[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 2]
[House]
[Page 2792]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



            FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROMOTING LIVABLE COMMUNITIES

  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, my priority in Congress is for the 
Federal Government to be a better partner in promoting livable 
communities, to make our families safe, healthy, and economically 
secure. A critical element in a livable community is making sure that 
we can deal with the natural disasters: floods, fire, earthquakes, and 
storms.
  Every year natural disasters cost billions of dollars and kill and 
injure Americans all across this great Nation. Every year the Federal 
Government is there to help unfortunate victims and their States and 
local governments in the recovery and repair. In the last 8 years 
alone, the United States has suffered more than 850 people dying in 
floods, and the property damage has totaled almost $90 billion. The 
total expenditure for disaster relief, including FEMA and insured 
losses, has been more than $150 billion in the last 20 years.
  There are two ways that we can help: we can be dealing after the 
fact, dealing with the unfortunate victims and the damage that has been 
brought; or we can work to deal before disaster occurs to minimize 
damage and perhaps even prevent it all together.
  I note two important provisions in the administration's recent budget 
submission: one is the reform of the Federal flood insurance program. 
This is a high priority for me. It is long overdue. The gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) and I have introduced legislation in the last 
Congress that two floods and you are out of the taxpayer pocket bill to 
stop the Federal Government subsidizing people who live in areas that 
God has repeatedly shown that he does not want them. There is one home 
in suburban Houston that has suffered over $800,000 of loss over the 
last 20 years, 16 occasions, a home that is only worth, they tell us, 
$115,000.
  Our legislation would allow people to use this money to relocate out 
of harm's way or to flood-proof their property. But if they do not, 
then they will be required to foot the bill themselves, not the U.S. 
taxpayer. We have seen dramatic examples of what this sort of proactive 
activity can do. The Arnold, Missouri, flood damage in 1993 was over $2 
million; but after work in flood-proofing the community, moving people 
out of harm's way, the 1995 flood, which was much larger, had only 
$40,000 in damage.
  Madam Speaker, I am pleased with the recognition the administration 
has for our legislation, but I have serious reservations about another 
proposal which would eliminate Project Impact. This is a Federal 
program that is not a grant, but instead provides seed money to help 
the people themselves build disaster resistant communities, to develop 
the partnerships and upfront investment needed to make sure that people 
do not suffer these horrible losses.
  Madam Speaker, I was impressed this last fall to be able to address a 
conference of over 2,000 participants, partners all across the country 
in these partnerships. There are now 250 Project Impact communities and 
over 2,500 business partners alone, including NASA and four NASCAR race 
drivers. It is important for us to nurture this type of partnership, 
not to turn our back on it.
  Project Impact and flood insurance reform are two important ways that 
the Federal Government can be a better partner to promote livable 
communities and to make our families safer, healthier, and more 
economically secure.

                          ____________________