to incur the costs of repair on 
their own and, additionally, is not reflective of the current state of 
industry practices. In fact, with the exception of VA loans, limiting 
insurance to the unpaid principal balance is not recommended under 
existing law.
  Consumers, not lenders, will bear the financial brunt of a disaster. 
Limiting flood insurance to the unpaid principal balance may protect 
the lender's financial interest in the property; however, it doesn't 
protect the consumer's equity and investment in the property.
  NFIP establishes the minimum amount of coverage required at the 
lesser of the outstanding balance of the loan or the maximum available 
NFIP coverage, which today is $250,000 for residential and $500,000 for 
commercial properties.
  The standard NFIP dwelling flood policy requires that one to two 
family owner-occupied dwellings be insured for the replacement value in 
order for losses to be paid for the cost to repair or replace the 
property. If these properties are not insured for at least 80 percent 
of the replacement value at the time of loss, the policyholder cannot 
obtain the full benefits of the policy and may not receive sufficient 
funds to repair or replace the property damaged by flood.
  Guidelines issued by Federal regulators encourage and authorize 
lenders to require flood insurance at replacement cost, not to exceed 
NFIP maximum available coverage. The guidelines also urge lenders to 
follow the same rules in calculating flood coverage as they do in 
calculating hazard coverage, where standard industry practice is to 
require coverage at replacement cost.
  In the case of condominiums, the guidelines issued by Federal 
regulators require lenders to ensure that flood protection has been 
obtained for the replacement value of the property improvements, not to 
exceed the NFIP maximum limits.
  I would request a ``no'' vote on the Speier amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California 
will be postponed.


                  Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Flake

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mr. FLAKE. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:


[[Page H4901]]


       Page 14, line 24, strike the second semicolon and insert 
     ``; and''.
       Strike paragraph (3) of section 4(c) (page 15, lines 1 and 
     2).
       Page 15, line 5, strike ``(8)'' and insert ``(6)''.
       Page 15, line 6, strike ``(2), (3), (4), (5), and (6)'' and 
     insert ``(2), (3), and (4)''.
       Strike subsection (d) of section 4 (page 16, line 1 and all 
     that follows through page 18, line 10).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. I thank the Chair.
  This amendment would strike additional flood-related coverage 
provided in the underlying bill for business interruption and cost-of-
living expenses. Specifically, this amendment would prohibit FEMA from 
offering individuals up to $5,000 for living expenses and up to $20,000 
for interruption of business expenses.
  I understand that the committee worked to ensure that the inclusion 
of this additional coverage would be provided at fully actuarial rates, 
but let me remind this body that Congress does not have a great track 
record when it comes to pricing risks. One has to look no further than 
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to see an example of that, or just look at 
this program, itself.
  The National Flood Insurance Program is about $18 billion in the red. 
Let me say that again. We have a Federal flood insurance program that 
currently owes the Treasury Department nearly $18 billion, so we 
shouldn't take at face value the notion that any new coverage that's 
offered is priced at fully actuarial rates.
  This expansion of coverage will only increase taxpayer liability, 
which is the last thing that this Congress ought to do with a program 
so severely in debt and with a country so severely in debt. Instead, we 
should be passing legislation to narrow the scope of the NFIP, not to 
expand it.
  Simply put, any reform to the NFIP should be moving toward 
privatization, and I am sure this belief is shared by a number of my 
colleagues. Voting against this amendment is a vote to expand the 
current National Flood Insurance Program. Again, a vote against this 
amendment is a vote to expand the current flood insurance program, a 
program that is currently $18 billion in debt to the U.S. Treasury.
  My understanding is that private market participants are hesitant to 
offer this type of coverage because it is not profitable for them to do 
so. I'm not sure I've ever seen an instance where government 
involvement in the market incentivized the private sector to compete. 
In fact, according to testimony from Taxpayers for Common Sense:
  ``We have learned from Federal flood insurance itself that the best 
way to stifle a private market is to have the Federal Government 
provide the same product.'' That simply makes sense.
  When you have a Federal Government borrowing 41 cents on the dollar, 
the last thing we need to do is expand an insurance program that is 
already $18 billion in the red. Again, voting for this amendment isn't 
to cut this program--I wish it were--but it is simply to not allow the 
program to expand further.

                              {time}  1530

  FEMA estimated that had this same policy been enacted in 2005 before 
Katrina and Rita hit, combined losses from additional expenses and 
business interruption would have been about $600 million in net losses. 
If you consider the increase in policies since 2005, they estimated if 
we had another 2005-like year, this additional coverage would result in 
$850 million in net losses just for 2011. We can't afford to do that, 
Mr. Chairman.
  If there is no private market for this type of coverage, we ought to 
understand why there is no private market, and having government enter 
the marketplace will only ensure there is no private market for it. We 
shouldn't be comforted by the notion that we will hear, I am sure, that 
the premiums will be priced at fully actuarial rates. That's saying 
that there's no private market out there, government has to be 
involved, but we have priced it as if the private sector were involved. 
Anybody who believes that, I have a bridge somewhere to sell you. 
Government entrance into this type of marketplace is simply not right. 
We shouldn't be doing it. And to my colleagues who think that we have a 
debt problem today, think what problem we will have if we have another 
year like 2005.
  According to FEMA's only projections, it could result in $850 million 
in net losses. So I would urge adoption of the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), the chairman of the full 
committee.
  Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I don't think anyone in this Congress is 
more sincere on cutting government spending than Mr. Flake. I believe 
he comes here with pure motivation. I would simply say this to him and 
my colleagues: this is an issue that we carefully considered. It was 
first proposed as a result of Katrina and the losses there. As he said 
correctly, this program is $16 billion in the red. After Katrina, the 
Federal Government through FEMA, SBA and others, paid out several 
billion dollars not on the flood insurance program but paid out an 
estimated $6 billion or $7 billion to businesses because of their 
losses from business interruption and temporary shelter and living 
expenses.
  In 2006, really as a result of that, the subcommittee chairman, 
Richard Baker, held hearings and determined that business interruption 
and cost-of-living coverage should be included. It has passed the 
House, but we have actually since then never passed a flood insurance 
reform bill.
  As all of us know, and I think all of us agree, the legislation 
before us today has already been scored as a $4.2 billion savings. The 
reason that it saves money, the reason that it takes a program that is 
costing taxpayers money every day is because it requires a risk-based 
premium. Now, beyond that, it also requires reinsurance if the risk-
based premium proves insufficient. So it has a cushion.
  It also says that if private insurers will offer this plan, then the 
government will not. It makes a finding that a competitive private 
market for such coverage does not exist. That was actually based on 
2006 and again last year. It certifies that the National Flood 
Insurance Program will offer such coverage with the prohibition that it 
is supplemented by taxpayer money from the Treasury. This was a concern 
that many of us, including Mr. Flake, you know, had, that the taxpayer 
would end up subsidizing this.
  This legislation with this provision actually scores as a $4.2 
billion savings over the next 10 years. Actually, I think it could be 
greater than that because, as Mr. Flake said, we don't know what is 
going to happen next year or the year after that. We do know this: we 
know when we have one of these, and in fact this year is a great 
example, when we have four $1 billion disasters, what did this Congress 
do? It appropriated disaster assistance. And that included 
reimbursement for living expenses and business interruption. Not only 
that, but the SBA, the Agricultural Department and I can't imagine how 
many others that we don't know about, FEMA, as a realistic matter, they 
are handing out checks every day when we have these disasters. Local 
and State governments are doing the same.

  Why not, instead of this being handed out, why not have the people 
who own the businesses, who are living there, why not offer them 
coverage and let them pay the premium and let them share the loss? 
There are many places in the West where a flood, it would be almost 
impossible. There are many places in this country where a flood is 
simply not a problem. Why should those people be required to pay 
taxpayer money for what has become basically the Federal Government 
coming in and reimbursing everyone that doesn't have insurance? That is 
a question that we have asked.
  We have just had the largest outbreak of tornadoes and death in the 
United States in Alabama. I have heard people say we have a situation 
where

[[Page H4902]]

there is no insurance and the Federal Government comes in and says, if 
you have insurance, you have got it covered; and if you don't, we'll 
make it up. I don't like that idea. I think it encourages people not to 
have coverage.
  This offers them coverage. The next step is telling them no to these 
others program; you should have had insurance.
  Mr. CAPUANO. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will 
be postponed.


              Amendment No. 5 Offered by Ms. Ros-Lehtinen

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 19, strike lines 10 to 13.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentlewoman 
from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I thank the chairman.
  My amendment is quite simple. It removes the 100 percent increase and 
possible flood insurance rate increases from the underlying bill. 
Currently, rate increases are capped at 10 percent a year; yet this 
bill would double that to 20 percent per year.
  Homeowners in this down-turned economy can little afford to have this 
looming possibility. One in four Floridians is covered under the 
National Flood Insurance Program, and they collectively pay nearly $900 
million in premiums per year. Since 1978, Florida policyholders have 
paid $14.1 billion in premiums and have received only $3.6 billion in 
payments. That is 3.9 times more in premiums than they received in 
claims.
  Our residents, usually in high-risk flood areas, pay 
disproportionately more in premiums than they will likely ever see in 
payments on claims. Despite this fact, Floridians were near the cap of 
a 10 percent increase in the premium rates from the years 2009 and 
2010, while the average national increase during the same time was 8 
percent.

                              {time}  1540

  Despite these problems, the residents in my area say they need this 
program, but they need this cap where it is. People outside of at-risk 
areas file over 20 percent of NFIP claims and receive one-third of 
disaster assistance for flooding. Floridians, my constituents, know 
that the doubling of the amount that FEMA can charge for their flood 
insurance is aimed at them.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, which is one that will 
prevent unnecessary and unprecedented rate hikes for hardworking 
Americans on their flood insurance bills.
  I yield the balance of my time to my good friend from Florida (Ms. 
Wilson).
  (Ms. WILSON of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend her remarks.)
  Ms. WILSON of Florida. I rise today in support of this bipartisan 
amendment that strikes a blow for fairness for those consumers who need 
flood insurance. I rise along with my colleagues from Florida: 
Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, David Rivera, Ruben Hinojosa, and 
Rush Holt.
  I am a proud Floridian by birth. I make Florida my home. Most of my 
family and friends live in the great State of Florida. On top of our 
sunshine, Florida has a regular hurricane season and torrential 
rainfalls. The majority of the people who live in Florida live in this 
reality for the majority of their lives. However, flooding does not 
only affect the State of Florida, so I want to ensure that taxpayers 
who live in flood zones do not pay too much for their vitally needed 
flood insurance. This amendment is very simple:
  It prevents flood insurance rates from potentially going up 100 
percent. The current cap on flood insurance rate increases in a given 
year is 10 percent. My amendment would keep it that way. This 
commonsense, bipartisan amendment is fiscally responsible. It protects 
consumers, and it ensures that the National Flood Insurance Program 
will remain sound.
  Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my bipartisan amendment that 
strikes a blow for fairness for those consumers who need flood 
insurance. Along with my colleagues Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, David 
Rivera, Ruben Hinojosa, and Rush Holt, I want to ensure that taxpayers 
who live in flood zones do not pay too much for their vitally needed 
flood insurance. My amendment is very simple. It prevents flood 
insurance rates from going up 100%. The current cap on flood insurance 
rates is ten percent. My amendment would keep it that way.
  I am a proud Floridian by birth. I make Florida my home. Most of my 
family and friends live in the great State of Florida. On top of our 
sunshine, Florida has a regular hurricane season and torrential 
rainfalls. The majority of the people who live in Florida live with 
this reality for the majority of their lives. However, flooding does 
not only affect the State of Florida. Flooding is our Nation's most 
common disaster. While flooding affects every State, most private 
insurance companies do not offer their own flood insurance. Plus, 
standard homeowner insurance policies do not cover flooding.
  In 1968, Congress started the National Flood Insurance Program, or 
the NFIP. This allows homebuyers to purchase flood insurance for their 
homes. In Florida, you cannot get a mortgage on your property if you do 
not have a flood insurance policy on your home. Ninety percent of all 
flood insurance is done through the NFIP. There are more than 20,000 
NFIP communities throughout our nation and all of them are not in 
Florida.
  Since 1978, Florida policyholders have paid 14.1 billion dollars in 
premiums and have had 231,595 individual losses and received ONLY $3.6 
billion in payments--3.9 times more in premiums than they receive in 
claims. Yet Floridians had a 9.6% increase in premium rates from 2009 
to 2010. Nationally, from 2009 to 2010, premiums increased an average 
of 8%.
  The NFIP today covers approximately 5.6 billion households and 
businesses across the country for a total of $1.25 trillion in 
exposure. Forty percent of those policies are held in Florida, and one 
in four Floridians is covered under NFIP. Floridians collectively pay 
nearly $900 million in premiums per year.
  The near $19 billion in debts held by the NFIP are mostly as a result 
of the 2005 hurricane season (Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma) and 
the 2008 Midwest floods. While the average flood insurance policy is 
about $600 per year, residents of high-risk flood areas pay 
disproportionately more in premiums. However, these residents do not 
take near the same proportion in payments on claims. Furthermore, 
individuals outside of high-risk areas file over 20% of NFIP claims and 
receive one-third of disaster assistance for flooding.
  The NFIP paid $709 million in flood insurance claims to homeowners, 
business owners, and renters in 2010. In fact, in 2010, New Jersey had 
the highest number of claims, and Tennessee had the highest payments on 
claims--not Florida. As a matter of fact, Florida was not in the top 10 
in either category of claims or payments.
  I thank the Chair for the time. My commonsense amendment is fiscally 
responsible, protects consumers, and ensures that the NFIP will remain 
sound.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Illinois is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen's amendment, while well 
intentioned, would prevent the National Flood Insurance Program from 
moving toward a more actuarially sound basis for calculating premiums 
in as quick a manner as possible.
  The underlying bill provides that FEMA, at the discretion of the 
administrator, can increase the chargeable premiums for flood 
policyholders by up to 20 percent once every 12 months until the 
premium being paid properly reflects the risk associated with the 
property.
  The amendment is intended to save policyholders from the ``sticker 
shock'' premium increases potentially pose, but the underlying bill 
addresses this concern by allowing for a gradual phase-in of the 
actuarial rates instead of an abrupt adjustment.
  One of the core goals of this bill is to move the NFIP towards a more 
actuarially sound, properly functioning

[[Page H4903]]

program, and any amendment to slow down that effort must be opposed.
  The amendment would strike part of section 5 that would increase 
annual limits on premium rates. It increases from 10 to 20 percent. The 
sponsors of the amendment have stated that their objective is to 
prevent a 100 percent increase in possible premium hikes, but what it's 
doing is really going to delay our being able to have a more 
actuarially sound basis for calculating the premiums in as quick a 
manner as possible.
  Section 5 really addresses this concern by phasing in all of the non 
pre-FIRM properties to full actuarial rates over time to eliminate the 
subsidy and to allow the premiums paid for policies to reflect the risk 
covered by those policies. So I would oppose this amendment.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this bipartisan amendment 
to maintain the 10 percent statutory NFIP premium increases.
  While it is important to keep NFIP authorized and to begin solving 
its funding problems, we must make sure we are improving participation 
in the program and keeping premiums affordable. Low participation in 
NFIP in high-risk areas has been one of the program's most persistent 
challenges.
  That is why I joined my colleagues in sponsoring this amendment. 
Doubling the maximum premium rate increase from 10 to 20 percent would 
hurt existing policyholders nationwide and in my Central New Jersey 
district.
  If homeowners get hit with annual premium increases in excess of 10 
percent, I am concerned that that they will decide flood insurance is 
something they can do without. And when a catastrophic event occurs, 
taxpayers will pick up the tab with disaster aid.
  I have heard from homeowners, flood plain managers, insurers, and 
realtors in my congressional district about the importance of passing 
an extension of NFIP. Although I am pleased that we are considering the 
underlying bill, we should be encouraging more homeowners to obtain 
flood insurance, not placing an extra burden on policyholders who are 
doing the right thing protecting their homes from flood.
  I ask my colleagues to join me supporting this amendment.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).
  The amendment was rejected.


                Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Walberg

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mr. WALBERG. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 36, after line 3, insert the following new subsection:
       (i) Moratorium on Flood Map Changes.--
       (1) Moratorium.--Except as provided in paragraph (2) and 
     notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968, or the Flood Disaster Protection 
     Act of 1973, during the period beginning upon the date of the 
     enactment of this Act and ending upon the submission by the 
     Council to the Administrator and the Congress of the proposed 
     new mapping standards required under subsection (c)(1), the 
     Administrator may not make effective any new or updated rate 
     maps for flood insurance coverage under the national flood 
     insurance program that were not in effect for such program as 
     of such date of enactment, or otherwise revise, update, or 
     change the flood insurance rate maps in effect for such 
     program as of such date.
       (2) Letters of map change.--During the period described in 
     paragraph (1), the Administrator may revise, update, and 
     change the flood insurance rate maps in effect for the 
     national flood insurance program only pursuant to a letter of 
     map change (including a letter of map amendment, letter of 
     map revision, and letter of map revision based on fill).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Walberg) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering today 
addresses the most pressing concern my constituents have with the 
National Flood Insurance Program, and that problem is inaccurate flood 
maps.
  I certainly understand that the NFIP is on shaky financial ground, 
and I commend Chairman Bachus and Congresswoman Biggert and the 
Financial Services Committee for their work in crafting this bill; but 
as we vote today to put the NFIP on a path to solvency, we must not let 
this opportunity to strengthen the program pass us by.
  Since I returned to Congress in January, my office has been barraged 
with letters and phone calls expressing concerns about the new and 
revised flood insurance rate maps that FEMA is rolling out in my 
district. These maps determine whether property owners will be required 
to purchase flood insurance, and evidence shows that the current 
mapping methods are oftentimes inaccurate, onerous or punitive; and 
while this insurance represents an essential lifeline to some property 
owners who face a real risk of flood damage, it is a costly, 
unnecessary mandate on those who face no actual threat of being 
flooded.
  I am encouraged that the underlying bill, H.R. 1309, establishes a 
Technical Mapping Advisory Council to review the current mapping 
standards and that it proposes revised standards to be implemented by 
the FEMA administrator. Within 12 months of organization, the TMAC is 
required to report to Congress and the administrator on how to improve 
mapping methodology. H.R. 1309 clearly instructs the TMAC on their 
task, and that is to ensure that the flood insurance rate maps reflect 
true risk and that the most current and accurate data is used.
  I look forward to receiving this report from TMAC and to the 
administrator's implementation of the new mapping standards; but in my 
view, this review is a tacit admission that the current practices are 
not working and that they represent a poorly implemented government 
mandate that cannot continue. The maps FEMA has been rolling out across 
the country are not based on the best information available, and this 
needs to stop.
  My amendment improves on the work of the TMAC, simply requiring that, 
while the TMAC studies the best possible mapping methods, none of our 
constituents will be at risk of inclusion in a new map that uses the 
faulty, questionable methods currently in place. Simply put, this 
amendment would implement a moratorium on the issuance of new flood 
maps until the TMAC has done its due diligence and has issued its 
report on new mapping standards.
  I am glad to have the support of Chairman Bachus, and I ask that you 
support me in voting for this commonsense amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. CAPUANO. While I understand the gentleman's concern about the 
accuracy of the FEMA maps, this bill does contain a 3-year delay of 
mandatory purchase and a 5-year phase-in thereafter. That's 8 years. We 
already have mechanisms in this bill that would insulate homeowners 
from the sticker shock of mandatory purchase while still alerting them 
to the fact that they actually live in a flood zone.
  I am very concerned that, in the absence of any maps, we place our 
homeowners and communities in the dark about the risks they may be 
facing. This is why the bill does not delay the maps, themselves, but 
only the mandatory purchase requirement. So, while I understand the 
gentleman's concerns, I must oppose his amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1550

  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Cardoza

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 36, line 23, after the semicolon insert ``and''.
       Page 37, strike lines 1 through 3.
       Page 37, line 4, strike ``(C)'' and insert ``(B)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentleman

[[Page H4904]]

from California (Mr. Cardoza) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment that would remove 
onerous requirements on properties that already have existing flood 
protection and would prevent unnecessary economic harm to communities 
already struggling to recover.
  My amendment strikes the language in the legislation requiring FEMA 
to include on its flood maps areas of residual risk. I'm offering this 
amendment because large areas across the country, such as large parts 
of the Central Valley and Los Angeles and Orange Counties, are already 
protected by existing levees and have no history of flooding, but would 
find themselves in newly designated ``residual risk'' floodplains under 
H.R. 1309. Such a policy would essentially map the entire area in the 
new residual risk flood zone as though the levee that had been 
protecting the community for years had never existed. This would have a 
significant economic impact, and in many cases more than double the 
insurance premiums of those regions throughout the country.
  In the area I represent of Stockton, California, and other affected 
areas of the San Joaquin Valley, this bill would place in the 
floodplain an additional 280,000 people who currently have flood 
protection provided by significant levees.
  In 1995, annual premium payments were estimated at $30 million. The 
CBO estimates that rates will more than double under this bill, 
totaling an estimated $68 million in annual premiums from the greater 
Stockton area alone. Floodplain building restrictions for these 
protected areas would have an even greater impact on the cost of 
construction. These building restrictions would substantially increase 
the cost of home construction and severely impact housing affordability 
at a time when the housing market is already on life support in my 
area.
  For my district and many other districts across the country, entire 
communities would be mapped into the floodplain. Mapping areas that 
have existing flood protection for residual risk effectively amounts to 
double taxation of these regions, where citizens are paying taxes to 
the local flood control agencies and then having to pay additional 
flood insurance as well as a result of being mapped into these areas.
  This mapping requirement would also remove an important incentive for 
State and local governments to invest in flood control projects. If 
communities will still have to buy flood insurance after they improve 
and protect their communities, then why would they devote precious 
resources to these expensive projects? The cost benefits just simply 
wouldn't exist.
  Mr. Chairman, at this point, I would like to yield 1 minute to my 
colleague from California (Mr. McNerney).
  Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment 
offered by Mr. Cardoza.
  He and I are fortunate to represent San Joaquin County in California, 
which is home to many, many miles of levees and waterways. His 
amendment is especially important to our constituents.
  While the ``residual risk'' section of H.R. 1309 may be well 
intended, I believe it should be removed. We all believe that 
homeowners living in high-risk areas for flooding should have an 
insurance policy, but this language is overly broad and will hurt my 
constituents.
  I've consulted closely with flood control officials from my district 
who share this concern and have expressed strong support for this 
amendment.
  Our country is experiencing tough economic times, and we should take 
great care to protect homeowners from unnecessary burdens. Our 
homeowners are losing their homes; let's not give them an extra burden 
that will send many of them into the street.
  I am proud to rise in support of this amendment offered by my 
colleague, Mr. Cardoza, which will significantly improve the bill we 
are considering today.
  Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote for this 
commonsense amendment and prevent undue economic harm to our 
communities.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Illinois is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Under H.R. 1309, FEMA is required to update its flood 
maps according to the Technical Mapping Advisory Council's 
recommendations within 6 months or report to Congress why it has 
rejected them. As part of the new standard for the flood insurance rate 
maps, FEMA must include in any rate map areas of residual risk, 
including areas behind levees, dams and other manmade structures. I'm 
afraid that the Cardoza amendment would fail to provide homeowners with 
a real assessment of their risks, thereby impairing their ability to 
prepare for such natural disasters.
  And to address concerns about the mapping process, H.R. 1309 
reinstates the Technical Mapping Advisory Council to bring in the 
expertise and perspectives of other stakeholders in FEMA's process for 
setting new mapping standards. The amendment I think would weaken these 
new mapping standards that are designed to give homeowners and the NFIP 
an accurate portrait of flood risk, and I would oppose the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. McGovern

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 55, line 4, before ``OBTAINING'' insert ``AND 
     COMMUNITIES''.
       Page 55, line 5, before the period insert ``OR REVISION''.
       Page 55, line 14, after ``1973'' insert ``, or a community 
     in which such a property is located,''.
       Page 55, line 15, before ``due'' insert ``, or a letter of 
     map revision,''.
       Page 55, line 19, after ``behalf,'' insert ``or such 
     community, as applicable,''.
       Page 56, line 2, after ``owner'' insert ``or community, as 
     applicable,''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I will be brief.
  My amendment is simple. If FEMA makes a mistake in designing a flood 
map, communities can be reimbursed for the cost of mounting a 
successful challenge. If FEMA makes a mistake in mapping a flood area, 
then they should pay for it. Doing so will result in significant 
savings for cities and towns and homeowners. And to me, this is 
something that should be noncontroversial and hopefully wins bipartisan 
support.
  Mr. Chair, I was pleased that the Rules Committee made in order my 
amendment to H.R. 1309.
  My amendment is simple: if FEMA makes a mistake in designing a flood 
map, communities can be reimbursed the costs of mounting a successful 
challenge.
  Currently, communities that dispute FEMA's flood elevations can hire 
a private engineering firm to get a ``second opinion'' flood map.
  While this may sound like an attractive option, it puts small 
communities in a very difficult financial position. Hiring a private 
engineering firm is expensive and cost-prohibitive for many small 
communities.
  On the one hand, if the community decides that it's too expensive to 
get a second opinion, homeowners are forced to pay higher, or in some 
cases, needless flood insurance premiums.
  On the other hand, if the community does mount a successful challenge 
to the original FEMA map, homeowners are spared from having to pay the 
higher flood insurance premiums. But, the town must still pay the costs 
associated with obtaining that second map.

[[Page H4905]]

  I've heard of many small communities that are forced into this tough 
situation, including the Town of Holliston in my district. There is 
substantial evidence to support the case that the FEMA flood map is 
inaccurate, but town officials are struggling to find a way to pay the 
estimated $30,000 it would cost to conduct a second engineering study.
  I feel for these town officials. They want to do the right thing and 
help their residents, but these small towns are already cash-strapped 
and cutting funding left and right for essential services like 
teachers, cops and firefighters. There simply is no money for a 
legitimate but expensive second opinion map.
  If FEMA makes a mistake in mapping a flood area, they should pay for 
it. Doing so would relieve towns like Holliston from the enormous 
burden of fixing a mistake they did not make and saving residents 
hundreds of dollars in unnecessary flood insurance premiums.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
  The amendment was agreed to.


             Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Brady of Texas

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 56, after line 9, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 20. NOTIFICATION TO RESIDENTS NEWLY INCLUDED IN FLOOD 
                   HAZARD AREAS.

       Section 1360 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 
     (42 U.S.C. 4101), as amended by the preceding provisions of 
     this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(n) Notification to Residents Newly Included in Flood 
     Hazard Area.--In revising or updating any areas having 
     special flood hazards, the Administrator shall provide to 
     each owner of a property to be newly included in such a 
     special flood hazard area, at the time of issuance of such 
     proposed revised or updated flood insurance maps, a copy of 
     the proposed revised or updated flood insurance maps together 
     with information regarding the appeals process under section 
     1363 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 
     4104).''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Brady) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Chairman, this amendment might well be 
described as the ``Homeowner's Right to Know.''
  The original bill, H.R. 1309, contains several very positive 
notification requirements to help ensure that our constituents are more 
aware of the National Flood Insurance Program, the flood mapping 
process, and how they can protect their property from the risk of 
flood. However, one critical area in which the underlying bill needs to 
require adequate notification is when a homeowner is being newly added 
into a revised or updated flood map.

                              {time}  1600

  My amendment would require the FEMA Administrator to provide a copy 
of a flood insurance risk map to property owners who are newly added to 
such a map along with information regarding the appeals process at the 
time the map is issued. The purpose is simple: One, bring more 
transparency to the flood mapping process; and, two, protect 
homeowners' rights by ensuring they have adequate notice their property 
is being added to the floodplain while ensuring that they have the 
information about the appeals process.
  Too often, homeowners aren't even aware that FEMA is making changes 
to the flood maps in their communities until after a map is finalized 
and they receive a notice from their mortgage lender that they are now 
required to purchase flood insurance. Perhaps just as often, properties 
are not only unknowingly added to the floodplain, but they are added 
based on inconsistent or inaccurate data used by FEMA to create the 
maps. As a result, many homeowners are forced into buying flood 
insurance for the first time and mandated to do so when, in fact, their 
flood risk hasn't changed.
  Constituents in my own district have experienced these issues 
firsthand. One county in my district has been going through the 
remapping process for the past couple of years. Last year, FEMA 
introduced a draft map that would have added literally thousands of 
homes into the floodplain. In one portion of the county, I would 
estimate that nearly 10 percent of the total number of homes would be 
added by FEMA's draft map, yet few people were even aware. I know they 
weren't aware because I had conversations with insurance agents who 
write flood policies in the community, and they weren't aware. I have 
had major developers who are building in that area talk to me about 
other related issues but didn't know about the new draft map. To make 
matters worse, we believe the map was technically inaccurate. FEMA was 
using incongruent data. As a result, new floodplains were proposed 
when, in fact, flood risk could not increase.
  In a second community, the outcry was so great that FEMA had to come 
back for a public town hall meeting to discuss the mapping process 
after the map went into effect. Local residents started getting 
notifications from their lenders that they needed to purchase flood 
insurance, and they simply didn't know why. My office received calls 
from residents in one portion of that community where the homes have 
been confirmed as nearly 8 feet above the highest recorded level of 
flooding in that area ever, but they were now in the floodplain. No one 
had bothered to tell them.
  My amendment would ensure that in all these scenarios the homeowner 
would simply be notified that their home was potentially being added to 
a floodplain and tell them about their right to appeal. Homeowners 
deserve to be informed when the government is making decisions that 
impact their property. This simple amendment will ensure that they do.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, as I understand it, the amendment is 
perfectly fine, and we hope that it will be adopted.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. Sherman

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mr. SHERMAN. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 57, after line 2, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 21. FEMA AUTHORITY TO REJECT TRANSFER OF POLICIES.

       Section 1345 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 
     (42 U.S.C. 4081) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(d) FEMA Authority to Reject Transfer of Policies.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the 
     Administrator may, at the discretion of the Administrator, 
     refuse to accept the transfer of the administration of 
     policies for coverage under the flood insurance program under 
     this title that are written and administered by any insurance 
     company or other insurer, or any insurance agent or 
     broker.''.
       Strike line 23 on page 64 and all that follows through page 
     65, line 5, and insert the following new section:

     SEC. 24. REQUIRING COMPETITION FOR NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE 
                   PROGRAM POLICIES.

       (a) Report.--Not later than the expiration of the 90-day 
     period beginning upon the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 
     in consultation with insurance companies, insurance agents 
     and other organizations with which the Administrator has 
     contracted, shall submit to the Congress a report describing 
     procedures and policies that the Administrator shall 
     implement to limit the percentage of policies for flood 
     insurance coverage under the national flood insurance program 
     that are directly managed by the Agency to not more than 10 
     percent of the aggregate number of flood insurance policies 
     in force under such program.
       (b) Implementation.--Upon submission of the report under 
     subsection (a) to the Congress, the Administrator shall 
     implement the policies and procedures described in the 
     report. The Administrator shall, not later than the 
     expiration of the 12-month period beginning upon submission 
     of such report, reduce the number of policies for flood 
     insurance coverage that are directly managed by

[[Page H4906]]

     the Agency, or by the Agency's direct servicing contractor 
     that is not an insurer, to not more than 10 percent of the 
     aggregate number of flood insurance policies in force as of 
     the expiration of such 12-month period.
       (c) Continuation of Current Agent Relationships.--In 
     carrying out subsection (b), the Administrator shall ensure 
     that--
       (1) agents selling or servicing policies described in such 
     subsection are not prevented from continuing to sell or 
     service such policies; and
       (2) insurance companies are not prevented from waiving any 
     limitation such companies could otherwise enforce to limit 
     any such activity.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Sherman) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. SHERMAN. I rise to offer an amendment that is coauthored by 
Chairman Bachus and by my friend Gregory Meeks from New York. It is a 
bipartisan and, I hope, noncontroversial amendment.
  This flood insurance program is usually a partnership between private 
companies and the Federal Government. The Write Your Own Program 
involves the companies servicing the policies. And one major company 
that used to write policies in this area decided to pull out of the 
program and turned over 800,000 policies to the Federal Government. The 
whole idea behind the program is that the Federal Government will 
administer as few of these insurance policies as possible.
  The purpose of this amendment is to require that the vast majority of 
these policies be made available to be handled by private insurance 
companies. It is simply a privatization amendment. This includes 
language in the amendment designed to protect the agents of State Farm, 
which is the company that is no longer in this business, ensuring that 
they will be able to continue servicing the policies that shift from 
the Federal Government to private insurance companies. This is an 
effort to ensure that these policies are taken off the taxpayers' books 
without interfering in the relationship between consumers and their 
insurance agents.
  I would hope that this would be a noncontroversial amendment. As I 
said, it is supported by the chairman of the committee and is offered 
on his behalf as well as the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BACHUS. I rise to claim time in opposition, although I am not 
opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Alabama is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, this is a commonsense amendment. As many of 
us on the Financial Services Committee know, the flood insurance 
program is a public-private partnership where private insurance 
companies write the coverage and service the policies, with the 
government setting the coverage and the requirements.
  Recently, State Farm Insurance decided that they no longer wanted to 
participate in the program, and they transferred--I guess that's a nice 
word. An unflattering term which is more accurate would be they dumped 
800,000 policies back on the Federal Government. This was after they 
collected premiums and their agents sold the coverage.
  This amendment would make changes to that, where if an insurance 
company wants to participate in the plan, they can; if they want to 
profit from the plan, they can. But they don't have the unilateral 
right to dump those policies back on the government agencies.
  Prior to that, there were about 150 policies that the government was 
administering directly.
  What this amendment would do is called a depopulation amendment. It 
directs FEMA and the National Flood Insurance Program to take those 
policies and distribute them among insurance companies who are willing 
to service those contracts. And I'm happy to report to the Congress and 
the Members that many mainline insurance companies have agreed to take 
up these policies.
  Out of respect for State Farm agents, many of whom I think were 
displeased and surprised by their parent company abandoning these 
policies, it would give them the right to also service those policies. 
However, there may be some legal problems with that, but we at least 
don't rule that out.
  The depopulation of these policies--and by that, the return to what 
the program was set up to function like, and that was with private 
servicers and agents. Handling the policies would be done over a 1-year 
time frame.
  I actually believe that we should have actually depopulated more than 
we did, but we did this as an accommodation to FEMA and to some of the 
State Farm agents. I think this is a noncontroversial amendment.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois. Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to the 
amendment offered by Mr. Sherman and would like to make a few points.
  First, I would like to point out that I fully understand and support 
the goal of encouraging private sector involvement in offering flood 
insurance and exploring ways to diminish unnecessary reliance on 
government programs.
  However, I am not convinced that this amendment gets us any closer to 
achieve this goal. In fact, this Amendment may actually put Congress in 
the position of picking winners and losers in the market place, 
interfering with private contracts, and creating millions of dollars in 
new federal spending.
  I would like to make the following points:
  Regardless of whether a flood insurance policy is provided through 
NFIP Direct or through a WYO insurer, the federal government is 
responsible for all losses covered under the policy. Regardless of 
whether a policy is issued by NFIP Direct of a WYO insurer, a private 
company will handle all aspects of policy issuance and claims 
administration and these services will be paid for through the federal 
government.
  FEMA has informed Congress that private contractors handling NFIP 
Direct policies can manage the recently transferred policies for $50 
million less each year than WYO carriers. This is a savings of $250 
million for the life of the bill.
  Redistribution of these policies destroys consumer choice and 
dictates to consumers the company and agent they are required to use 
for flood insurance while taking property from the agents who produce 
the business. This redistribution affects flood insurance policy 
holders and insurance agents in every Congressional District across the 
country.
  The only thing this amendment accomplishes is the forcible transfer 
of polices from one group to another, with absolutely no cost savings 
and no improvement in customer service.
  There are many questions to answer, and I believe the Committee took 
the right step in requesting a study before acting on the issue. 
Unfortunately, we seem to be acting today before we have these answers.
  I would like to submit the following statements: (1) A summary of the 
issue provided to the Senate Banking Committee in connection with their 
hearings on NFIP authorization; and (2) A letter from FEMA to House 
Financial Services and Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee 
Chairman Neugebauer answering questions about the redistribution 
amendment and highlighting the increased cost to taxpayers of this 
amendment.

