[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 4]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 6087]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              REPETITIVE FLOOD LOSS REDUCTION ACT OF 1999

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. KEN BENTSEN

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 25, 1999

  Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Repetitive 
Flood Loss Reduction Act of 1999. Mr. Speaker, every year in the United 
States many of our constituents suffer the devastating loss of their 
home from rampaging flood waters. I am introducing the Repetitive Flood 
Loss Reduction Act to correct a serious flaw in the National Flood 
Insurance Program (NFIP) by improving pre-disaster mitigation and 
facilitating voluntary buyouts of repetitively flooded properties. 
Specifically, my legislation will:
  Provide $90 million to the Director of the Federal Emergency 
management Agency (FEMA) to purchase homes insured by the NFIP that 
have flooded at least three times and have received cumulative flood 
insurance payments of at least 125 percent of the value of the 
structure.
  Provide $10 million in grants to states to seek non-structural 
alternatives to protect flood-prone communities.
  Create new incentives for home owners to comply with post-FIRM 
building standards. If a buyout offer is refused by the NFIP policy 
holder, their yearly premium will automatically increase by 150 percent 
and their deductible will rise by $5,000. For every future flood 
incident when the structure is substantially damaged the premium and 
deductible will rise again by the aforementioned amount.
  Grant more discretion to local flood officials to determine how best 
to use this program. State or local flood plain administrators will 
provide the Director with a list of priority structures that should be 
targeted for participation in the buyout program.
  I am hopeful that these steps will lead to a more effective pre-
disaster mitigation and buy-out program that will both reduce costs to 
taxpayers and better protect residents of flood-prone areas. I have 
drafted this legislation in consultation with the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency and the Harris County, Texas, Flood Control District, 
one of the Nation's most experienced and innovative flood control 
districts. However, I want to emphasize that I consider this 
legislation to be a starting point to begin the debate, and I look 
forward to input from my colleagues, my constituents, and other 
interested parties.
  Some ideas in this bill will be considered controversial and may need 
to be changed. By introducing this bill, I am not endorsing each 
provision, but rather, the idea that some action needs to be taken to 
reform the National Flood Insurance Program. In fact, it is my hope 
that the public will review the contents of the bill and make their 
specific support and objections known, so we can develop consensus 
legislation.
  The need for this legislation was underscored by a report sponsored 
by the National Wildlife Federation, that the National Flood Insurance 
Program has made flood insurance payments exceeding the values of the 
properties involved to thousands of repetitively flooded properties 
around the Nation. This report, entitled Higher Ground, found that from 
1978 to 1995, 5,629 repetitively flooded homes had received $416 
million in payments, far in excess of their market value of $307 
million. My state of Texas led the Nation in volume of such payments, 
with more than $144 million, or $44 million more than the market value, 
paid to 1,305 repetitively flooded homes. The Houston/Harris County 
area, which I represent, had 132 of the 200 properties that generated 
the largest flood insurance payments beyond their actual value.
  This included one property in South Houston that received a total of 
$929,680 in flood insurance payments from 17 flooding incidents, and 
another property near the San Jacinto river that received $806,591 for 
16 flooding incidents, about 7 times the actual value of the home.
  Other areas around the country have also had the same incidents 
occur. Altogether, according to the National Wildlife Federation 
report, although repetitive flood loss properties represent only 2 
percent of all properties insured by the National Flood Insurance 
Program, they claim 40 percent of all NFIP payments during the period 
studied.
  Since its creation in 1968, the NFIP has filled an essential need in 
offering low-cost flood insurance to homeowners who live inside 100-
year flood plains. The program has helped to limit the exposure of 
taxpayers to disaster costs associated with flooding. However, the 
recent report clearly points out the need to improve the NFIP to 
address the problem of repetitive loss property.
  Furthermore continued losses to the NFIP has increased the call by 
some of my colleagues to increase premiums and reduce the Federal 
subsidy for all Federal homeowners in the flood plain, not those who 
suffer from repetitive flooding loss, in order to reduce Federal budget 
outlays.
  Without long-term comprehensive reform of the NFIP, I am concerned 
that in the future, Congress may follow through with proposals to 
double or triple flood insurance premiums for all flood-prone 
homeowners, as was proposed in 1995 and 1996. Many of us, myself 
included, fought vigorously to oppose these increases, but our victory 
will be short-lived if we do not make changes in the program.
  These repetitive loss properties represent an enormous cost for 
taxpayers. They are also a tremendous burden to residents whose lives 
are disrupted every time there is a flood. In many cases, these 
residents want to move but cannot afford to do so. By repeatedly 
compensating them for flood damage, current Federal law makes it easier 
for them to continue living where they are, rather than moving to 
higher ground.

                          ____________________