[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 7971-7973]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1920
             NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM EXTENSION ACT

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in 
the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 5740) to extend the National 
Flood Insurance Program, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the Senate amendment is as follows:
  Senate amendment:

       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM.

       (a) Program Extension.--Section 1319 of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4026) is amended by striking 
     ``the earlier of the date of the enactment into law of an Act 
     that specifically amends the date specified in this section 
     or May 31, 2012'' and inserting ``July 31, 2012''.
       (b) Financing.--Section 1309(a) of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by 
     striking ``the earlier of the date of the enactment into law 
     of an Act that specifically amends the date specified in this 
     section or May 31, 2012'' and inserting ``July 31, 2012''.

     SEC. 2. EXCLUSION OF VACATION HOMES AND SECOND HOMES FROM 
                   RECEIVING SUBSIDIZED PREMIUM RATES.

       (a) In General.--Section 1307(a)(2) of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4014(a)(2)) is amended by 
     inserting before ``; and'' the following: ``, except that the 
     Administrator shall not estimate rates under this paragraph 
     for any residential property which is not the primary 
     residence of an individual''.
       (b) Phase-out of Subsidized Premium Rates.--Section 1308(e) 
     of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 
     4015(e)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``under this title for any properties 
     within any single'' and inserting the following: ``under this 
     title for--
       ``(1) any properties within any single''; and
       (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting the 
     following: ``; and
       ``(2) any residential properties which are not the primary 
     residence of an individual, as described in section 
     1307(a)(2), shall be increased by 25 percent each year, until 
     the average risk premium rate for such properties is equal to 
     the average of the risk premium rates for properties 
     described under paragraph (1).''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The first increase in chargeable risk 
     premium rates for residential properties which are not the 
     primary residence of an individual under section 1308(e)(2) 
     of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as added by this 
     Act, shall take effect on July 1, 2012, and the chargeable 
     risk premium rates for such properties shall be increased by 
     25 percent each year thereafter, as provided in such section 
     1308(e)(2).

     SEC. 3. COMPLIANCE WITH PAYGO.

       The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 
     complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall 
     be determined by reference to the latest statement titled 
     ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation'' for this Act, 
     submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the 
     Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, provided that such 
     statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. David 
Scott) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Illinois.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and to add extraneous material on this bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Senate amendment to H.R. 
5740, the National Flood Insurance Program Extension Act. As my 
colleagues know, the NFIP is set to expire on May 31. This program 
provides vital flood insurance coverage to homeowners in flood-prone 
communities.
  Just 2 weeks ago, we passed a 30-day extension, H.R. 5740, to spare 
property owners and the housing market from another lapse in the NFIP. 
That bill was approved by this Chamber on May 17 by a vote of 402-18.
  The Senate has since amended our legislation, extending the 
authorization for an additional 30 days, for a total of 60 days, or 
until July 31. The Senate amendment also eliminates subsidized rates 
for second and vacation homes. According to an unofficial Congressional 
Budget Office staff estimate, this provision will generate 
approximately $2 billion to $2.5 billion over 10 years.
  Although not identical, the Senate's reform provision mirrors section 
5 of H.R. 1309, the 5-year flood reform bill that we in the House 
passed with overwhelming bipartisan support last July. And if any 
technical changes are needed, they can be addressed in any long-term 
reform measure that we consider in the coming weeks.
  On that note, I am pleased to report that, as part of reaching an 
agreement on this extension, Senate leaders have offered their public 
and private assurances that they will vote this June on the long-term 
flood insurance reform. This agreement is a major breakthrough for 
those of us who have been pushing for the Senate passage of the long-
term bill since the House completed its work nearly 11 months ago. The 
Senate Banking Committee has already approved a bipartisan NFIP 
proposal, and I remain confident that the House and Senate can 
reconcile any differences that remain between our respective visions 
for reform.
  Mr. Speaker, the NFIP is over $17 billion in debt to taxpayers, and 
since 2008 Congress has enacted 16 stopgap measures to keep the program 
running. Today's bill can and should be the last short-term extension, 
because this program is too important to let lapse and too in debt to 
continue without reform. Today's bill not only prevents a lapse, it 
brings us closer to a responsible long-term solution. And the sooner we 
accomplish this goal, the sooner taxpayers can stop bearing the full 
expense and risk of an outdated flood program.
  With that, I would urge my colleagues to support the Senate amendment 
to H.R. 5740, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, again, it is certainly a 
pleasure always to work with the gentlewoman from Illinois on this 
issue.
  We brought this issue up awhile back, and we were very successful in 
getting a 5-year extension, the way this should be dealt with. The 
Senate,