                  State Farm Insurance--June 30, 2011


 State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (State Farm) Views on Efforts to 
      Redistribute NFIP Direct Policies to Write Your Own Insurers

       State Farm supports reauthorizing the National Flood 
     Insurance Program (NFIP) and would like to take this 
     opportunity to clear up any confusion surrounding State 
     Farm's and its agents' participation in the NFIP and the 
     operational differences between flood insurance policies 
     distributed through the Write Your Own (WYO) program and NFIP 
     Direct.
     I. The Proposed Redistribution of NFIP Policies Will Not 
         Decrease the Federal Government's Risk
       Unfortunately, under the guise of NFIP ``reform,'' the 
     attributes of the WYO and NFIP Direct distribution channels 
     have been mischaracterized in order to pursue an ill-advised 
     scheme to enlist the federal government's powers to take 
     insurance business marketed, solicited, and sold by one group 
     of private insurance agents and redistribute those policies 
     to other agents and companies who had no role in generating 
     these policies in the first instance. There are proprietary 
     rights of insurance agents at stake in this matter.
       Characterized as NFIP ``depopulation,'' this scheme hijacks 
     familiar terminology relating to programs used in several 
     states that transfer insurance policies out of state-run 
     insurance pools into the private sector. However, unlike 
     ``depopulation'' at the state level, where the entire risk of 
     a policy is shifted to the private insurer, the scheme as 
     advocated for NFIP merely redistributes customers, policies, 
     and revenues associated with administering those policies 
     from private businesses connected with NFIP Direct to 
     selected WYO insurers. No changes are made in the risk 
     bearing of companies in the

[[Page H4907]]

     WYO distribution channel. The federal government retains 100% 
     responsibility for paying all covered flood losses.
       Far from being an effort towards privatization reform, the 
     true nature of WYO participation is captured best in the U.S. 
     Securities and Exchange Commission filing of a firm that is 
     the largest WYO insurer--Fidelity National Financial, Inc. As 
     described in the firm's most recent Form 10-K for calendar 
     year 2010:

       ``We earn fees under [the NFIP] program for settling flood 
     claims and administering the program. We serve as 
     administrator and processor in our flood insurance business, 
     and bear none of the underwriting or claims risk. The U.S. 
     federal government is guarantor of flood insurance coverage 
     written under the NFIP and bears the underwriting risk. 
     Revenues from our flood insurance business are impacted by 
     the volume and magnitude of claims processed as well as the 
     volume and rates for policies written. For example, when a 
     large number of claims are processed as a result of a natural 
     disaster, such as a hurricane, we experience an increase in 
     the fees that we receive for settling the claims.''
       The suggestion that this confiscatory redistribution scheme 
     would shrink the public sector while growing the private 
     sector is wrong. It also completely ignores the fact that, 
     just like the WYO program, NFIP Direct fully utilizes the 
     private sector in handling flood insurance policies.
       To be clear:
       (1) Regardless of whether a flood insurance policy is 
     provided through NFIP Direct or through a WYO insurer, the 
     policy provides federal insurance coverage and the federal 
     government is responsible for all losses covered under the 
     policy;
       (2) NFIP redistribution is a confiscatory scheme that does 
     not diminish federal obligations on a flood insurance policy 
     placed with a WYO insurer;
       (3) Whether a policy is issued by NFIP Direct or a WYO 
     insurer, a private company will handle all aspects of policy 
     issuance and claims administration and these services will be 
     paid for through the federal government;
       (4) Since NFIP costs are funded entirely with federal 
     monies and FEMA utilizes private parties for handling 
     policies under both the WYO program and NFIP Direct, there 
     are no demonstrated federal savings from redistributing 
     federal flood insurance policies from NFIP Direct to WYO 
     insurers;
       (5) Redistribution of NFIP Direct policies to WYO insurers 
     does nothing to increase consumer participation rates which 
     are critical to program solvency; redistribution actually 
     creates disincentives for more than 17,000 agents to increase 
     such participation rates; and
       (6) Redistribution destroys consumer choice and dictates to 
     consumers the company and/or agent they are required to use 
     for flood insurance while taking property from the agents who 
     produced the business.
       Following is more detailed background information.
     II. Background on NFIP
       a. The WYO Program and State Farm's Participation
       The NFIP program has been in place since 1968. The NFIP's 
     WYO program began in 1983 through statute and federal rule as 
     a financial arrangement between participating property and 
     casualty insurers and the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     (FEMA). The WYO program permits participating property and 
     casualty insurers to sell and service the NFIP's standard 
     flood insurance policies in their own names. Although 
     participating insurance companies receive an expense 
     allowance for policies written and claims processed, the 
     federal government retains full responsibility for 
     underwriting losses and all premiums paid by purchasers of 
     flood insurance go into the US. Treasury. Currently, about 88 
     insurance companies participate in the WYO arrangement with 
     FEMA; this is a decrease from previous years.
       Insurers participate in the program through a WYO 
     Arrangement. FEMA publishes the WYO Arrangement, which is a 
     federal rule, in the Federal Register before the end 
     of August every year. Each WYO insurer considers annually 
     whether or not to sign the WYO arrangement.
       State Farm began its WYO participation in 1985. Following 
     its entry in the program, each year State Farm carefully 
     evaluated its continuing participation in the WYO 
     Arrangement. In recent years, NFIP has presented a more 
     challenging landscape of changing requirements and directives 
     which requires the expenditure of resources with varying 
     degrees of notice and clarity of instruction. In addition, 
     the WYO program's continuing existence became more uncertain 
     with each gap in authorizations and there were numerous 
     occasions when the program was allowed to lapse. These 
     situations complicated our ability to serve our customers' 
     needs. Subsequently, State Farm made a very difficult 
     business decision to no longer participate in the WYO 
     Arrangement.
       b. Transition to NFIP Direct and Meeting Customer Needs:
       Based on existing regulations, State Farm's orderly 
     transfer plan was structured in a way that permitted State 
     Farm agents to continue servicing their customers' needs 
     through NFIP Direct, regardless of whether State Farm itself 
     participated as a WYO insurer. For example, under the 
     Arrangement, a WYO company has the option to sell its book of 
     business to another WYO insurer (subject to FEMA approval) or 
     to transfer policies to the NFIP Direct program. State Farm 
     exercised the option to transfer the policies to the NFIP 
     Direct Program, which avoided the potential for substantial 
     customer confusion and disrupting the relationship customers 
     have with their State Farm agent. More specifically, in 
     utilizing NFIP Direct, the State Farm agent remains the agent 
     of record on transferred policies. This means that State 
     Farm's decision to discontinue participation in the WYO 
     Arrangement did nothing to undermine our exclusive 
     independent contractor agents' ability to continue servicing 
     the needs of their flood insurance customers who maintained 
     or sought federal flood insurance protection in the future. 
     From a consumer perspective, this seamless transition of the 
     policies was effortless; renewal of flood insurance coverage 
     did not require any additional steps by policyholders. The 
     customer placed their coverage as they did previously--
     through their State Farm agent, an individual who was a 
     familiar face to the customer and had an existing 
     understanding of the customer's property and needs.
       State Farm did not receive any compensation for its orderly 
     transfer of policies to NFIP Direct. Of approximately 800,000 
     policies, State Farm has transferred to date over 550,000 
     policies. Each State Farm WYO policyholder has already 
     received a notice regarding the transfer plan. Each 
     policyholder has also received or will receive a second 
     notice prior to the policy transfer.
       c. The Critical Role of State Farm Agents
       Perhaps more important to the functioning of NFIP, active 
     agent participation in the marketing and selling flood 
     insurance is a significant issue of concern to FEMA. It is 
     widely recognized that one major shortcoming of the NFIP is 
     that the purchase of flood insurance is often limited to only 
     those who need coverage or are mandated to purchase coverage 
     in connection with the purchase of a home. This limited 
     demand impedes the ability of the NFIP to broaden its 
     insurance base to satisfy a fundamental tenet of insurance 
     underwriting--spreading the risk of loss among a larger and 
     more diverse pool of policyholders who are unlikely to 
     experience losses at the same time. Consequently, an agent 
     workforce actively engaged in marketing and soliciting NFIP 
     policies is a critical component of making the program more 
     actuarially sound.
       Indeed, FEMA recognized that having State Farm agents 
     actively market and sell NFIP Direct policies is a major 
     benefit to the program. However, if the federal government 
     were to redistribute policies brought into NFIP by an agent 
     to another company or agent (which includes commissions), the 
     incentive for agents to originate policies in NFIP Direct 
     would be removed without any commensurate benefit, which 
     would undermine the entire program. Equally pernicious, it 
     would be tantamount to a government taking of business 
     property from individual businessmen and businesswomen solely 
     for the benefit of another private party.
     III. Proposed Redistribution Scheme Offers No Cost Advantage: 
         Private Parties Handle the Servicing of all NFIP Policies 
         Regardless of Who Distributes Them
       Contrary to the assertions made by supporters of NFIP 
     ``depopulation,'' the confiscatory redistribution of NFIP 
     Direct policies to WYO insurers will not create smaller 
     government, increase the role of the private sector, or 
     diminish the government's risk of loss on flood insurance 
     policies. All NFIP policies have an agent of record that 
     handles the sales and some aspects of servicing. These agents 
     may or may not be associated with a WYO company, but they are 
     paid a commission through NFIP, regardless of whether they 
     are affiliated with a WYO company or not. A similar pattern 
     is followed for claims handling where private sector parties 
     service all NFIP claims regardless of how they are 
     distributed.
       Claims handling for NFIP Direct policies is done by a 
     private contractor, Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC), 
     through a competitively bid contract. Furthermore, as 
     described in its own marketing materials, CSC provides 
     identical services to several WYO carriers, including some of 
     the largest. As a result, there is a strong probability that 
     the so-called ``reforms'' achieved through confiscatory 
     redistribution would do nothing more than transfer the 
     handling of flood insurance policies from CSC under its NFIP 
     Direct hat to CSC wearing its WYO hat. Significantly, the 
     proponents of confiscatory redistribution have not produced 
     any evidence suggesting that their servicing will save the 
     NFIP money. Indeed, the only difference for policies so 
     redistributed would be that insurance agents--primarily small 
     businesspeople who sold the flood policy in the first 
     instance, would see their book of business confiscated by the 
     federal government and simply handed over to another company. 
     This is not reform and is not about ``making the government 
     smaller.''
     IV. Proposed Redistribution Scheme Destroys Consumer Choice
       Another insidious result of NFIP confiscatory 
     redistribution is the elimination of consumer choice and 
     engaging the federal government to forcibly require consumers 
     to accept companies and/or agents with whom they have no 
     prior relationship, or, even worse, whom they have 
     affirmatively rejected in the past. Far from creating a 
     seamless transition for consumers, redistribution

[[Page H4908]]

     generates several problems. For example, if a consumer has 
     chosen to work with an agent and has been with an agent for 
     many years, should the federal government overrule the 
     consumer's choice through redistribution? What if a policy 
     has been redistributed to a company with whom the consumer 
     does not want to do business? Does the consumer have any 
     control? Does the federal government really want to be 
     involved in this type of decision?
     V. Conclusion
       ``Depopulation'' of NFIP is a myth. Current efforts along 
     these lines are nothing more than a scheme to use the federal 
     government's authority to redistribute existing policies from 
     one group of private insurance agents and give that business 
     to other private entities. This confiscatory redistribution 
     scheme makes no changes in the federal government's risk 
     exposure under NFIP, fails to increase participation rates in 
     purchasing flood insurance, provides no demonstrated savings 
     to the federal government, and destroys consumer choice. Such 
     measures should be opposed.
                                  ____

                                                U.S. Department of


                                            Homeland Security,

                                    Washington, DC, June 27, 2011.
     Hon. Randy Neugebauer,
     Chairman, Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, 
         Financial Services Committee, House of Representatives, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Neugebauer: Thank you for your letter of May 
     23, 2011, in which you requested clarification of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) position on a proposed 
     ``depopulation amendment'' to H.R. 1309. As a preliminary 
     matter, please accept my assurances that FEMA is committed to 
     administering the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in 
     a manner that provides affordable insurance combined with a 
     floodplain management program designed to reduce the nation's 
     risk from flood. Since 1983, FEMA has taken advantage of the 
     expertise of the private insurance industry through the Write 
     Your Own (WYO) program, and we remain convinced that a 
     public-private partnership provides the appropriate vehicle 
     for administering the NFIP.
       Below are FEMA's responses to your questions.
       1. Please explain in detail how the NFIP plans to expand 
     its ability to administer the additional 800,000 policies 
     which State Farm is ceding to the NFIP program, when it is 
     currently handling approximately 120,000 policies under the 
     NFIP Direct program? What is the anticipated additional 
     annual expense to the program to administer this vastly 
     expanded book of business?
       The NFIP Direct program is administered by a contractor 
     acting as FEMA's servicing agent. That contractor, Computer 
     Sciences Corporation (CSC), has increased its capacity to 
     process the transferred policies by hiring additional staff. 
     State Farm will transfer the policies to NFIP Direct on a 
     monthly basis as they expire. The transition is already 
     underway, with all policies anticipated to be transferred by 
     September 30, 2011.
       We estimate that the transfer will reduce NFIP expenses by 
     about $50 million a year for FY 2012 and subsequent years. 
     During FY 2011 while the policies transition from State Farm 
     to NFIP Direct, the savings will be slightly less. NFIP 
     policyholders and the National Flood Insurance Fund will 
     share the $50 million in savings. Thirty million dollars of 
     the savings comes from our full-risk policyholders, and the 
     NFIP will pass the savings back to them through slightly 
     lower premiums. We estimate that the average savings per 
     policy will be about $7, which will be a 1.5% premium 
     reduction. Twenty million dollars of this savings comes from 
     our subsidized policyholders. By retaining that savings 
     within the NFIP, we can slightly reduce the average amount of 
     the subsidy and there will be more funds available either to 
     pay claims or to reduce the current borrowing.
       2. Does FEMA or the NFIP support, oppose, or take a neutral 
     position with respect to an amendment to HR. 1309, which 
     would have required the NFIP to make the right to service 
     these policies available to other WYO companies, their 
     agents, or to independent agents in a timely, orderly and 
     reasonable manner?
       Without seeing the specific language of the amendment, FEMA 
     would oppose such an amendment unless it allowed, but did not 
     require, the individuals who hold the State Farm policies to 
     move to other companies. Requiring the policies to be 
     transferred to other WYO companies, their agents, or 
     independent agents could harm agents who work with State Farm 
     because State Farm prohibits its agents from working with any 
     other insurance companies, so its agents would have to choose 
     between continuing to work with State Farm or continuing to 
     work with the individuals who hold the State Farm flood 
     insurance policies. FEMA does plan to notify policyholders of 
     their right to voluntarily move from the NFIP Direct program 
     to other companies or agents at the time of policy renewal. 
     We estimate that providing such notifications will cost NFIP 
     over $900,000 annually.
       3. What, if any, contractual obligations prevent FEMA or 
     the NFIP from making available to the remaining WYO companies 
     the right to service flood insurance policies no longer being 
     serviced by State Farm? If such contracts or agreements 
     exist, please provide a copy to my staff in electronic 
     format.
       State Farm policyholders may move from the NFIP Direct 
     program to a WYO company, and FEMA plans to notify 
     policyholders of that fact at the time of their policy 
     renewals.
       Without seeing specific legislative language, FEMA cannot 
     fully assess the nature of the contractual obligations that 
     may be impacted by an amendment. However, to require FEMA to 
     transfer the policies to a WYO company could impact existing 
     contractual obligations.
       FEMA has a contractual agreement with the Computer Science 
     Corporation (CSC) to act as its NFIP Direct servicing agent. 
     As the NFIP Direct servicing agent, CSC services flood 
     insurance policies sold directly by FEMA, collects premiums, 
     adjusts and settles claims, and disseminates insurance 
     information to the public, lenders, and agents. Prior to 
     State Farm's decision to terminate its participation in the 
     WYO Program, CSC acted as NFIP Direct servicing agent for 
     approximately 150,000 policies. In March 2011, FEMA 
     competitively awarded a contract to CSC to handle 
     approximately 900,000 State Farm policies that will move to 
     NFIP Direct upon policy renewal. The contract is valid for 
     five years. Because of the increased volume of business now 
     handled by NFIP Direct, FEMA negotiated a 40% per policy 
     discount on the amount charged for each policy handled by CSC 
     through NFIP Direct, which is a significant cost savings to 
     NFIP. Pursuant to the newly-awarded contract, CSC has stepped 
     up its operations, including hiring new employees to assist 
     in servicing the 900,000 new NFIP Direct policies.
       Additionally, as explained below, the State Farm insurance 
     agents have contractual obligations that make it difficult to 
     implement a broad-based transfer of policies.
       4. Does NFIP currently possess the legal authority to offer 
     the right to service these policies to the remaining WYO 
     companies, their agents, or independent agents? If so, have 
     there been any efforts on the part of the NFIP to make these 
     rights available to these companies or agents? If the NFIP 
     does in fact have such authority, and if there have been no 
     such efforts to utilize that authority to return these rights 
     to the private market, why has NFIP not made these rights 
     available to the remaining WYO companies or agents? Does NFIP 
     intend to make these rights available to the private market?
       Once a policy has been transferred to NFIP Direct, FEMA has 
     the authority to allow the policy to be written by 
     participating WYO companies, and typically, policies tend to 
     migrate to WYO companies as those companies compete for the 
     business. FEMA is committed to notifying the insureds in NFIP 
     Direct of the option to take their business elsewhere and has 
     formulated a proposal to provide notice upon policy renewal.
       Without seeing the specific language of the amendment, FEMA 
     cannot fully assess the legal implications of such an 
     amendment. However, there are impediments to requiring FEMA 
     to offer the opportunity to service NFIP Direct policies to 
     WYO companies, their agents, or independent agents, 
     particularly with respect to policies that were written by 
     State Farm insurance agents.
       When the State Farm policies transfer to NFIP Direct at the 
     time the policies are renewed, State Farm agents will be the 
     agents of record for the policies. While State Farm allows 
     its agents to work with NFIP Direct to provide policyholders 
     with flood insurance, the company prohibits its agents from 
     working with any other private insurance companies. 
     Therefore, State Farm agents would have to choose between 
     continuing to work with State Farm or continuing to work with 
     the approximately 900,000 policyholders who have other lines 
     of insurance with the agents. Moreover, mandating that all, 
     or a certain subset, of NFIP Direct policies be transferred 
     to WYO carriers would harm the agents of record on those 
     policies if those agents are not affiliated with the 
     particular WYO carrier that receives those policies.
       Requiring FEMA to offer the opportunity to service NFIP 
     Direct policies to WYO companies, their agents, or 
     independent agents could also create a disincentive to policy 
     renewal and negatively affect the number of policies in force 
     because of the additional steps that would be required to 
     obtain a new carrier and transfer the policy to the new 
     carrier. This may require a policyholder to obtain more than 
     one agent to handle all of their insurance needs. 
     Additionally, such a provision could limit individual 
     citizens' right to choose their insurance agent because some 
     policyholders may not be able to work with their current 
     agents if those agents are not affiliated with the particular 
     WYO carriers that received the policyholder's business from 
     the NFIP Direct.
       Although the NFIP has not transferred NFIP Direct policies 
     to the WYO insurers, their agents, or independent insurance 
     agents for the reasons provided above, the NFIP intends to 
     advise NFIP Direct policyholders of the option to move their 
     policies to another WYO carrier or to continue with NFIP 
     Direct at the time their policies are renewed. This 
     notification will inform policyholders that they have a 
     choice about who handles their business, while allowing the 
     policyholders' current agents the opportunity to compete to 
     retain that business.
       I trust that this information is helpful. If you have 
     further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to 
     contact the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Legislative 
     Affairs at Division.
           Sincerely,

