Thad Cochran's claim to fame for re-election is defeating increases in Flood Insurance.
There was a bill passed in 2012 asking FEMA to re-evaluate the Flood Insurance Program. There are reasons to believe there is chronic abuse of the program. In other words, FEMA is suppose to designate flood plains. In doing so they issue flood maps which dictate insurance rates. Not only that but it indicates where development of infrastructure is a bad idea. Let's say there is a major power plant being planned it would be important it wasn't placed on a flood plain.
DIY: This home in Vicksburg, Mississippi (click here) is surrounded by tons of earth and sand as its owner tries to hold back the floodwaters from the Yazoo River
In July 2012, (click here) the U.S. Congress passed the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 (BW-12) which calls on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and other agencies, to make a number of changes to the way the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is run. Some of these changes already have occurred, and others will be implemented in the coming months. Key provisions of the legislation will require the NFIP to raise rates to reflect true flood risk, make the program more financially stable, and change how Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) updates impact policyholders. The changes will mean premium rate increases for some—but not all—policyholders over time. Homeowners and business owners are encouraged to learn their flood risk and talk to their insurance agent to determine if their policy will be affected by BW-12....
So, with a history of chronic use of The Flood Insurance Program as a means to maintain building of homes in flood plains, the Congress fairly much stated in 2012, enough is enough.
Flooding isn't just about having a home safe and sound from destruction or ending the purpose of the the home in sheltering a family, it is also about setting standards for where to safely homes, so lives are not in danger. Within the legislation in 2012 was the request for research to determine the rates of flood insurance. That is not yet completed. So, to that end Senator Thad Cochran had a legitimate reason to ask for a delay in issuing higher rates. But, it is astounding to me how flippant Republican law makers are when it comes to these issues.
The tornadoes and hurricanes and Superstorms occurring in the USA are NOT single occurrences anymore. Lives of citizens are in the balance and to continue to deny at a legislative level there is no anthropogenic climate change is moronic and extremely expensive. If Republicans want to complain about the debt on future generations they need to address the chronic problems they create as an insult to the USA Treasury because it is convenient to their political dogma.
There was a bill passed in 2012 asking FEMA to re-evaluate the Flood Insurance Program. There are reasons to believe there is chronic abuse of the program. In other words, FEMA is suppose to designate flood plains. In doing so they issue flood maps which dictate insurance rates. Not only that but it indicates where development of infrastructure is a bad idea. Let's say there is a major power plant being planned it would be important it wasn't placed on a flood plain.
In July 2012, (click here) the U.S. Congress passed the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 (BW-12) which calls on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and other agencies, to make a number of changes to the way the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is run. Some of these changes already have occurred, and others will be implemented in the coming months. Key provisions of the legislation will require the NFIP to raise rates to reflect true flood risk, make the program more financially stable, and change how Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) updates impact policyholders. The changes will mean premium rate increases for some—but not all—policyholders over time. Homeowners and business owners are encouraged to learn their flood risk and talk to their insurance agent to determine if their policy will be affected by BW-12....
So, with a history of chronic use of The Flood Insurance Program as a means to maintain building of homes in flood plains, the Congress fairly much stated in 2012, enough is enough.
Flooding isn't just about having a home safe and sound from destruction or ending the purpose of the the home in sheltering a family, it is also about setting standards for where to safely homes, so lives are not in danger. Within the legislation in 2012 was the request for research to determine the rates of flood insurance. That is not yet completed. So, to that end Senator Thad Cochran had a legitimate reason to ask for a delay in issuing higher rates. But, it is astounding to me how flippant Republican law makers are when it comes to these issues.
...Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., (click here) is a member of the subcommittee that Tuesday backed provisions in the flood insurance program that would put off for a year implementation of Federal Emergency Management Agency plans that opponents say would dramatically increase flood insurance premiums.
“We need to make sure the National Flood Insurance program is solvent, but we can’t make flood insurance protection unaffordable for the average family, business or community,” Cochran said in a release. “A one-year delay would give communities more time to plan for and mitigate possible rate changes.”...
That is populous mind speak. People aren't suppose to be building in areas where flooding is known to occur. It is just that simple. To continue the idea the USA's Treasury can continue to sustain losses in insuring the nation against BAD CHOICES is hideous.
This has been a problem in the southern Red States for a long time and then the nation wonders why these states continue to be afflicted with chronic problems and poverty. Well, if one is always patching their homes back together at the cost of national funding do those homes actually have value enough to build wealth?
No.
Then there is the interruption in income and sustainable plans for a quality community where education is important and long term plans can be carried out. Flood Insurance is not suppose to support bad choices, it is emergency funding. It is when in a wicked instance nature turns a dream into a nightmare. But, it was never intended to chronically support a community or a state in bad choices.
I hope the flood plains, new or otherwise because of the Climate Crisis, are identified and enforced by higher insurance rates. The idea that building will continue on flood plains or the side of mountains where deforestation will allow large deluge of rain to wash away homes and lives along with it is nonsense.
This is the problem of ignoring the Climate Crisis and denying the cause which is anthropogenic. The USA legislature has to recognize the chronic problems this country is facing in relation to a Wild West climate and the deadly trend it is on. The problems within these programs don't belong to citizens so much as the general fund to the USA Treasury. When that shift in thinking occurs the budget of the nation will have to reflect the need for better infrastructure regardless of the cause, be it storm cellars in Oklahoma for tornadoes or walls surrounding cities as Europe has built to save cities from high velocity storms.
Senators like Cochran are not the people that anyone can call a responsible legislator. He simply and chronically puts out fires rather than recognizing the sincere core of the problem and addressing it. He is ineffective in protecting the citizens of Mississippi on a long term basis. The way infrastructure is thought about in the USA has to change because lives depend on it. That is populous mind speak. People aren't suppose to be building in areas where flooding is known to occur. It is just that simple. To continue the idea the USA's Treasury can continue to sustain losses in insuring the nation against BAD CHOICES is hideous.
This has been a problem in the southern Red States for a long time and then the nation wonders why these states continue to be afflicted with chronic problems and poverty. Well, if one is always patching their homes back together at the cost of national funding do those homes actually have value enough to build wealth?
No.
Then there is the interruption in income and sustainable plans for a quality community where education is important and long term plans can be carried out. Flood Insurance is not suppose to support bad choices, it is emergency funding. It is when in a wicked instance nature turns a dream into a nightmare. But, it was never intended to chronically support a community or a state in bad choices.
I hope the flood plains, new or otherwise because of the Climate Crisis, are identified and enforced by higher insurance rates. The idea that building will continue on flood plains or the side of mountains where deforestation will allow large deluge of rain to wash away homes and lives along with it is nonsense.
This is the problem of ignoring the Climate Crisis and denying the cause which is anthropogenic. The USA legislature has to recognize the chronic problems this country is facing in relation to a Wild West climate and the deadly trend it is on. The problems within these programs don't belong to citizens so much as the general fund to the USA Treasury. When that shift in thinking occurs the budget of the nation will have to reflect the need for better infrastructure regardless of the cause, be it storm cellars in Oklahoma for tornadoes or walls surrounding cities as Europe has built to save cities from high velocity storms.
The tornadoes and hurricanes and Superstorms occurring in the USA are NOT single occurrences anymore. Lives of citizens are in the balance and to continue to deny at a legislative level there is no anthropogenic climate change is moronic and extremely expensive. If Republicans want to complain about the debt on future generations they need to address the chronic problems they create as an insult to the USA Treasury because it is convenient to their political dogma.