[[Page 7972]]

unfortunately, chose not to immediately pursue that, so we came back 2 
weeks ago and asked for a 30-day extension, to our good graces and the 
good grace of the Senate. They doubled that and came back with a 60-day 
extension, but yet we still need the 5-year extension, so we hope that 
this is a sign of us moving in the right direction. We are very pleased 
that the Senate is moving with the House in the right direction on this 
very important plan, and this is an important plan.
  We are now just 2 days from the start of the hurricane season and, as 
a matter of fact, as I was here before 2 weeks ago, I said we needed to 
make sure we prepared for the storm before the hurricane is raging and 
that we were just a couple of weeks away from the start of the 
hurricane season. But we had an early arrival. We had Beryl come in. So 
you see how pressing and how urgent this is.
  This piece of legislation is perhaps the most important piece of 
legislation that we can pass right now of major benefit for the 
American people. They will be able to go to sleep tonight to know that 
at least for the next 2 months this National Flood Insurance Program 
will be in place. And this will be a great sigh of relief, but that 
still leaves the heavy lifting to do. We have got the 5-year program 
and we have got to do that.
  I do want to say thank you and my hat is off to Senator Reid and 
Senator Coburn, who came to an agreement. I think it's a good 
agreement. It's an agreement that we certainly accept here, too. And 
what we understand happened in the Senate was that the Senate 
amendment, which was offered in the Senate Banking Committee by Senator 
Tim Johnson, was to make sure that those homes that are second homes or 
vacation homes would not receive subsidized rates, and we think that's 
fair. That's a part of what's in our 5-year plan as well, so that is 
very much appreciated there.
  As we look forward now, all we have to do now is pass this out now 
and move forward in good faith with the Senate to let's move with 
dispatch and get the 5-year plan. Now, the reason we need the 5-year 
plan is because of the continuity, of the dependability, so that people 
will know well in advance exactly that we have this program in place.
  If I may, and with just my short time here, in case some of the 
people do not know why this 5-year plan is so important, I do want to 
state exactly what it does.
  First of all, it does, in fact, extend the flood insurance program 
for 5 years.
  It will also delay, for 5 years, the mandatory purchase requirement 
resulting from new flood maps.
  The bill certainly requires annual notification to homeowners who are 
living in flood zones about the risks to their community. As I noted 
last week, a couple of weeks ago, many people move into areas, and they 
don't even know that they are in a flood zone, so it's very important 
that we will notify people. Our bill, this 5-year program, lets people 
know every single year because you have people moving in, you have 
people moving out. Every year there will be a notification as to 
whether or not they are in a flood zone.
  The other important part about this is we have noticed, particularly 
in my own home State of Georgia where we had such a devastating flood 
in the year 2009, it was the worst flood we had there since we started 
taking records of that. As I mentioned, we lost lives. Seven 
individuals lost their lives in one county in my district. The 
application of flood maps all across this country, in every corner of 
this country, our flood maps are outdated.
  Well, this bill will make sure that they are dated--so that many of 
our constituency who are at the risk of flood damage are at that risk 
without any knowledge--by making the flood maps current, by making sure 
that information is imparted to individuals who move in and out of 
communities every year that they are in a flood zone.
  Most importantly, most importantly in these tough economic times, 
under our 5-year plan, individuals will be able to purchase their flood 
insurance in installments instead of one lump sum. This has caused many 
people not to be able to be have the flood insurance, because prior to 
this bill, this 5-year plan, as of right now, to get flood insurance, 
you have to do it as a lump sum. That's why this 5-year plan is 
important, and it's important for the Senate to move so that we can get 
this done right away.
  But this is good news for the American people. We do have 2 months, 
as the hurricane season starts, and I think we have a good agreement 
here and good energy to move forward, the House and the Senate 
together, and put the 5-year plan in place.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1930