                                             Edward L. Connor,

                                      Deputy Federal Insurance and
                              Mitigation Administration Insurance.

  I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H4909]]

  Mr. SHERMAN. I move the adoption of the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1610


                Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Loebsack

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 17 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 57, after line 2, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 21. APPEALS.

       (a) Television and Radio Announcement.--Section 1363 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4104) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by inserting after 
     ``determinations'' by inserting the following: ``by notifying 
     a local television and radio station,''; and
       (2) in the first sentence of subsection (b), by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``and shall 
     notify a local television and radio station at least once 
     during the same 10-day period''.
       (b) Extension of Appeals Period.--Subsection (b) of section 
     1363 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 
     4104(b)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(b) The Director'' and inserting ``(b)(1) 
     The Administrator''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) The Administrator shall grant an extension of the 90-
     day period for appeals referred to in paragraph (1) for 90 
     additional days if an affected community certifies to the 
     Administrator, after the expiration of at least 60 days of 
     such period, that the community--
       ``(A) believes there are property owners or lessees in the 
     community who are unaware of such period for appeals; and
       ``(B) will utilize the extension under this paragraph to 
     notify property owners or lessees who are affected by the 
     proposed flood elevation determinations of the period for 
     appeals and the opportunity to appeal the determinations 
     proposed by the Administrator.''.
       (c) Applicability.--The amendments made by subsections (a) 
     and (b) shall apply with respect to any flood elevation 
     determination for any area in a community that has not, as of 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, been issued a Letter 
     of Final Determination for such determination under the flood 
     insurance map modernization process.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentleman 
from Iowa (Mr. Loebsack) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I want to thank Congresswoman Biggert for bringing this bill to the 
floor. I look forward to supporting this important legislation that 
will address many of the issues I have been experiencing in my 
district, and ones that I know are occurring all across the country.
  In Iowa, we are all too familiar with the flood insurance program 
because of the devastating floods of 2008, and again on the Missouri 
River in western Iowa this summer. We also have many communities 
throughout the State going through the mapping process. Unfortunately, 
due to a lack of adequate notification during the process of flood 
mapping, many homeowners continue to be surprised when they find out 
that their homes are newly placed in a floodplain and they will be 
required to purchase flood insurance.
  My amendment will help ensure communities and property owners that 
are affected by new maps are made aware of the process taking place 
from the beginning. Currently, FEMA is only required to publish notice 
of new flood elevations in a local newspaper. For one community in my 
district, this translated literally to a paragraph in the legal notice 
section. My amendment will require FEMA to notify not only the local 
paper, but also a local television and radio station, because I think 
it's time we update this law to be more reflective of all the media our 
constituents use daily.
  Ensuring communities have the information needed at the beginning is 
one step. The next is ensuring that there is appropriate time and 
ability for communities and property owners to appeal the drafts. 
Currently, there is a 90-day appeal period for property owners to 
dispute FEMA's draft maps. Many property owners don't find out this 
process is taking place until after the map is finalized, meaning the 
90-day appeal period has long passed, and they no longer have the 
ability to ensure their houses are not included in the final map in 
error.
  My amendment ensures that communities and property owners have an 
additional 90 days to appeal the draft maps if they weren't aware of 
the original appeal period and believe there are property owners that 
haven't been made aware of the appeals process already.
  I think we can all agree that every property owner who might be 
affected by flood maps should have an opportunity to fully participate 
in the established process, and that we should strive to have the most 
accurate maps possible. My amendment will ensure that homeowners have 
the information they need to make informed decisions and preparations 
at the beginning of the process and fully participate in the existing 
appeals process.
  The more homeowners that are aware of flood maps, the more 
participation there is in the process, in the program; and the more 
accurate our maps will be. Greater map accuracy will give us better 
awareness of the flood risks in our communities and allow homeowners 
and community leaders alike to take steps to mitigate and prepare for 
that risk.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment on behalf of property 
owners in all of our districts.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the 
amendment, even though I support the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Illinois is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.
  I think that proper and effective notification by FEMA allows the 
protection provided by the NFIP to reach out to those who need it. And 
the amendment also includes provisions designed to benefit communities 
that believe that they have been incorrectly mapped in the flood 
program, further enhancing the validity of the maps by providing an 
appeal for newly mapped areas. I support it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. In closing, I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment. Again, I thank Mrs. Biggert for her support of this 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Bachus).
  Mr. BACHUS. I would like to commend Mr. Loebsack for his amendment. I 
also would like to say that because it does require or ask that TV and 
radio be utilized to get the word out, the next amendment by the lady 
from Michigan actually would--and I have taken no position on her 
amendment--but it actually asks that national flood insurance not incur 
advertising expenses. And I think there is some good points to that, 
some bad points. But as this amendment proves, the local stations 
themselves and the local media can get these things out. So that might 
be a point in favor of her first amendment.
  I am very opposed to her second amendment. I don't want the Members 
to confuse support, or at least non-opposition to her first amendment, 
as support for her second. But I commend the gentleman, and I think 
it's a good sense amendment and would urge strong support to the 
Loebsack amendment.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr. Johnson).
  Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois. I thank the distinguished sponsor and would 
preface my comments by saying I am strongly in support of Congresswoman 
Biggert's superb piece of legislation.
  However, I rise today in opposition to this amendment offered by 
Representative Sherman. I would like to point out first that I fully 
understand and support the goal of encouraging private sector 
involvement and exploring ways to diminish unnecessary reliance on 
government programs. However, I am not convinced, in fact I am 
unconvinced, this amendment gets us any

[[Page H4910]]

closer to achieving that goal. In fact, this amendment may put Congress 
in the position of choosing winners and losers in the marketplace, 
interfering with private contracts, and creating millions of dollars in 
new Federal spending.
  I would like to make the following points: regardless of whether a 
flood insurance policy is provided through NFIP Direct or WIO, the 
Federal Government's responsible for all the losses incurred under the 
policy. FEMA has informed Congress that private contractors handling 
NFIP Direct policies can manage the recently transferred policies for 
$50 million less, which is a saving of $250 million over the life of 
the bill. I don't have to tell any individuals in today's world what 
that means.
  Redistribution of these policies destroys, in my judgment, consumer 
choice, dictates to consumers the company and agent they are required 
to use for flood insurance, while taking property from the agents who 
produce the business. This redistribution affects flood insurance 
policyholders and insurance agents in every district in the country.
  Really, the only thing this amendment does is the forcible transfer 
of policies from one group to the other with not only no cost savings, 
with significant costs to the Federal Government. A lot of questions to 
answer.
  I believe the committee and Representative Biggert took the right 
approach in requesting a study before acting on the issue. 
Unfortunately, today, we seem to be acting contrary-wise before we have 
these answers. With all due respect again to the sponsor of the 
amendment, and certainly in concert with the sponsor of the bill, I 
urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Alabama (Mr. Bachus).
  Mr. BACHUS. I think the gentleman from Illinois was arguing on the 
last amendment, not this amendment. If the Members will take everything 
he said, transfer it to the amendment before, it would be appropriate. 
But I disagree with his argument.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Loebsack).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1620


              Amendment No. 19 Offered by Mr. Westmoreland

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 19 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 57, after line 2, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 21. RESERVE FUND.

       (a) Establishment.--Chapter I of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 is amended by inserting after section 
     1310 (42 U.S.C. 4017) the following new section:

     ``SEC. 1310A. RESERVE FUND.

       ``(a) Establishment of Reserve Fund.--In carrying out the 
     flood insurance program authorized by this title, the 
     Administrator shall establish in the Treasury of the United 
     States a National Flood Insurance Reserve Fund (in this 
     section referred to as the `Reserve Fund') which shall--
       ``(1) be an account separate from any other accounts or 
     funds available to the Administrator; and
       ``(2) be available for meeting the expected future 
     obligations of the flood insurance program.
       ``(b) Reserve Ratio.--Subject to the phase-in requirements 
     under subsection (d), the Reserve Fund shall maintain a 
     balance equal to--
       ``(1) 1 percent of the sum of the total potential loss 
     exposure of all outstanding flood insurance policies in force 
     in the prior fiscal year; or
       ``(2) such higher percentage as the Administrator 
     determines to be appropriate, taking into consideration any 
     circumstance that may raise a significant risk of substantial 
     future losses to the Reserve Fund.
       ``(c) Maintenance of Reserve Ratio.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator shall have the 
     authority to establish, increase, or decrease the amount of 
     aggregate annual insurance premiums to be collected for any 
     fiscal year necessary--
       ``(A) to maintain the reserve ratio required under 
     subsection (b); and
       ``(B) to achieve such reserve ratio, if the actual balance 
     of such reserve is below the amount required under subsection 
     (b).
       ``(2) Considerations.--In exercising the authority under 
     paragraph (1), the Administrator shall consider--
       ``(A) the expected operating expenses of the Reserve Fund;
       ``(B) the insurance loss expenditures under the flood 
     insurance program;
       ``(C) any investment income generated under the flood 
     insurance program; and
       ``(D) any other factor that the Administrator determines 
     appropriate.
       ``(3) Limitations.--In exercising the authority under 
     paragraph (1), the Administrator shall be subject to all 
     other provisions of this Act, including any provisions 
     relating to chargeable premium rates and annual increases of 
     such rates.
       ``(d) Phase-in Requirements.--The phase-in requirements 
     under this subsection are as follows:
       ``(1) In general.--Beginning in fiscal year 2012 and not 
     ending until the fiscal year in which the ratio required 
     under subsection (b) is achieved, in each such fiscal year 
     the Administrator shall place in the Reserve Fund an amount 
     equal to not less than 7.5 percent of the reserve ratio 
     required under subsection (b).
       ``(2) Amount satisfied.--As soon as the ratio required 
     under subsection (b) is achieved, and except as provided in 
     paragraph (3), the Administrator shall not be required to set 
     aside any amounts for the Reserve Fund.
       ``(3) Exception.--If at any time after the ratio required 
     under subsection (b) is achieved, the Reserve Fund falls 
     below the required ratio under subsection (b), the 
     Administrator shall place in the Reserve Fund for that fiscal 
     year an amount equal to not less than 7.5 percent of the 
     reserve ratio required under subsection (b).
       ``(e) Limitation on Reserve Ratio.--In any given fiscal 
     year, if the Administrator determines that the reserve ratio 
     required under subsection (b) cannot be achieved, the 
     Administrator shall submit a report to the Congress that--
       ``(1) describes and details the specific concerns of the 
     Administrator regarding such consequences;
       ``(2) demonstrates how such consequences would harm the 
     long-term financial soundness of the flood insurance program; 
     and
       ``(3) indicates the maximum attainable reserve ratio for 
     that particular fiscal year.
       ``(f) Availability of Amounts.--The reserve ratio 
     requirements under subsection (b) and the phase-in 
     requirements under subsection (d) shall be subject to the 
     availability of amounts in the National Flood Insurance Fund 
     for transfer under section 1310(a)(10), as provided in 
     section 1310(f).''.
       (b) Funding.--Subsection (a) of section 1310 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4017(a)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (8), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (9), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(10) for transfers to the National Flood Insurance 
     Reserve Fund under section 1310A, in accordance with such 
     section.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. I want to thank Chairwoman Biggert for her hard 
work on this bill and the ranking member, Mr. Gutierrez, and the 
gentlewoman from California, who is the overseer of this program.
  This amendment is a forward thinking amendment to put the flood 
insurance program on sound footing. Consider this amendment the 
national flood insurance emergency fund. Currently premiums come in, 
payments go out, but nothing is reserved for the events that no one can 
predict.
  Claims are paid with existing premiums and everyone crosses their 
fingers that nothing really bad happens.
  If incoming premiums are not enough, then the National Flood 
Insurance Program has no other option than to ask for a bailout.
  In fact, the NFIP program has carried debt in 18 of the past 30 
years. Most interesting of all is that not all of these years saw 
catastrophic flooding. FEMA just didn't do a good job managing premiums 
and claims. It's clear that in good years and in bad the flood 
insurance program does not have a good grasp on how much they will pay 
out in claims.
  However, when catastrophic flooding does happen, the NFIP program is 
even less prepared for the claims. The year of 2005 was one of those 
years that nobody could predict. Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma 
together cost $17 billion in losses for the National Flood Insurance 
Program. Six years later, including principal and interest, the NFIP 
debt is now $18 billion.
  Every year it seems like flooding impacts a wide swath of the United

[[Page H4911]]

