Flood insurance rates are spiking:
President Obama has signed a law that would reduce rates for residents of coastal areas. Tracey Samuelson summarizes the news:
President Obama signed the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act into law, which dramatically slows down the federal government’s effort to end subsidies for the program. The law was fought for by coastal homeowners who feared that previous attempts to reform the National Flood Insurance Program, passed by Congress in 2012, would make insurance premiums unaffordable. … The legislation caps premium increases at 18 percent a year and reinstates subsidized rates for properties that had begun to be phased out under the 2012 reforms. Those restored subsidies apply to properties which were built in compliance with earlier flood elevation recommendations and ensures that those rates will apply to new homeowners, if a property is sold.
Scott Gabriel Knowles believes the 2012 law, the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act, should have been left intact:
Its stipulations were firm: Properties built before the NFIP were no longer grandfathered into the program; homes that flood repeatedly (“Repetitive Loss Properties”) were denied coverage; and insurance premiums would be recalculated to accurately reflect real actuarial risk. The law further mandated the formation of a Technical Mapping Advisory Council, a body of experts empowered to advise FEMA on best practices in floodplain mapping. Biggert-Waters marked a rare moment in American disaster politics: enlightenment. Local interests were sacrificed for something bigger – preparing the nation for the storms on the horizon. …
For advocates of sustainable development, Biggert-Waters held out the hope that the longstanding promise of the NFIP—controls over rampant real estate development in hazardous terrains—could at last be realized. Intense lobbying by homebuilders at the state level has a long history of thwarting local zoning restrictions. And many governors and local officials were eager to hand out relief checks and spur a return to the shore after a flood rather than waiting for impact studies that might restrict post-disaster reconstruction. The weakened act is much less likely to slow down coastal development in flood zones, and that’s bad news for advocates of an aggressive climate change policy.
The Dish 