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Stivers), a valued member of the Financial Services 
Committee.
  Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlelady from 
Illinois for yielding me time. I'd like to thank her as chairwoman of 
the Subcommittee on Insurance and Housing for the Financial Services 
Committee for her incredible bipartisan effort that she led on this 
bill, along with Members of the other side, including the gentlelady 
from California and the gentleman from Georgia. It's been a true 
bipartisan effort. Obviously, that's reflected in the 402-18 vote 
coming out of this Chamber in May.
  I'm happy that the Senate has finally reached an agreement to move 
forward with the multiyear extension of the National Flood Insurance 
Program because if we don't have a multiyear extension, what could 
happen is it could really cause problems in our housing market. I think 
the gentleman from Georgia has really talked about the importance of 
continuity and why that's really important for people that live in a 
flood plain to be able to know they can sell their house and also know 
that somebody can buy a home that happens to be in a flood plain.
  I think it is important that we have accurate flood maps. This bill 
will ensure that we have much more accurate flood maps that have three 
dimensions on them, and that will result in better knowledge of where 
the flood plains are and where the risk is.
  This bill will help stop the taxpayer-funded bailouts. As you know, 
the National Flood Insurance Program owes $17 billion to the taxpayers. 
We've got to make sure that it is sustainable into the future.
  I think some of the Senate changes are good. The amendment by Senator 
Coburn that makes sure that we don't subsidize second and third homes 
that happen to be vacation homes makes a lot of sense. It steps up the 
premiums 25 percent a year for multiple years until they become 
actuarially sound. We need to ultimately move the whole program to an 
actuarially sound basis. That's why I'm concerned about some of the 
other provisions in the amended Senate language that removed the GAO 
study regarding privatization and allowing a chance to look at the 
flood insurance program's ability to pay claims over the long term.
  I think it is important that we know the viability of the flood 
insurance program. But overall, I think having Senate amendments and a 
Senate agreement is a major step forward. I'm excited about continuing 
to work together to move this program forward and reauthorize it, 
hopefully, for a 5-year term. But this step to agree to Senate 
amendments to extend the time for a total of 60 days to get us past 
July so that hopefully the Senate will have time in June to bring this 
up, I think allows us the time we need to make that happen.
  I do think if anybody in this body cares about our housing market or 
cares about stopping taxpayer-funded bailouts or wants to make sure 
that we have accurate flood maps, they should vote to agree to these 
amendments, and I hope all my colleagues will do so.
  Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. I only have myself to close.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I have no further requests for time.
  Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. Again, let me thank the gentlelady from 
Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) for her outstanding leadership on this. It's

[[Page 7973]]