States, and 2011 has been no different. No one can predict the weather. 
What NFIP needs is the ability to save up to help smooth out those 
unpredictable years. If the program could stash money away in good 
times, it would have money to pay for the years when the estimates were 
incorrect.
  My amendment does just that. It establishes a reserve fund in NFIP. 
This is just common sense, so much so, NFIP is one of the few Federal 
funds that does not have a reserve fund. FHA has a 2 percent reserve 
requirement. The FDIC deposit insurance fund is required to have a 1.35 
percent reserve ratio.
  Now I want to take a moment to address some of the possible concerns 
with the amendment.
  First, this amendment does not expand the NFIP to other catastrophic 
events, like earthquakes or tornados. This fund and the bill remains 
specific to flooding.
  Second, the administrator gets the funds from the existing premiums. 
The administrator and this amendment are bound to adhere to the 
parameters established in the underlying bill on premium rates and 
annual increases.
  Third, this amendment does not take away from debt repayment. Any 
premium collected would be spent to cover losses because the program is 
running up the deficit. This takes precedent.
  At some point in the future, the program might be able to collect 
enough to cover all costs and set aside a reserve. But given the 
magnitude of the current debt, this is not likely to occur in the 
short-term.
  Finally, this amendment does not stand in the way of reinsurance 
opportunity for the flood program. I support reinsurance for the flood 
program and firmly believe that both reinsurance and a reserve fund can 
coexist.
  In fact, many private insurers reserve for losses and purchase 
reinsurance. Private insurers will use reserve funds as a deductible 
for reinsurance coverage.
  However, I fundamentally believe that as long as taxpayers are 
involved, it's an ultimate backstop. This program needs a reserve. It 
is not responsible to tell taxpayers no more bailouts but offer no 
solution to the ongoing bailout of NFIP.
  If there is no reserve fund, there will be more bailouts. It is just 
a matter of when.
  Adopting this amendment would address a fundamental deficiency in the 
program that is ripe for bailouts. I urge adoption of the amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I oppose the gentleman's amendment.
  In drafting this bill, the chairwoman and I sought to strike the 
right balance between protecting homeowners and strengthening the flood 
insurance program. I believe that the bill before us today does just 
that.
  Unfortunately, I do not believe that the gentleman's amendment 
strikes the same balance. Specifically, by creating a reserve fund, the 
gentleman's amendment would allow the NFIP to increase insurance 
premiums on homeowners.
  So regardless of their flood risk, homeowners will have to pay more 
in order to fund a reserve fund that will never have enough money to 
pay out claims for catastrophic events. This isn't fair to our 
taxpayers, Mr. Chairman, and, in fact, would stall the already slow 
recovery of the housing market.
  I understand the problem that the gentleman is attempting to solve. 
We all know that the flood insurance program is over $17 billion in 
debt due to claims resulting from Hurricane Katrina.
  However, I think we have to be clear that Hurricane Katrina was a 
catastrophic, once in a lifetime event. Prior to Katrina, the flood 
insurance program operated completely in the black.
  In addition, I believe that the bill contains many provisions that 
would allow the flood insurance program to reform its premium structure 
so that it can collect the premiums it needs to pay out claims. For 
example, the bill ends subsidies for 350,000 pre-FIRM properties, 
including second homes, commercial properties, homes with new owners, 
homes substantially damaged or improved, and homes with repetitive 
claims.
  By making these properties pay actuarial rates that reflect their 
full risk, the bill would make these properties pay their fair share, 
thereby increasing the amount of funding to the flood insurance fund.
  Mr. Chairman, while I believe that the gentleman's amendment is very 
well intended, I believe that it is unnecessary given the strong 
reforms in this bill and the potential problems it may cause for 
homeowners, particularly those that have been phased into actuarial 
rates.
  For these reasons, Mr. Chairman, I must oppose the amendment and I 
would urge a ``no'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chairman, I respect the gentlewoman's opinion, 
and I know that she is very familiar with this program, but I don't 
think a reserve fund would cost anybody any additional money. It does 
not go up on premiums. The premium amount stays the same.
  This is a rainy day thing, excuse the pun, a fund that would be 
there. It would not even be started until this current $18 billion in 
debt is paid off. But we are fooling ourselves if we think that we can 
predict the weather, if we think we know when Katrina or Rita or Wilma 
is going to come.
  This fund would only be established after the debt is repaid, and so 
it's a very commonsense measure to have this reserve fund, as many 
other government agencies do.
  With that, I would ask for a ``yes'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will 
be postponed.


          Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mrs. Miller of Michigan

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 20 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 64, after line 22, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 23. TERMINATION OF BROADCAST PERSONIFIED FLOOD INSURANCE 
                   COMMERCIALS.

       (a) Prohibition.-- The Administrator of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency may not, after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, obligate any amounts for purchasing 
     time or space for any advertisement or commercial for flood 
     insurance coverage under the national flood insurance program 
     under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 
     4001 et seq.). This subsection may not be construed to 
     prohibit obligation of amounts for dissemination of 
     information regarding such program to holders of flood 
     insurance policies under such program.
       (b) Reduction of National Flood Insurance Fund Debt.--Any 
     amounts made available to the Administrator and allocated for 
     advertising or commercials described in subsection (a) that 
     remain unobligated on the date of the enactment of this Act 
     shall be used only for reducing the debt of the National 
     Flood Insurance Fund incurred pursuant to the authority under 
     section 1309 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 4016).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentlewoman 
from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Michigan.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, today I am offering an 
amendment that would end TV and radio ads that I believe to be a total 
waste of taxpayers' dollars. Over the past 2 years FEMA has actually 
spent over half a million dollars on the production of what they called 
``Home Personified flood insurance commercials.'' These slick 
commercials sort of depict actors with roofs hovering over their heads 
talking about the need to

[[Page H4912]]

obtain flood insurance, and about the fact that one in four homes are 
in a high-risk flood zone, and they pitch to contact FEMA for a free 
brochure about the program.

                              {time}  1630

  These commercials between April of 2010 and April of 2011 cost over 
$7 million in airtime to broadcast all across the 50 States, and they 
are slated to be aired for an additional year at least. Seven million 
dollars spent on promoting the National Flood Insurance Program, which 
is a federally mandated flood program, which has been mentioned all 
across the day here, is already almost $18 billion in debt. I would 
say, why not spend that $7 million to pay back the American taxpayers? 
Or better yet, to begin paying off the program's $18 billion in debt?
  Mr. Chairman, last year in the election in the fall, the American 
people sent a very clear message to Washington. And I don't think the 
message to Congress here was urging us to spend millions of dollars of 
taxpayers' money on TV commercials asking them to put money into a 
failing, bloated, and completely unnecessary government program. No, 
they were demanding that we get a grip on government spending, on out-
of-control government spending, and they were asking us to end programs 
where the government is trying to fill a role best done by the private 
sector.
  Shortly, Mr. Chairman, all of us in this House, in the Congress, in 
both Chambers, are going to be asked to raise the national debt limit 
because we have not been able to get our fiscal house in order. And 
this week, here we are being asked to renew a Federal program that is 
over $17 billion in debt currently, all of which falls on the backs of 
the American taxpayers, and we need to raise the debt ceiling of the 
flood insurance program, as well, to almost $25 billion. Who cares? I 
guess it's just taxpayers' money.
  If we want to stop adding to our national debt, we should not 
continue the Federal flood insurance program--and I'm going to be 
offering an amendment to that in a moment--nor should we continue to 
spend millions each year on TV commercials for a program that 
constituents in many, many States, most of the States across the 
Nation, are wondering about, at a minimum, and many of them are 
outraged. I certainly hear from my constituents back in Michigan who 
are looking for some relief. These hard-pressed taxpayers from my State 
are asking for less spending, for less government, for lower taxes and 
less government intrusion into their lives. They're certainly not 
asking us for wasteful government programs to be shoved down their 
throats on television with television ads.
  My amendment today, Mr. Chairman, to end unnecessary spending on TV 
commercials for the National Flood Insurance Program will be a 
downpayment on the relief that we owe to the American taxpayers who are 
concerned about these commercials that seem to be on repeat all across 
the airwaves in all of the States across our Nation.
  Mr. Chairman, I would ask that my colleagues support this amendment 
today and vote in favor of saving money, taxpayers' money, for the 
American taxpayers.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I oppose the gentlewoman's amendment.
  The gentlewoman's amendment would prohibit FEMA from spending any 
funds on television or radio commercials to promote the purchase of 
flood insurance.
  Floods are the most common natural disaster in the United States. 
Unfortunately, even areas that aren't in floodplains experience floods 
sometimes. When that happens, the Federal Government provides aid to 
those homeowners and communities, and it is the taxpayer who pays for 
that aid.
  Under the National Flood Insurance Program, insurance premiums pay 
for the cost of flood damage. Therefore, if homeowners outside 
floodplains buy flood insurance, taxpayers won't be on the hook if 
their properties flood. However, in order to have these homeowners buy 
flood insurance, they have to learn about the program and its benefits 
to them. This is where radio and television advertising are helpful--
essential, that is. The ads reach a wide audience and present clear 
facts about the availability and affordability of flood insurance.
  To take away FEMA's ability to let the people know what's available 
to them would actually place the millions of Americans who choose and 
are not required to purchase flood insurance at risk. Given these times 
of record deficits, this is simply irresponsible. That is why I urge a 
``no'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I would simply observe that, 
for the most part, the reason that folks, property owners, get national 
flood insurance is because the Federal Government holds a gun to their 
heads and says that you cannot get a federally backed mortgage unless 
you buy Federal national flood insurance through the National Flood 
Insurance Program. So I don't think we have to spend millions and 
millions of dollars to convince them to do something that, in my mind, 
I question whether it is even constitutional that we are forcing people 
to do this kind of a thing; but I certainly don't think we need to 
spend millions of dollars to notify them of something that we are 
mandating for them.
  Certainly if you live in a flood-prone area, you probably know it. 
And with everything going on in the Nation, I just can't believe we're 
wasting money like this. And I would certainly urge my colleagues to 
support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned earlier, when the gentlelady 
offered her views during the general discussion, she certainly does not 
join with her colleagues who have joined with us in a bipartisan way to 
produce a bill that is in the best interests of all of the citizens of 
this country. As a matter of fact, I have referred to her views on this 
issue as rather radical. I think that for us to have an insurance 
program that allows participation by the average citizen so that they 
can be in a position to make themselves whole after a disaster, to 
basically repair their homes, to replace their furnishings, and to 
basically have a way of continuing a decent quality of life is not too 
much to ask of your government.
  So I would oppose this amendment and consider this amendment also 
just as radical. To say that you have a program but you can't tell 
anybody about it simply does not make good sense.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 23 Offered by Mr. Scott

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 23 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 70, after line 5, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 27. STUDY OF ALL-PERIL INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR 
                   RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.

       (a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States 
     shall conduct a study to determine various means and methods 
     by which a market could be established, and the effectiveness 
     and feasibility of each such means and method, for providing 
     all-peril insurance coverage for residential properties. Such 
     study shall analyze and determine, for only residential 
     properties with mortgages insured under the FHA mortgage 
     insurance programs of the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development, and for all residential properties--
       (1) whether a viable insurance market could be established, 
     including by establishment of a Federal program for 
     reinsurance for such all-peril insurance coverage and by 
     other means and methods;

[[Page H4913]]

       (2) the effects of each such means and method of 
     establishing such a market in facilitating and encouraging 
     the private insurance market to develop and offer all-peril 
     insurance products for residential properties;
       (3) the cost of such all-peril insurance coverage for 
     various types of residential properties; and
       (4) the effects that requiring such insurance coverage 
     would have on prices for existing housing and for housing 
     constructed in the future.
       (b) Report.--Not later than the expiration of the 12-month 
     period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Comptroller General shall submit to the Congress a report 
     describing the study conducted pursuant to subsection (a) and 
     the analysis conducted under such study, and setting forth 
     the results and determinations of the study.
       (c) All-peril Insurance.--For purposes of this section, the 
     term ``all-peril insurance'' means, with respect a 
     residential property, insurance coverage meeting the 
     following requirements:
       (1) Substantial deductible.--The coverage is made available 
     subject to a substantial deductible in relation to the amount 
     of coverage provided.
       (2) Covered losses.--The coverage covers only damage and 
     losses to the property that--
       (A) render the property uninhabitable or substantially 
     impair the habitability of the property; and
       (B) result from any of the following hazards--
       (i) movement of the earth, including earthquakes, 
     shockwaves, sinkholes, landslides, and mudflows;
       (ii) water damage, including floods, sewer back-ups, and 
     water seepage through the foundation;
       (iii) war, including undeclared war and civil war;
       (iv) nuclear hazards, including explosion of nuclear 
     devices and nuclear reactor accidents;
       (v) governmental action, including the destruction, 
     confiscation, or seizure of covered property by any 
     governmental or public authority; or
       (vi) bad repair or workmanship on a property, use of faulty 
     construction materials in a property, or defective 
     maintenance to a property.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Scott) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment today to propose what I believe 
would be a proactive solution for homeowners when they face unforeseen 
disasters. My amendment will simply ask the GAO to report to Congress 
the means and effects of facilitating a market for all-peril insurance 
policies. This amendment comes directly from an issue faced by many of 
my constituents and in nearly 4,000 households around the country--
problems associated with the unforeseen disaster caused by the use of 
toxic Chinese drywall.
  Over the last 5 years, nearly 4,000 homes in over 40 States have been 
discovered to contain toxic Chinese drywall. This drywall has been 
tested by the Consumer Product Safety Commission and has been found to 
be responsible for hazardous chemicals oozing into these homes. 
Americans living in these homes have experienced everything from cold 
and flu-like symptoms to migraine headaches, chronic nosebleeds, 
gastrointestinal problems, and other debilitating symptoms.
  Homeowners with homes tainted with toxic drywall have had the 
expectation that the costs associated with remediating their home would 
be covered by their homeowner's insurance policy. But virtually all of 
their policies exclude from coverage many of the different classes of 
damages. In the case of Chinese drywall, a standard homeowner's policy 
does not cover ``losses to property resulting from faulty zoning, bad 
repair or workmanship, faulty construction materials, or defective 
maintenance.'' And so these families are stuck with paying mortgages 
and have homes that are essentially uninhabitable.
  This problem is not limited to just Chinese drywall. In the aftermath 
of hurricanes, many homeowners discover that they are not covered for 
water damage and frequently have to argue whether or not their home was 
destroyed by water or by wind. Sinkholes, which are normally associated 
with areas with histories of mining or seismic activity are springing 
up outside of these typical areas, and homeowners are learning the hard 
way that they are not covered by damages caused by them.
  I believe that homeowners need all-peril insurance, insurance that 
covers homeowners from catastrophic losses regardless of cause, 
provided, of course, that the homeowners did not cause the loss 
themselves.

                              {time}  1640

  All-peril plans would be supplemental insurance policies that would 
cover losses resulting from any of the causes currently excluded from 
the standard homeowners policy. These policies could be limited to 
catastrophic losses and provide for substantial deductibles and 
possibly only cover losses that rendered a property uninhabitable.
  With that in mind, Mr. Chairman, my amendment would direct the GAO to 
fully study the implications of an all-peril policy. Why can't a policy 
be bought now? Is there no interest in it? Could the Federal Government 
successfully market the plans with the private sector? I feel that 
answers to these questions are needed.
  What we do know is that when circumstances beyond a homeowner's 
control make a home uninhabitable, the last thing they want to do is 
look through a policy and find that their completely destroyed home 
isn't protected by the insurance policy that they bought. It is for 
this reason that I offer the amendment, Mr. Chairman, for a GAO study 
and ask that the amendment be adopted.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I claim time in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Illinois is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  This amendment, which would direct the GAO to conduct a study on all-
peril insurance policies for residential properties, to me really 
expands beyond the scope of this bill.
  Fundamental reform of the National Flood Insurance Program should be 
the priority of this Congress, including the removal of subsidies over 
time to improve the long-term solvency of the program. In contrast, the 
Scott amendment would dramatically increase the scope at a time when 
government insurance programs, such as the NFIP, are essentially 
insolvent and remain grossly underfunded.
  If the gentleman would like to have an all-peril study, he has the 
option to write a letter to the GAO and request such a study, and that 
will be done, but to tie it into the flood insurance makes it seem like 
we're going to expand the flood insurance when we're really trying to 
decrease the expansion and really to bring in the private sector to do 
this. I really think that this is way beyond what we should be doing.
  His amendment would pave the way to expand the Federal Government's 
role in the private insurance market by creating a massive new program 
to offer government-provided coverage backed by taxpayer dollars 
against property losses. If the gentleman is really interested in the 
drywall particularly, this is something that he can ask for a study on 
that, and it really should not be within the scope of this bill.
  I would urge opposition to this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have 
remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, this study would not affect the 
underlying provisions of the bill. The priorities of the bill remain 
the priorities of the bill. This would just affect the situation where 
people find their homes uninhabitable and are looking for help.
  This does not have to be a government program. The GAO could 
recommend that it could be a private program and possibly get out of 
the flood insurance business altogether if it covered all perils.
  I would hope that we would at least study the issue to see if it is 
feasible. Anybody who has talked to people with Chinese drywall and 
find that their house is uninhabitable, they're paying their mortgage, 
they don't have anywhere to go, they can't afford another mortgage, and 
their insurance policy that they paid premiums for every

[[Page H4914]]

month, month after month after month, doesn't cover anything. I think 
if you're buying insurance, it ought to insure you for unforeseen 
circumstances, and that is what this study would provide.
  I hope you would adopt the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I yield back the balance of my time and request a 
``no'' vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia 
will be postponed.


          Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mrs. Miller of Michigan

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 25 
printed in House Report 112-138.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk made in order under the rule.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``National Flood Insurance 
     Program Termination Act of 2011''.

     SEC. 2. TERMINATION OF NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM.