been a joy to work with her. The American people are certainly 
appreciative of her efforts in leading this fight. I also want to thank 
Ms. Maxine Waters, who is our subcommittee ranking member; and I also 
want to extend congratulations to Senator Harry Reid and Senator Tom 
Coburn.
  I also want to just say a word for the bipartisan relationships that 
have developed on this bill. This is how we move bills forward. This is 
how we've got to move the country forward, and this is what the 
American people are looking to us to do. This is not a Democratic or a 
Republican Congress. It is a Congress of the American people. And the 
progress of this flood insurance bill is indicative of that fact.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, this bill is the 17th short-term 
extension of the National Flood Insurance Program. Our colleagues in 
the Senate have assured us that in June they will take up the version 
of a long-term NFIP reauthorization and reform bill, so I am confident 
that this will be our last short-term extension.
  H.R. 5740, with the Senate amendment, extends the program for an 
additional 2 months in order to protect homeowners, communities in 
flood-prone areas, and the housing market. Including at least one 
reform provision in H.R. 5740--to eliminate subsidized rates for second 
and vacation homes--reduces some of the NFIP's risk to taxpayers.
  H.R. 5740 also buys the House and Senate 2 more months to finalize a 
larger bill to reauthorize the 5 years and reform the National Flood 
Insurance Program.
  Eleven months ago, over 400 Members of the House from both sides of 
the aisle voted for H.R. 1309 to reform this program. Actually, the 
reform bill passed out of the Financial Services Committee 54-0. So 
this is a real bipartisan effort. The House also has approved the same 
5-year NFIP reauthorization and reform bill as part of the Middle Class 
Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 in December, and as part of the 
Reconciliation Act that was passed a couple of weeks ago.
  Again, earlier this month over 400 Members of the House voted for the 
first version of H.R. 5740 to ensure that NFIP doesn't lapse. NFIP is 
over $17 billion in debt to taxpayers and it cannot continue without 
reforms, but shouldn't lapse, particularly at the start of the 
hurricane season, which begins this week on June 1.
  With that, I urge my colleagues to again support H.R. 5740.
  Finally, I would really like to thank Ms. Waters for cosponsoring 
this bill as the lead cosponsor and Mr. Scott from Georgia for managing 
time for the other side and all other Members on both sides of the 
aisle. We've had a really great turnout for the NFIP reform effort.
  Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. Will the gentlelady yield?
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. I misspoke when I referred to Ms. Waters 
as the ranking member of the Housing Subcommittee. That honor goes to 
the Congressman from Illinois (Mr. Gutierrez). So I just wanted to 
correct that. Ms. Waters was the former chairman of the Housing 
Subcommittee. All of us worked together in such a way, but I did want 
to correct that as Mr. Gutierrez as the ranking member
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentleman. Both of the Members have been 
great in working with this. I know that Ms. Waters has been the ranking 
member for the committee in the past and has always worked on the flood 
insurance.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I once again rise in strong 
opposition to the reauthorization of the National Flood Insurance 
Program.
  With all the challenges our nation faces I have a simple question for 
everyone . . . why in the world is the federal government in the flood 
insurance business?
  The federal government is a bad insurance company. This program which 
began issuing policies in the 1970's is now almost $19 billion in debt 
with no hope to ever repay that debt because it is not run with sound 
actuarial standards.
  I opposed this bill a few weeks ago when it passed this House and 
while the Senate made improvements by taking away subsidized rates from 
second homes, which is a start, but it still provides others with 
subsidies while charging premium rates to others, like many in my 
district with little risk of ever flooding, to provide that subsidy to 
others in more flood prone areas.
  I believe strongly that this is a practice best left to the private 
sectors or individual states. It is long past time to get the federal 
government out of the flood insurance business and I continue to oppose 
this bill.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 
National Flood Insurance Program Extension Act.
  I support this bill because any extension is better than no 
extension. We really owe our constituents more than a 60 day extension 
and we must pass a long-term reauthorization the NFIP. Last year, the 
House completed their work on a reauthorization. I supported that bill 
and wish it was the one we could consider today.
  In our district, in Houston and East Harris County, Texas, the flood 
insurance program is critically important. Many of our constituents are 
required to carry flood insurance. The flood plain in our district 
covers thousands of houses and because of the topography of the land, 
the flood insurance program is the only way building and living here is 
practical. Without it, no policies could be written and no one would 
want to buy or live with such financial risk hanging over their heads.
  I also hope that when we revisit flood insurance that we include 
provisions that provide a five year phase-in of flood insurance 
premiums for low-income homeowners or renters whose primary residence 
is placed within a flood plain through an updating of flood insurance 
program maps. This language, which was in the bill we passed last July, 
homes can be valued at no more than 75% of the median home value for 
the state in which the property is located. The Harris County Flood 
Control District implements new flood control measures by maintaining 
bayous, building retention basins, and implementing drainage features, 
but even the best flood control can be overrun by a particularly bad 
storm. This language should be included in the final bill that is sent 
to the President.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues so that the next time we 
consider flood insurance we are reauthorizing and not extending it.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) that the House suspend the 
rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 5740.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the Senate amendment was concurred in.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________