       (a) Termination of Authority To Provide Coverage.--
     Effective January 1, 2012, the Administrator of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency (in this section referred to as 
     the ``Administrator'') shall not provide any new flood 
     insurance coverage, or renew any coverage provided before 
     such date, under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 4001 et seq.).
       (b) Treatment of Existing Coverage.--Subsection (a) shall 
     not--
       (1) affect any flood insurance coverage provided under such 
     Act under a contract or agreement entered into before the 
     date specified in such subsection and, notwithstanding the 
     repeals under section 3, such provisions as in effect 
     immediately before such repeal shall continue to apply with 
     respect to flood insurance coverage in force after such 
     repeal; or
       (2) require the termination of any contract or other 
     agreement for flood insurance coverage entered into before 
     such date.
       (c) Wind-Up.--After the date specified in subsection (a), 
     the Administrator shall take such actions as may be necessary 
     steps to wind up the affairs of the National Flood Insurance 
     Program.
       (d) Treatment of Funds.--Amounts in the National Flood 
     Insurance Fund established under section 1310 of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4017) shall be 
     available to the Administrator for performing the functions 
     of the Administrator with respect to flood insurance coverage 
     remaining in force after the date specified in subsection 
     (a). Upon the expiration of the contracts and agreements for 
     such coverage, any unexpended balances in such Fund shall be 
     deposited in the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.
       (e) Savings Provisions.--
       (1) Treatment of prior determinations.--The repeals made by 
     section 3 of the provisions of law specified in such section 
     shall not affect any order, determination, regulation, or 
     contract that has been issued, made, or allowed to become 
     effective under such provisions before the effective date of 
     the repeal. All such orders, determinations, regulations, and 
     contracts shall continue in effect until modified, 
     superseded, terminated, set aside, or revoked in accordance 
     with law by the President, the Administrator, or other 
     authorized official, a court of competent jurisdiction, or by 
     operation of law.
       (2) Pending proceedings.--
       (A) Effect on pending proceedings.--The repeals made by 
     section 3 shall not affect any proceedings relating to the 
     National Flood Insurance Program, including notices of 
     proposed rulemaking, pending on the effective date of the 
     repeals, before the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 
     except that no assistance or flood insurance coverage may be 
     provided pursuant to any application pending on such 
     effective date. Such proceedings, to the extent that they 
     relate to functions performed by the Administrator after such 
     repeal, shall be continued. Orders shall be issued in such 
     proceedings, appeals shall be taken therefrom, and payments 
     shall be made pursuant to such orders, as if this Act had not 
     been enacted; and orders issued in any such proceedings shall 
     continue in effect until modified, terminated, superseded, or 
     revoked by the Administrator, by a court of competent 
     jurisdiction, or by operation of law.
       (B) Construction.--Nothing in this subsection may be 
     construed to prohibit the discontinuance or modification of 
     any proceeding described in subparagraph (A) under the same 
     terms and conditions and to the same extent that such 
     proceeding could have been discontinued or modified if this 
     section had not been enacted.
       (3) Actions.--This section shall not affect suits commenced 
     before the effective date of the repeals made by section 3, 
     and in all such suits, proceedings shall be had, appeals 
     taken, and judgments rendered in the same manner and effect 
     as if this section had not been enacted.
       (4) Liabilities incurred.--No suit, action, or other 
     proceeding commenced by or against an individual in the 
     official capacity of such individual as an officer of the 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency having any responsibility 
     for the National Flood Insurance Program shall abate by 
     reason of the enactment of this section. No cause of action 
     relating to such Program, by or against the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency, or by or against any officer thereof in 
     the official capacity of such officer having any 
     responsibility for such program, shall abate by reason of the 
     enactment of this section.

     SEC. 3. REPEALS AND CONTINUATION OF FEMA MAPPING 
                   RESPONSIBILITIES.

       (a) National Flood Insurance Act of 1968.--The National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 is amended--
       (1) by striking section 1302 (42 U.S.C. 4001);
       (2) by striking chapters I and II (42 U.S.C. 4011 et seq.);
       (3) in section 1360 (42 U.S.C. 4101)--
       (A) in subsection (a)(2), by striking ``until the date 
     specified in section 1319'';
       (B) by striking subsection (d);
       (C) in subsection (g)--
       (i) by striking ``To promote compliance with the 
     requirements of this title, the'' and inserting ``The'';
       (ii) by striking ``directly responsible for coordinating 
     the national flood insurance program'';
       (iii) in the last sentence, by striking ``National Flood 
     Insurance Fund, pursuant to section 1310(b)(6)'' and 
     inserting the following: ``General Fund of the Treasury and 
     shall be used only for reducing the budget deficit of the 
     Federal Government''; and
       (D) in subsection (i)--
       (i) by striking ``free of charge'' and inserting ``at 
     cost'';
       (ii) by striking ``and States and communities participating 
     in the national flood insurance program pursuant to section 
     1310 and at cost to all other'' and inserting ``, States and 
     communities, and other interested''; and
       (iii) in the he last sentence, by striking ``National Flood 
     Insurance Fund, pursuant to section 1310(b)(6)'' and 
     inserting the following: ``General Fund of the Treasury and 
     shall be used only for reducing the budget deficit of the 
     Federal Government'';
       (4) by striking sections 1361A (42 U.S.C. 4102a);
       (5) in section 1363(e) (42 U.S.C. 4104(e)), by striking the 
     third and fifth sentences; and
       (6) in section 1364 (42 U.S.C. 4104a)--
       (A) in subsection (a)--
       (i) in paragraphs (1) and (2), by striking ``or the Flood 
     Disaster Protection Act of 1973'' each place such term 
     appears; and
       (ii) in paragraph (3)--

       (I) by striking subparagraphs (B) and (C) and inserting the 
     following:

       ``(B) a statement that flood insurance coverage may be 
     available in the private market or through a State-sponsored 
     program; and''; and

       (II) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C);

       (B) by striking subsections (b) and (c);
       (7) in section 1365 (42 U.S.C. 4104b)--
       (A) in subsection (a), by striking ``and in which flood 
     insurance under this title is available''; and
       (B) in subsection (b)--
       (i) by striking paragraph (1); and
       (ii) in paragraph (2)--

       (I) in the first sentence, by striking ``the community 
     identification number and community participation status (for 
     purposes of the national flood insurance program) of the 
     community in which the improved real estate or such property 
     is located,''; and
       (II) in the third sentence, by striking ``because the 
     building or mobile home is not located in a community that is 
     participating in the national flood insurance program or'';

       (8) by striking sections 1366 and 1367 (42 U.S.C. 4104c, 
     4104d);
       (9) in section 1370 (42 U.S.C. 4121)--
       (A) by striking paragraphs (3), (4), (5), (7), (14), and 
     (15);
       (B) in paragraph (12)(B), by striking the semicolon at the 
     end and inserting ``; and'';
       (C) in paragraph (13), by striking the semicolon at the end 
     and inserting a period; and
       (D) by redesignating paragraphs (6), (8), (9), (10), (11), 
     (12), and (13), as so amended, as paragraphs (3), (4), (5), 
     (6), (7), (8), and (9), respectively;
       (10) by striking sections 1371 through 1375 (42 U.S.C. 
     4122-26);
       (11) in section 1376 (42 U.S.C. 4127)--
       (A) in subsection (a), by striking ``to carry out this 
     title'' and all that follows through the end of paragraph (3) 
     and inserting ``to carry out the mapping, studies, 
     investigations, and other responsibilities of the Director 
     under this title''; and
       (B) by striking subsection (c); and
       (12) by striking section 1377 (42 U.S.C. 4001 note).
       (b) Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973.--The Flood 
     Disaster Protection Act of 1973 is amended--

[[Page H4915]]

       (1) by striking section 2 (42 U.S.C. 4002);
       (2) by striking section 102 (42 U.S.C. 4012a);
       (3) in section 201 (42 U.S.C. 4105)--
       (A) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(a) As information becomes available to the Director 
     concerning the existence of flood hazards, the Director shall 
     publish information in accordance with section 1360(a)(1) of 
     the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and shall notify the 
     chief executive officer of each known flood-prone community 
     of its tentative identification as a community containing one 
     or more areas having special flood hazards.'';
       (B) in subsection (b), by striking ``shall either (1) 
     promptly make proper application to participate in the 
     national flood insurance program or (2)'' and inserting 
     ``may'';
       (C) by striking subsections (c) and (d);
       (D) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (c); and
       (4) by striking section 202 (42 U.S.C. 4106).
       (c) Bunning-Bereuter-Blumenauer Flood Insurance Reform Act 
     of 2004.--Title II of the Bunning-Bereuter-Blumenauer Flood 
     Insurance Reform Act of 2004 (42 U.S.C. 4011 note).
       (d) National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994.--The 
     National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 is amended by 
     striking sections 561 (42 U.S.C. 4011 note), 562 (42 U.S.C. 
     4102 note), 578 (42 U.S.C. 4014 note), 579(b), and 582 (42 
     U.S.C. 5154a).
       (e) Federal Flood Insurance Act of 1956.--Section 15 of the 
     Federal Flood Insurance Act of 1956 (42 U.S.C. 2414) is 
     amended by striking subsection (e).
       (f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on January 1, 2012.

     SEC. 4. INTERSTATE COMPACTS FOR FLOOD INSURANCE COVERAGE.

       (a) Congressional Consent.--The consent of the Congress is 
     hereby given to any two or more States to enter into 
     agreement or compacts, not in conflict with any law of the 
     United States, for making available to interested persons 
     insurance coverage against loss resulting from physical 
     damage to or loss of real property or personal property 
     related thereto arising from any flood occurring in the 
     United States.
       (b) Rights Reserved.--The right to alter, amend, or repeal 
     this section, or consent granted by this section, is 
     expressly reserved to the Congress.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 340, the gentlewoman 
from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Michigan.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I would begin by asking a very fundamental question: Why in the world 
is the Federal Government in the flood insurance business? Really, I do 
not understand it.
  I don't think anyone should be surprised to learn that the Federal 
Government is not a very good insurance agent, that they run a terrible 
insurance program, as evidenced by the $18 billion in debt that the 
NFIP, the National Flood Insurance Program, has racked up over the 
years and will probably never repay. I don't think they'll ever repay 
it. If you don't believe me, you can consider the testimony that the 
administrator of FEMA made before the Financial Services Committee. In 
congressional testimony, he said the program will likely always be in 
debt, massive debt.
  Congress set up the NFIP to ostensibly be an insurance company, but 
it is not held to the same standards as private insurance companies. 
Instead of holding cash reserves, the NFIP has a bottomless pit of 
money that it shamelessly taps into. That money pit is also known as 
the U.S. Treasury, or the American taxpayers. If the NFIP were a 
private insurance company, it would have gone bankrupt years ago, or it 
would have been in need of a Federal bailout. In other words, when this 
government-authorized Ponzi scheme runs out of money, it simply gets 
more by dipping into the pockets of taxpayers. Mr. Chairman, I would 
say that this is a program that would make Bernie Madoff blush.
  The American people are fed up with bailouts, and this bill is just 
that: another bailout for another broken program. If we want to stop 
adding to our national debt, we should not continue the Federal flood 
insurance program.
  My home State of Michigan is just one of a majority of States that is 
actually disadvantaged by this Ponzi scheme. The State House of 
Representatives has recently passed a resolution condemning the NFIP as 
fundamentally flawed and unfair, and I would expect the State Senate to 
follow suit shortly. So there is an entire State. I don't think that's 
radical.
  My amendment would actually end the program at the end of this year 
and allow States to work together to form a regional coalition to shape 
insurance policies that meet the needs of their particular State. There 
is no way that a one-size-fits-all insurance program that dramatically 
subsidizes rates in some of the most flood-prone areas of our Nation 
while at the same time forcing those in less flood-prone areas to pay 
much higher rates can be sustained. States like mine will simply become 
fed up and opt out, which is what's going to happen, so that they can 
better protect their citizens. Then, of course, it would force this 
program even deeper into debt. It is time to end this program now.
  My amendment would also, and perhaps more importantly, allow the 
private market to get into the flood insurance business without the 
Federal Government's unfair competition of politically based premiums, 
which would allow premiums to be set based on actual risk.
  If you want to get a handle on out-of-control Federal spending and 
start eliminating government programs that do nothing except enforce 
bad policy and recklessly spend the taxpayers' money, I would ask my 
colleagues to support my amendment.

 A Resolution To Memorialize the Congress of the United States To Make 
      Significant Reforms to the National Flood Insurance Program

       Whereas, Under the National Flood Insurance Program, most 
     property owners must purchase flood insurance if their 
     property is located within a mapped floodplain; and
       Whereas, The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has 
     recently revised existing floodplain maps in Michigan that, 
     in many cases, have increased the amount of land within the 
     floodplain without adequate explanation of perceived 
     additional flood risk. Flood insurance for buildings within 
     redrawn areas is a significant added expense. These revisions 
     amount to a penalty that will be felt far into the future, 
     especially as the market value of impacted properties suffers 
     needlessly; and
       Whereas, The revised maps exacerbate disparities between 
     the premiums paid by Michigan residents relative to claims 
     received. Michigan residents have paid nearly five times as 
     much in flood insurance premiums than they have received back 
     in claims over the last 30 years. The remaining funds from 
     these premiums goes to subsidize flood insurance claims in 
     higher risk areas of the country; and
       Whereas, The National Flood Insurance Program is operated 
     without transparency to the public in rate-setting methods. 
     Rebuilding within a floodplain has continued in higher risk 
     areas of the country where multiple recent flood events have 
     occurred, contributing to the $20 billion in debt of the 
     National Flood Insurance Program. Rebuilding in very high 
     risk areas would be avoided if flood insurance was set at 
     actuarially sound rates; and
       Whereas, The National Flood Insurance Program is 
     fundamentally flawed and unfair. Year after year, the program 
     takes money from property owners in most states and uses that 
     money to rebuild in only a few states. Congresswoman Candice 
     Miller has introduced legislation (H.R. 435) to eliminate the 
     National Flood Insurance Program in 2013 and to authorize 
     states to work together to provide flood insurance as they 
     deem appropriate; and
       Whereas, Congresswoman Judy Biggert has introduced 
     legislation, the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011 (H.R. 
     1309), to begin the process of modernizing and reforming the 
     National Flood Insurance Program; now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives, That we 
     memorialize the Congress of the United States to make 
     significant reforms to the National Flood Insurance Program; 
     and be it further
       Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to 
     the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the 
     United States House of Representatives, and the members of 
     the Michigan congressional delegation.
       Adopted by the House of Representatives, June 21, 2011.

  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. I claim time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose this amendment.
  The gentlewoman's amendment would terminate entirely the flood 
insurance program, which provides much needed insurance for 5.5 million 
homeowners. The flood insurance program was created in 1968 after 
record flooding led the private insurance industry to stop writing 
flood policies. The private sector didn't want to write these policies 
because floods are very common and very expensive. However, the Federal 
Government didn't want to

[[Page H4916]]

simply write a blank check for homeowners every time it flooded. This 
is why the flood insurance program was created.

                              {time}  1650

  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from 
Illinois, Chairwoman Biggert, who has worked so hard on this 
legislation.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Illinois 
will control the time.
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  I know we have had quite a bit of discussion about this already, but 
maybe we will bring this to a close with this amendment, for a while 
anyway.
  Let me just say that the underlying bill really doesn't ask for 
additional borrowing authority. In fact, the reforms in the underlying 
bill will accelerate the ability of NFIP to pay down its debt. This 
bill is a revenue raiser and will bring in $4.2 billion to the program.
  We have addressed the fact that there have been some problems with 
NFIP. I think there was some mismanagement, and there was a need for 
reform. That is why we have spent so much time on this bill to talk to 
all of the different groups, to talk to all of the Members who have had 
concerns.
  I have got here a list. According to a broad coalition of industry 
experts and trade associations who all support this, more than 5.6 
million policyholders depend on the NFIP as their only source of 
protection against economic devastation from a flood. In fact, I could 
read all of those who asked for a ``no'' vote on this amendment. We 
have the American Insurance Association, American Land Title 
Association, Building Owners and Management Association, CCIM 
Institute, Chamber SWLA, Council of Insurer Agents and Brokers, The 
Financial Services Roundtable, Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers 
of America, Institute of Real Estate Management, International Council 
of Shopping Centers, Manufactured Housing Institute, Mortgage Bankers 
Association, National Association of Home Builders, National 
Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, National Association of 
REALTORS, National Ready Mix Concrete Association, Society of 
Industrial and Office Realtors, Property and Casualty Insurance 
Association of America, The Risk and Insurance Management Society, and 
the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
  You know, if 5.6 million property owners can't rely on this, what is 
going to happen? What is going to happen is we wouldn't have flood 
insurance. And on May 13, the Financial Services Committee favorably 
reported the Flood Insurance Reform Act by a unanimous vote of 54-0. 
Anybody who doesn't think that is something on how much time we put 
into this and how much people care about it, 54-0 in this Congress, I 
don't think that has happened for a bill that is this important for a 
long, long time. It really reflects the hard work and the bipartisan 
support of the Financial Services Committee.
  Again, it has a series of reforms that are going to make this a much 
better program. It improves the financial stability of the NFIP. It 
reduces the burden on taxpayers. It restores integrity to the FEMA 
mapping system and explores ways to increase private market 
participation. It helps to bring certainty to the housing market. I 
would oppose this amendment strongly.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Higgins).
  Mr. HIGGINS. I thank my friend and colleague from Michigan for 
yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment to terminate 
the National Flood Insurance Program. The National Flood Insurance 
Program is, both in its design and execution, the worst Federal program 
I have encountered in my time in Congress.
  This program levies a mandatory flood tax on homeowners who are at 
virtually no risk of flooding and see absolutely no benefit from the 
program. In western New York, the requirement to purchase flood 
insurance has increased mortgage costs and created economic dead zones 
in once-vibrant neighborhoods.
  This amendment will finally end this unfair burden on homeowners in 
communities like Buffalo and Lackawanna, New York, who neither want nor 
need to purchase flood insurance. I urge my colleagues to support it as 
well. I thank the gentlelady from Michigan.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I would simply reiterate that 
I don't think this is something that the Federal Government should be 
involved in. If you are truly a friend of the taxpayers, and believe 
me, I appreciate the bipartisanship and the hard work about reforming 
this program. I understand the need to reform programs, but I also 
understand the need to get a handle on the Federal debt and deficit; 
and one way to do that is to eliminate unnecessary programs, not just 
nibble around the edges, which is what I think we are doing here today.
  I certainly urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  If this bill were not to pass and if this amendment were to be agreed 
to, it would be devastating to at least 20,000 communities if there was 
no flood insurance. Congress would inevitably have to bail out flood 
disaster victims, as it did prior to 1968; and it would cost so much 
more money. And the President would have to sign on to any devastation 
that might be made, as is what happened in Louisiana after Katrina. I 
oppose this amendment and support the underlying bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan 
will be postponed.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 112-138 on 
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 3 by Ms. Speier of California.
  Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Flake of Arizona.
  Amendment No. 11 by Mr. Cardoza of California.
  Amendment No. 19 by Mr. Westmoreland of Georgia.
  Amendment No. 20 by Mrs. Miller of Michigan.
  Amendment No. 23 by Mr. Scott of Virginia.
  Amendment No. 25 by Mrs. Miller of Michigan.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any 
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Ms. Speier

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Speier) on which further proceedings were postponed and 
on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 195, 
noes 230, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 554]

                               AYES--195

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bono Mack
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Burgess
     Butterfield
     Camp
     Campbell
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge

[[Page H4917]]


     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kingston
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Mack
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paul
     Payne
     Peters
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--230

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Canseco
     Capito
     Carney
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Himes
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Ribble
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Walberg
     Walsh (IL)
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Cantor
     Deutch
     Giffords
     Hinchey
     Hoyer
     Pelosi

                              {time}  1731

  Messrs. WESTMORELAND, RIBBLE, BLUMENAUER, GARY G. MILLER of 
California, HALL, and AKIN changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. POSEY, UPTON, SHERMAN, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. PAUL, Mrs. BONO 
MACK, Messrs. BARTLETT, WALDEN, BURGESS, HOLDEN, KINGSTON, and HARRIS 
changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                  Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Flake

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 118, 
noes 305, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 555]

                               AYES--118

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Benishek
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bono Mack
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coffman (CO)
     Conaway
     Culberson
     DesJarlais
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Eshoo
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Griffith (VA)
     Harris
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lankford
     Latta
     Long
     Lummis
     Mack
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McDermott
     McMorris Rodgers
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Quayle
     Quigley
     Reed
     Ribble
     Roe (TN)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Sensenbrenner
     Stark
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Thornberry
     Tipton
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Walberg
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Woodall
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--305

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Black
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Canseco
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Engel
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Gosar
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Huizenga (MI)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Landry
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Noem
     Nunes
     Olver
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell

[[Page H4918]]


     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schilling
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     West
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Cantor
     Deutch
     Giffords
     Gohmert
     Hinchey
     Hoyer
     McHenry
     Pelosi


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  1736

  Ms. ESHOO changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Cardoza

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Cardoza) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 261, 
noes 163, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 556]

                               AYES--261

     Ackerman
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (FL)
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson (IN)
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crawford
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emerson
     Engel
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleming
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Fudge
     Gardner
     Gerlach
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Hinojosa
     Hochul
     Holden
     Honda
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jordan
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     King (IA)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Landry
     Langevin
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lowey
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Peters
     Peterson
     Platts
     Pompeo
     Price (GA)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Ribble
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Roe (TN)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stark
     Stutzman
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Waxman
     Webster
     Welch
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--163

     Bachus
     Barletta
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Brooks
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Canseco
     Capito
     Carney
     Carter
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Cravaack
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     DeGette
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Ellmers
     Eshoo
     Farenthold
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hayworth
     Hensarling
     Himes
     Hirono
     Holt
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Latta
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lucas
     Lummis
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Markey
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McKinley
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Quayle
     Quigley
     Reed
     Renacci
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rokita
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Sullivan
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Turner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Watt
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woodall
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Cantor
     Deutch
     Giffords
     Hinchey
     Hoyer
     Johnson (GA)
     Pelosi


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  1740

  Mr. MULVANEY changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. DUNCAN of South Carolina and WESTMORELAND changed their vote 
from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


              Amendment No. 19 Offered by Mr. Westmoreland

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia 
(Mr. Westmoreland) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 241, 
noes 183, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 557]

                               AYES--241

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Capito
     Cardoza
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costa
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)

[[Page H4919]]


     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Hochul
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--183

     Ackerman
     Amash
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Mack
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Cantor
     Deutch
     Giffords
     Hinchey
     Hoyer
     Payne
     Pelosi


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  1744

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


          Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mrs. Miller of Michigan

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan 
(Mrs. Miller) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 186, 
noes 238, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 558]

                               AYES--186

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Altmire
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Hochul
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Long
     Lucas
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reichert
     Ribble
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (NE)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--238

     Ackerman
     Alexander
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Butterfield
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Forbes
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Hensarling
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Landry
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Noem
     Olver
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Renacci

[[Page H4920]]


     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Rogers (AL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (SC)
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Stivers
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     West
     Wilson (FL)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Cantor
     Deutch
     Ellison
     Giffords
     Hinchey
     Hoyer
     Pelosi


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  1749

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


           Amendment No. 23 Offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Scott) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 192, 
noes 230, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 559]

                               AYES--192

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Forbes
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Landry
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Stark
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--230

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Capito
     Carter
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costello
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Quigley
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Cantor
     Deutch
     Giffords
     Hinchey
     Hoyer
     Meeks
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Rogers (KY)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  1752

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


          Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mrs. Miller of Michigan

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan 
(Mrs. Miller) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 38, 
noes 384, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 560]

                                AYES--38

     Amash
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (FL)
     Chaffetz
     DesJarlais
     Duncan (TN)
     Flake
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Goodlatte
     Graves (GA)
     Hensarling
     Higgins
     Holden
     Huelskamp
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Mack
     McClintock
     McHenry
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Nunes
     Paul
     Petri
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Sensenbrenner
     Walsh (IL)
     Westmoreland
     Woodall

                               NOES--384

     Ackerman
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brooks
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Capito

[[Page H4921]]


     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gonzalez
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holt
     Honda
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Landry
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Olver
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Ribble
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Welch
     West
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Canseco
     Cantor
     Deutch
     Giffords
     Gohmert
     Hinchey
     Hoyer
     Johnson (GA)
     Pelosi


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  1756

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Hultgren). The question is on the committee 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Hastings of Washington) having assumed the chair, Mr. Hultgren, Acting 
Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, 
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill 
(H.R. 1309) to extend the authorization of the national flood insurance 
program, to achieve reforms to improve the financial integrity and 
stability of the program, and to increase the role of private markets 
in the management of flood insurance risk, and for other purposes, and, 
pursuant to House Resolution 340, reported the bill back to the House 
with an amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment 
reported from the Committee of the Whole?
  If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, as amended.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. BOSWELL. In its current form, I am.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. BOSWELL moves to recommit the bill, H.R. 1309, to the 
     Committee on Financial Services with instructions to report 
     the same back to the House forthwith with the following 
     amendment:
       Page 57, after line 2, insert the following new sections:

     SEC. 14. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING RELIEF FOR 2011 FLOOD 
                   VICTIMS.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (1) The flood disasters and emergencies of 2011 have been 
     unprecedented.
       (2) Such flood disasters and emergencies cover 696 counties 
     in 29 States.
       (3) The President has declared a major disaster from 
     flooding in 2011 for 26 counties in Louisiana. 32 counties in 
     Indiana, 34 counties in Montana, 7 counties in Vermont, 23 
     counties in New York, 3 counties in Alaska, 21 counties in 
     Illinois, 16 counties in Oklahoma, 6 counties in Idaho, 37 
     counties in South Dakota, 48 counties in Mississippi, 34 
     counties in Minnesota, 47 counties in North Dakota, 38 
     counties in Missouri, 64 counties in Tennessee, 76 counties 
     in Kentucky, 57 counties in Arkansas, 23 counties in Georgia, 
     67 counties in Alabama, 20 counties in North Carolina, 13 
     counties in California, 3 counties in Hawaii, 8 counties in 
     Oregon, 7 counties in Washington, 3 counties in Utah, and 3 
     counties in Maine.
       (4) The President has declared an emergency from flooding 
     in 2011 for 28 counties in Missouri, 4 counties in Kansas, 18 
     counties in Nebraska, 26 counties in Louisiana, 4 counties in 
     Tennessee, 14 counties in Mississippi, and 22 counties in 
     North Dakota.
       (b) Purpose.--It is the sense of the Congress that relief 
     should be provided in the form of grants to families in areas 
     affected by flooding to repair damage to their homes and in 
     the form of assurances that such homeowners are not subjected 
     to additional flood insurance premium increases as they 
     struggle in the aftermath of disaster recovery.

     SEC. 15. EMERGENCY AID TO ASSIST 2011 FLOOD VICTIMS.

       (a) Assistance With Increased Cost of Compliance.--
     Subsection (b) of section 1304 of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4011(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) properties for which a major disaster or emergency 
     has been declared under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 
     Relief and Emergency Assistance Act.''.
       (b) Grants.--
       (1) Authority.--Chapter I of the National Flood Insurance 
     Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4011 et seq.), as amended by the 
     preceding provisions of this Act, is further amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 1326. GRANTS FOR REPAIRING FLOOD DAMAGE TO HOMES IN 
                   DISASTER AREAS.

       ``(a) Authority.--The Administrator may make grants under 
     this section to owners of qualified residences for costs of 
     repairing damage to such residences caused by flooding for 
     which a major disaster or emergency has been declared under 
     the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Assistance Act on or after January 1, 2011.
       ``(b) Terms.--The Administrator shall issue such 
     regulations as may be necessary to establish appropriate 
     limitations and terms regarding grants under this section, 
     which may include limitations and terms regarding the amount 
     of grants, avoiding duplication of reimbursement for damages, 
     use

[[Page H4922]]

     of grant amounts, and such other issues as the Administrator 
     considers appropriate.
       ``(c) Qualified Residence.--For purposes of this section, 
     the term `qualified residence' means a residential structure 
     that--
       ``(1) consists of from 1 to 4 dwelling units;
       ``(2) is located within the area for which a major disaster 
     or emergency has been declared under the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act as a result of 
     flooding; and
       ``(3) is covered, upon issuance of such declaration, by a 
     contract for flood insurance coverage under this title.''.
       (2) Availability of national flood insurance fund.--Section 
     1310(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 4017), as amended by the preceding provisions of this 
     Act, is further amended--
       (A) in paragraph (6), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in paragraph (7), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(8) for grants under section 1326.''.
       Page 21, line 22, strike the closing quotation marks and 
     the last period.
       Page 21, after line 22, insert the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Tolling of periods after disasters.--In the case of 
     any covered property that is subject under subsection (i) to 
     a prohibition on increases in chargeable risk premium rates, 
     any 12-month period applicable to such covered property under 
     paragraph (1), (2), or (3) shall be tolled for the duration 
     of the 36-month period applicable to such covered property 
     under subsection (i), and any increases in risk premium rates 
     otherwise effective upon expiration of any of such 12-month 
     periods shall take effect upon the expiration of such periods 
     as resumed after such tolling.''.
       Page 27, after line 11, insert the following new 
     subsection:
       (e) Relief From Premium Increases to Assist 2011 Flood 
     Victims.--Section 1308 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 
     1968 (42 U.S.C. 4015), as amended by the preceding provisions 
     of this Act, is further amended--
       (1) in subsection (c), in the matter that precedes 
     paragraph (1), as amended by the preceding provisions of this 
     Act, by inserting ``, and subsection (i)'' after ``subsection 
     (g)'';
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(i) Relief From Premium Increases to Assist 2011 Flood 
     Victims.--Subject to subsection (h) and notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law relating to chargeable risk premium 
     rates for flood insurance coverage under this title, in the 
     case of any area for which a major disaster or emergency has 
     been declared under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 
     and Emergency Assistance Act on or after January 1, 2011, as 
     a result of flooding, the chargeable risk premium rates for 
     flood insurance coverage under this title for any structure 
     located within such area upon the issuance of such 
     declaration may not be increased at any time during the 36-
     month period beginning upon issuance of such declaration.''.
       Page 27, line 12, strike ``(e)'' and insert ``(f)''.
       Page 19, line 22, strike ``and'' and insert a comma.
       Page 20, lines 3 and 4, strike ``Notwithstanding'' and 
     insert the following: ``Subject only to subsections (h) and 
     (i) and notwithstanding''.

  Mr. BOSWELL (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent to dispense with further reading.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Iowa?
  Mr. DOLD. Mr. Speaker, I object.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk continued to read.
  Mr. DOLD (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
to dispense with the reading.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. BOSWELL. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  At the outset, let me say this amendment does not--repeat, does not--
kill the underlying bill.
  Mr. Speaker, our Nation has been hit by devastating and unprecedented 
flooding this past spring that has displaced and damaged homes in 29 
States and nearly 700 counties. That is right. Nearly three-fifths of 
the States in this country, 60 percent, have counties that have been 
declared emergency areas by the President. I would like to insert into 
the Record the list of States and counties that have been hit by the 
floods of 2011.
  In my home State of Iowa, right as we stand here in this Chamber, we 
are seeing flooding as the Missouri River rises on the western border. 
Just last week, the Department of Agriculture declared Fremont, 
Harrison, Mills, Monona, Pottawattamie, and Woodbury Counties in Iowa 
as agriculture disaster areas. Farmers, homeowners, and small business 
owners are seeing their lives and their very livelihoods quite 
literally being washed away. As I talk to mayors, county supervisors, 
and my friends across the State who are being affected, they want to 
know if their government, this Congress, will stand with them in their 
time of dire need. We need to step up to the plate and help these flood 
victims rebuild their lives and repair the damage, and they should not 
be subjected to premium increases as they struggle to get back on their 
feet.
  This final amendment helps flood victims in three important ways:
  First, this amendment builds on a bipartisan program that was 
established in 1994 following the devastating Midwestern floods by 
reimbursing a flood policyholder for the cost of rebuilding a flood-
damaged structure as needed to comply with State and local floodplain 
management laws.
  Second, this amendment provides a new important tool to aid victims 
of the 2011 floods by giving the agency discretion to provide grants to 
homeowners to repair flood damage.
  Third, this amendment provides a temporary reprieve from any 
increases in flood insurance premiums for policyholders as they 
struggle to rebuild their homes and their lives. It does so by 
suspending any increases in flood insurance premiums for a period of 36 
months--we're talking about increases--for policyholders located in 
areas designated by the President as a major disaster or emergency.
  Importantly, this amendment accomplishes this in a responsible way by 
limiting such assistance to homeowners with existing flood policies. It 
rewards those who have obtained flood insurance and have paid into the 
Flood Insurance Fund. This amendment is consistent with the underlying 
policy of this bill by encouraging homeowners to obtain flood 
insurance, and by placing the program on stronger financial footing 
through a responsible phase-in of risk premium rates to full actuarial 
rates.
  In past years, Congress has stepped up to the plate and provided 
assistance to victims of natural disasters. That is what epitomizes our 
great country and its spirit. Yet this Congress has shown a disregard 
for flood victims at a time when we are struggling to recover from the 
worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Yes, we are a 
country marked by individual initiative, but we are also a country of 
compassion.

                              {time}  1810

  This final amendment is not a handout. It provides immediate 
assistance and relief to those homeowners who have paid into the Flood 
Insurance Fund. The Flood Insurance Fund is paid through premiums and 
fees paid by policyholders, not the taxpayer.
  I urge my colleagues to read the list of 29 States and 696 counties 
that have been hit by these devastating floods and join me in providing 
swift and immediate assistance to your constituents. These are your 
friends, your neighbors; and they are asking for your help. So I ask 
you to stand with them, and I ask my colleagues to do the same.
  Vote ``yes'' on this final amendment; and, remember, it does not kill 
the underlying bill.

    Statement of Rep. Leonard L. Boswell To Accompany The Motion To 
             Recommit the Bill, H.R. 1309 with Instructions

       According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, there 
     have been a total of 696 counties in 29 states for which a 
     Major Disaster or Emergency has been declared. There is some 
     overlap of states for which a major disaster and emergency 
     have been declared and some overlap of counties for which a 
     major disaster and emergency have been declared. Below is a 
     breakdown of the affected counties and states by major 
     disaster and by emergency.


  26 States for Which a Major Disaster has been Declared in 2011 for 
                               flooding*

       Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Hawaii, 
     Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, 
     Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New York, North Carolina, 
     North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, 
     Utah, Vermont, Washington


 696 Counties in 26 States Covered by a Major Disaster Declaration in 
                           2011 for flooding*

     Alabama Counties
       Autauga County, Baldwin County, Barbour County, Bibb 
     County, Blount County, Bullock County, Butler County, Calhoun 
     County, Chambers County, Cherokee County,

[[Page H4923]]

     Chilton County, Choctaw County, Clarke County, Clay County, 
     Cleburne County, Coffee County, Colbert County, Conecuh 
     County, Coosa County, Covington County, Crenshaw County, 
     Cullman County, Dale County, Dallas County, DeKalb County, 
     Elmore County, Escambia County, Etowah County, Fayette 
     County, Franklin County, Geneva County, Greene County, Hale 
     County, Henry County, Houston County, Jackson County, 
     Jefferson County, Lamar County, Lauderdale County, Lawrence 
     County, Lee County, Limestone County, Lowndes County, Macon 
     County, Madison County, Marengo County, Marion County, 
     Marshall County, Mobile County, Monroe County, Montgomery 
     County, Morgan County, Perry County, Pickens County, Pike 
     County, Randolph County, Russell County, Saint Clair County, 
     Shelby County, Sumter County, Talladega County, Tallapoosa 
     County, Tuscaloosa County, Walker County, Washington County, 
     Wilcox County, and Winston County.
     Alaska Counties
       Crooked Creek (ANV/ANVSA), Kuspuk Regional Educational 
     Attendance Area, and Red Devil (ANV/ANVSA).
     Arkansas Counties
       Arkansas County, Baxter County, Benton County, Boone 
     County, Bradley County, Calhoun County, Carroll County, 
     Chicot County, Clark County, Clay County, Cleburne County, 
     Cleveland County, Conway County, Craighead County, Crawford 
     County, Crittenden County, Dallas County, Faulkner County, 
     Franklin County, Fulton County, Garland County, Greene 
     County, Hot Spring County, Howard County, Independence 
     County, Izard County, Jackson County, Johnson County, 
     Lawrence County, Lee County, Lincoln County, Lonoke County, 
     Madison County, Marion County, Mississippi County, Monroe 
     County, Montgomery County, Nevada County, Newton County, 
     Perry County, Phillips County, Pike County, Poinsett County, 
     Polk County, Prairie County, Pulaski County, Randolph County, 
     Saint Francis County, Saline County, Searcy County, Sharp 
     County, Stone County, Van Buren County, Washington County, 
     White County, Woodruff County, and Yell County.
     California Counties
       Del Norte County, Inyo County, Kern County, Kings County, 
     Monterey County, Orange County, Riverside County, San 
     Bernardino County, San Diego County, San Luis Obispo County, 
     Santa Barbara County, Santa Cruz County, and Tulare County.
     Georgia Counties
       Bartow County, Catoosa County, Cherokee County, Coweta 
     County, Dade County, Floyd County, Gordon County, Greene 
     County, Harris County, Heard County, Jasper County, Lamar 
     County, Lumpkin County, Meriwether County, Monroe County, 
     Morgan County, Newton County, Pickens County, Rabun County, 
     Spalding County, Troup County, Walker County, and White 
     County.
     Hawaii Counties
       Hawaii County, Honolulu County, and Maui County.
     Idaho Counties and Indian Reservations
       Bonner County, Clearwater County, Idaho County, Nez Perce 
     County, Nez Perce Indian Reservation, and Shoshone County.
     Illinois Counties
       Alexander County, Franklin County, Gallatin County, 
     Hamilton County, Hardin County, Jackson County, Jefferson 
     County, Lawrence County, Marion County, Massac County, Perry 
     County, Pope County, Pulaski County, Randolph County, Saline 
     County, Union County, Wabash County, Washington County, Wayne 
     County, White County, and Williamson County.
     Indiana Counties
       Benton County, Clark County, Crawford County, Daviess 
     County, Dearborn County, Dubois County, Floyd County, 
     Franklin County, Gibson County, Harrison County, Jackson 
     County, Jefferson County, Jennings County, Knox County, 
     Martin County, Monroe County, Ohio County, Orange County, 
     Parke County, Perry County, Pike County, Posey County, Putnam 
     County, Ripley County, Scott County, Spencer County, Starke 
     County, Sullivan County, Switzerland County, Vanderburgh 
     County, Warrick County, and Washington County.
     Iowa Counties
       Fremont County, Harrison County, Mills County, Monona 
     County, Pottawattamie County, and Woodbury County.
     Kentucky Counties
       Anderson County, Ballard County, Bath County, Boone County, 
     Boyd County, Bracken County, Breathitt County, Breckinridge 
     County, Butler County, Caldwell County, Calloway County, 
     Campbell County, Carlisle County, Carroll County, Carter 
     County, Christian County, Clay County, Crittenden County, 
     Daviess County, Edmonson County, Elliott County, Estill 
     County, Fleming County, Floyd County, Franklin County, Fulton 
     County, Gallatin County, Grant County, Graves County, Grayson 
     County, Green County, Greenup County, Hancock County, Harlan 
     County, Henderson County, Henry County, Hickman County, 
     Hopkins County, Johnson County, Kenton County, Knott County, 
     Lawrence County, Lee County, Lewis County, Livingston County, 
     Logan County, Lyon County, Magoffin County, Marion County, 
     Marshall County, Martin County, Mason County, McCracken 
     County, McLean County, Meade County, Menifee County, Mercer 
     County, Monroe County, Morgan County, Nelson County, Nicholas 
     County, Oldham County, Owen County, Owsley County, Pendleton 
     County, Perry County, Robertson County, Rowan County, Spencer 
     County, Todd County, Trigg County, Trimble County, Union 
     County, Washington County, Webster County, and Wolfe County.
     Maine Counties
       Aroostook County, Piscataquis County, and Washington 
     County.
     Minnesota Counties
       Becker County, Beltrami County, Big Stone County, Blue 
     Earth County, Brown County, Carver County, Chippewa County, 
     Clay County, Grant County, Kittson County, Lac qui Parle 
     County, Le Sueur County, Lyon County, Marshall County, McLeod 
     County, Nicollet County, Norman County, Otter Tail County, 
     Polk County, Ramsey County, Red Lake County, Red Lake Indian 
     Reservation, Redwood County, Renville County, Roseau County, 
     Scott County, Sibley County, Stevens County, Swift County, 
     Traverse County, Washington County, Wilkin County, Wright 
     County, and Yellow Medicine County.
     Mississippi Counties
       Adams County, Alcorn County, Attala County, Benton County, 
     Bolivar County, Calhoun County, Carroll County, Chickasaw 
     County, Choctaw County, Claiborne County, Clarke County, Clay 
     County, Coahoma County, DeSoto County, Greene County, Hinds 
     County, Holmes County, Humphreys County, Issaquena County, 
     Itawamba County, Jasper County, Jefferson County, Kemper 
     County, Lafayette County, Lee County, Marshall County, Monroe 
     County, Montgomery County, Neshoba County, Newton County, 
     Noxubee County, Panola County, Prentiss County, Quitman 
     County, Scott County, Sharkey County, Smith County, Tate 
     County, Tippah County, Tishomingo County, Tunica County, 
     Union County, Warren County, Washington County, Webster 
     County, Wilkinson County, Winston County, and Yazoo County.
     Missouri Counties
       Barry County, Bollinger County, Butler County, Cape 
     Girardeau County, Carter County, Christian County, Douglas 
     County, Dunklin County, Howell County, Iron County, Jasper 
     County, Madison County, McDonald County, Miller County, 
     Mississippi County, New Madrid County, Newton County, Oregon 
     County, Ozark County, Pemiscot County, Perry County, Pettis 
     County, Polk County, Reynolds County, Ripley County, Saint 
     Francois County, Saint Louis County, Sainte Genevieve County, 
     Scott County, Shannon County, Stoddard County, Stone County, 
     Taney County, Texas County, Washington County, Wayne County, 
     Webster County, and Wright County.
     Montana Counties and Indian Reservations
       Big Horn County, Blaine County, Broadwater County, Carbon 
     County, Carter County, Cascade County, Chouteau County, Crow 
     Indian Reservation, Custer County, Dawson County, Fallon 
     County, Fergus County, Fort Belknap Indian Reservation, 
     Garfield County, Golden Valley County, Hill County, Judith 
     Basin County, McCone County, Meagher County, Musselshell 
     County, Petroleum County, Phillips County, Powder River 
     County, Prairie County, Rocky Boy's Indian Reservation, 
     Roosevelt County, Rosebud County, Stillwater County, Sweet 
     Grass County, Treasure County, Valley County, Wheatland 
     County, Wibaux County, and Yellowstone County.
     New York Counties
       Allegany County, Broome County, Chemung County, Chenango 
     County, Clinton County, Delaware County, Essex County, 
     Franklin County, Hamilton County, Herkimer County, Lewis 
     County, Livingston County, Madison County, Niagara County, 
     Oneida County, Onondaga County, Ontario County, Steuben 
     County, Tioga County, Ulster County, Warren County, Wyoming 
     County, and Yates County.
     North Carolina Counties
       Alamance County, Bertie County, Bladen County, Craven 
     County, Cumberland County, Currituck County, Greene County, 
     Halifax County, Harnett County, Hertford County, Hoke County, 
     Johnston County, Lee County, Onslow County, Pitt County, 
     Robeson County, Sampson County, Tyrrell County, Wake 
     County, and Wilson County.
     North Dakota Counties and Indian Reservations
       Barnes County, Benson County, Billings County, Bottineau 
     County, Burke County, Burleigh County, Cass County, Cavalier 
     County, Dickey County, Divide County, Eddy County, Fort 
     Berthold Indian Reservation, Foster County, Grand Forks 
     County, Grant County, Griggs County, Kidder County, LaMoure 
     County, Logan County, McHenry County, McIntosh County, 
     McKenzie County, McLean County, Mercer County, Morton County, 
     Mountrail County, Nelson County, Pembina County, Pierce 
     County, Ramsey County, Ransom County, Renville County, 
     Richland County, Rolette County, Sargent County, Sheridan 
     County, Spirit Lake Reservation, Steele County, Stutsman 
     County, Towner County, Traill County, Turtle Mountain Indian 
     Reservation, Walsh County, Ward County, Wells County, and 
     Williams County.
     Oklahoma Counties
       Adair County, Caddo County, Canadian County, Cherokee 
     County, Delaware County, Grady County, Haskell County, 
     Kingfisher County, Le Fiore County, Logan County, McClain 
     County, McIntosh County,

[[Page H4924]]

     Muskogee County, Okmulgee County, Pittsburg County, and 
     Sequoyah County.
     Oregon Counties
       Clackamas County, Clatsop County, Coos County, Crook 
     County, Curry County, Douglas County, Lincoln County, and 
     Tillamook County.
     South Dakota Counties
       Aurora County, Beadle County, Brookings County, Brown 
     County, Buffalo County, Butte County, Charles Mix County, 
     Clark County, Clay County, Codington County, Day County, 
     Deuel County, Edmunds County, Faulk County, Grant County, 
     Hamlin County, Hand County, Hanson County, Hughes County, 
     Hutchinson County, Hyde County, Jackson County, Jerauld 
     County, Kingsbury County, Lake County, Marshall County, Miner 
     County, Moody County, Perkins County, Potter County, Roberts 
     County, Sanborn County, Spink County, Stanley County, Sully 
     County, Union County, and Yankton County.
     Tennessee Counties
       Benton County, Bledsoe County, Blount County, Bradley 
     County, Campbell County, Carroll County, Chester County, 
     Cocke County, Crockett County, Davidson County, Decatur 
     County, Dickson County, Dyer County, Fayette County, Fentress 
     County, Franklin County, Gibson County, Giles County, 
     Grainger County, Greene County, Hamilton County, Hardeman 
     County, Hardin County, Henderson County, Henry County, 
     Hickman County, Houston County, Humphreys County, Jackson 
     County, Jefferson County, Johnson County, Knox County, Lake 
     County, Lauderdale County, Lawrence County, Lewis County, 
     Lincoln County, Loudon County, Madison County, Marion County, 
     Marshall County, McMinn County, McNairy County, Monroe 
     County, Montgomery County, Moore County, Morgan County, Obion 
     County, Perry County, Pickett County, Polk County, Rhea 
     County, Scott County, Sequatchie County, Shelby County, Smith 
     County, Stewart County, Sullivan County, Sumner County, 
     Tipton County, Union County, Washington County, Wayne County, 
     and Weakley County.
     Utah Counties
       Garfield County, Kane County, and Washington County.
     Vermont Counties
       Addison County, Chittenden County, Essex County, Franklin 
     County, Grand Isle County, Lamoille County, and Orleans 
     County.
     Washington Counties
       King County, Kittitas County, Klickitat County, Lewis 
     County, Skagit County, Skamania County, and Wahkiakum County.


7 States For Which an Emergency has been Declared in 2011 for flooding*

       Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North 
     Dakota, Tennessee


 116 Counties in 7 States Covered by Emergency Declaration in 2011 for 
                               flooding*

     Kansas Counties
       Atchison County, Doniphan County, Leavenworth County, and 
     Wyandotte County.
     Louisiana Counties
       Ascension Parish, Assumption Parish, Avoyelles Parish, 
     Catahoula Parish, Concordia Parish, East Baton Rouge Parish, 
     East Carroll Parish, East Feliciana Parish, Franklin Parish, 
     Iberia Parish, lberville Parish, La Salle Parish, Lafourche 
     Parish, Madison Parish, Pointe Coupee Parish, Richland 
     Parish, Saint Charles Parish, Saint James Parish, Saint John 
     the Baptist Parish, Saint Landry Parish, Saint Martin Parish, 
     Saint Mary Parish, Tensas Parish, Terrebonne Parish, West 
     Baton Rouge Parish, and West Feliciana Parish.
     Mississippi Counties
       Adams County, Bolivar County, Claiborne County, Coahoma 
     County, DeSoto County, Humphreys County, Issaquena County, 
     Jefferson County, Sharkey County, Tunica County, Warren 
     County, Washington County, Wilkinson County, and Yazoo 
     County.
     Missouri Counties
       Andrew County, Atchison County, Boone County, Buchanan 
     County, Callaway County, Carroll County, Chariton County, 
     Clark County, Clay County, Cole County, Cooper County, 
     Franklin County, Gasconade County, Holt County, Howard 
     County, Jackson County, Lafayette County, Lewis County, 
     Moniteau County, Montgomery County, Osage County, Platte 
     County, Ray County, Saint Charles County, Saint Louis, Saint 
     Louis County, Saline County, and Warren County.
     Nebraska Counties
       Boyd County, Burt County, Cass County, Cedar County, Dakota 
     County, Dixon County, Douglas County, Garden County, Knox 
     County, Lincoln County, Morrill County, Nemaha County, Otoe 
     County, Richardson County, Sarpy County, Scotts Bluff County, 
     Thurston County, and Washington County.
     North Dakota Counties
       Barnes County, Benson County, Burleigh County, Cass County, 
     Eddy County, Emmons County, Grand Forks County, McLean 
     County, Mercer County, Morton County, Nelson County, Oliver 
     County, Pembina County, Ramsey County, Ransom County, 
     Richland County, Sioux County, Standing Rock Indian 
     Reservation (also SD), Towner County, Traill County, Walsh 
     County, and Ward County.
     Tennessee Counties
       Dyer County, Lake County, Shelby County, and Stewart 
     County.

       * Data is based on information publicly available on the 
     Federal Agency Management Association (FEMA) website at: 
     http://www.fema.govinews/disasters.fema.

  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DOLD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to 
recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DOLD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this motion to 
recommit, and I must say that I'm very disappointed in my friends on 
the other side of the aisle for offering up yet another politically 
motivated motion, especially considering that the flood insurance bill 
passed out of the Financial Services Committee 54-0; 54-0 out of the 
Financial Services Committee.
  On top of that, we spent the majority of today debating the bill 
before the House and entertaining some 25 motions and amendments to the 
bill. The motion to recommit cynically undermines the broad bipartisan 
cooperation I have been pleased to see throughout this legislative 
process.
  Mr. Speaker, this is exactly the type of political bickering that the 
American people have loudly rejected. This circumvents the flood 
insurance program. It is actually a disservice to the people who you 
are attempting to try to help. The point of flood insurance is to 
prevent assistance packages like this and should be taken up in regular 
order. We have no idea of the cost of the new grants, the new programs, 
and the new spending in this disaster relief package.
  It prohibits us from charging actuarial rates. What the flood 
insurance bill tries to do is infuse more private sector solutions, put 
in a new map, and provide actuarial rates which will help benefit the 
American public. Over 5 million residents and commercial properties 
rely on flood insurance today; 20,000 American communities rely on it. 
We must make sure that this flood insurance bill goes through, not 
circumvent the process with some disaster relief package.
  This is an attempt to have an insurance program without paying the 
premiums. Frankly, we can't afford to do that. I would urge my 
colleagues, especially those on the Financial Services Committee who 
again passed it out of committee 54-0, to vote ``no'' on this motion to 
recommit.
  I want to thank the chairmen, Chairman Biggert and the chairman of 
the full committee, Chairman Bachus, and also the ranking member, Mr. 
Frank, and the ranking member in the subcommittee, Ms. Waters, for 
their leadership. What we don't need now is to have the other side try 
to circumvent this process with a disaster relief bill.
  I urge my colleagues on this side and that side to support the 
underlying bill and reject the motion to recommit.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 
XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by 
5-minute votes on passage of the bill, if ordered; and the motion to 
suspend the rules on H.R. 2417.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 181, 
noes 244, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 561]

                               AYES--181

     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez

[[Page H4925]]


     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--244

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costa
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Waters
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Deutch
     Giffords
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Rush
     Stearns


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Webster) (during the vote). There are 2 
minutes remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1831

  Mr. COSTA changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. BUTTERFIELD changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 561 I was unavoidably 
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 406, 
noes 22, not voting 3, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 562]

                               AYES--406

     Ackerman
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brooks
     Brown (FL)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Kucinich
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Olver
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Ribble
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stark
     Stearns

[[Page H4926]]


     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Welch
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                                NOES--22

     Amash
     Benishek
     Broun (GA)
     Chaffetz
     Duncan (TN)
     Flake
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Graves (GA)
     Higgins
     Huelskamp
     Labrador
     Mack
     McClintock
     Miller (MI)
     Paul
     Petri
     Quayle
     Rohrabacher
     Sensenbrenner
     Walsh (IL)
     Yoder

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Deutch
     Giffords
     Hinchey


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes 
remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1839

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________