Let’s see, they had about $3 billion in the coffers, have a $60 Billion request in from the states for damage and Congress gives them another $10 Billion. A billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you are talking about serious money.
I had a tree fall on my house one time from a storm. I also had my basement flood one time causing all sorts of damage. It never occurred to me to ask my local politicians to demand that money be taken from one group of citizens in other states and be given to me to help fix it, and be angry when the money wasn’t immediately provided. Hey Christie, this may shock you, but working folks in other states are not in a hurry to bail out those 1% crowd or others living near or on the coast who suffered perils that come with where they are living. Makes me sick.
Right Wayne, when was the last time we had a Governor of a state order the insurance industry to waive the deductible on their policies for wind? Cuomo did it in NY. Contracts don’t mean anything when we have liberals in charge. Christie has blown it with me. He was a RINO before and still is. People liked him because he talked tough etc, but he showed his true colors when he did the photo op with the President. Obama promised to cut the red tape and get help for the people, but there has been plenty of red tape and the unions rejected help from out of state because the contractors weren’t unionized. What a cesspool they have up there.
Hey Wayne. Those people purchased flood insurance and then suffered a flood loss. All they are asking for is to have the insurance policy they paid for cover the loss under the terms of the policy, nothing more. And that makes you sick.
I bet when the tree fell on your house, you expected your insurance policy to pay for the damages. Should that make me feel sick?
JS, I think Wayne was making a point that the taxpayers through FEMA continue to fund losses of people that live right on the ocean and rebuild on the same spot. Why are we subsidizing them over and over. By the way, FEMA didn’t even need Flood policies in force for Katrina. They just came in, gave everyone $2,000 spending money, trailers, hotel accommodations or apartments and those people never heard of a Flood policy down there. Many in the worst hit area never heard of a HO either. They knew the government would come in and give them the free stuff.
If that had been what he said, I would have agreed with him. But, this article is about funding the flood insurance people paid for and we should honor our committments under those policies.
And hopefully this event can serve as a catalyst for charging actuarially justified rates in the future, but I’m not holding my breath.
I agree, if actuarially sound rates were being charged for the coverage, maybe there would be enough money for the claims to be paid. If the NFIP was a private company they would have been bankrupt and out of business many years ago.
January 4, 2013 at 9:00 pm
wayne says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Actually JS, if I were coming to you to personally ask you to help pay for my tree claim, you may have some right to do so. One, I carry a high deductible so I paid for that damage 100%. Second, if my insurer gave me trouble because I used a carrier thinking it had bottomless pockets, then called you up asking for money when it turns out the carrier is on the verge of bankruptcy, you may have grounds to be sick. Neither happened, so your points are pointless.
In this case, people bought policies thinking the federal govt had an endless supply of other people’s money. The solution is to put all of us deeper in debt so some well-to-do folks and/or those who knew the risks can enjoy living on coastal property at the expense of others. Yes, I think I have a right to be sick that I scrape by to cover my own insurance premiums and deductibles on my un-glamourous property and then am expected to go deeper in debt through higher taxes so some coastal property owners can enjoy reduced expenses as they spread the risk of their property on to everyone else.
These are the same people who want govt in charge of healthcare too. Who will they complain to when getting an MRI takes 8 months to get approved and another 5 months for an appointment?
This is not about some flood insurance claims, “nothing more, nothing less.” We are out of money. States should take care of themselves. Citizens should also be more self-sufficient. Alas, we are so far past that point in our country.
One other note. I’ve tried hyperlinking the stories but I don’t think that’s permitted here. These states are not simply looking for some simple flood insurance claims to be paid and “nothing more.” Quoting from two recent stories:
” New York state on Wednesday asked the U.S. federal government to pay all the costs of cleaning up and repairing damage from massive storm Sandy that tore through the Northeast this week and crippled New York City.
Governor Andrew Cuomo said he is asking fellow Democrat, President Barack Obama, to pay 100 percent of the estimated $6 billion bill, at a time that state and local government budgets remain constrained by a weak economic recovery.”
Christie and Cuomo: “But they also want Congress to approve a much larger $51 billion package that’s due for a vote Jan. 15.”
In NJ: “The state wants the federal government to pay for at least 90 percent of the cost of the Sandy cleanup and recovery effort instead of the usual 75 percent.”
NFIP Take Some Responsibility, you are exactly right when you say NFIP would be out of business if it were a private company. That’s why this monstrosity should be abolished: so the market can set rates that reflect the reality of the risk. What is really disgusting is the way NAMIC supports this boondoggle. Nearly every day I read propaganda from NAMIC about how vital NFIP is. Baloney. Lacking a market pricing mechanism, it will never work, no matter how much it is “reformed.” I no longer support NAMIC’s PAC because of the way it constantly pushes for NFIP. This is lobbying at its worst: an insurance industry group pressuring lawmakers to keep sticking it to the taxpayers so its member companies can continue to write other coverage for structures that never would have been built in the first place if the owners had been quoted realistic prices for flood coverage.
Shocker
Let’s see, they had about $3 billion in the coffers, have a $60 Billion request in from the states for damage and Congress gives them another $10 Billion. A billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you are talking about serious money.
And the two political parties contiune to argue over the cost of dime on the price to go to the moon.
I had a tree fall on my house one time from a storm. I also had my basement flood one time causing all sorts of damage. It never occurred to me to ask my local politicians to demand that money be taken from one group of citizens in other states and be given to me to help fix it, and be angry when the money wasn’t immediately provided. Hey Christie, this may shock you, but working folks in other states are not in a hurry to bail out those 1% crowd or others living near or on the coast who suffered perils that come with where they are living. Makes me sick.
Right Wayne, when was the last time we had a Governor of a state order the insurance industry to waive the deductible on their policies for wind? Cuomo did it in NY. Contracts don’t mean anything when we have liberals in charge. Christie has blown it with me. He was a RINO before and still is. People liked him because he talked tough etc, but he showed his true colors when he did the photo op with the President. Obama promised to cut the red tape and get help for the people, but there has been plenty of red tape and the unions rejected help from out of state because the contractors weren’t unionized. What a cesspool they have up there.
Hey Wayne. Those people purchased flood insurance and then suffered a flood loss. All they are asking for is to have the insurance policy they paid for cover the loss under the terms of the policy, nothing more. And that makes you sick.
I bet when the tree fell on your house, you expected your insurance policy to pay for the damages. Should that make me feel sick?
JS, I think Wayne was making a point that the taxpayers through FEMA continue to fund losses of people that live right on the ocean and rebuild on the same spot. Why are we subsidizing them over and over. By the way, FEMA didn’t even need Flood policies in force for Katrina. They just came in, gave everyone $2,000 spending money, trailers, hotel accommodations or apartments and those people never heard of a Flood policy down there. Many in the worst hit area never heard of a HO either. They knew the government would come in and give them the free stuff.
If that had been what he said, I would have agreed with him. But, this article is about funding the flood insurance people paid for and we should honor our committments under those policies.
And hopefully this event can serve as a catalyst for charging actuarially justified rates in the future, but I’m not holding my breath.
I agree, if actuarially sound rates were being charged for the coverage, maybe there would be enough money for the claims to be paid. If the NFIP was a private company they would have been bankrupt and out of business many years ago.
Actually JS, if I were coming to you to personally ask you to help pay for my tree claim, you may have some right to do so. One, I carry a high deductible so I paid for that damage 100%. Second, if my insurer gave me trouble because I used a carrier thinking it had bottomless pockets, then called you up asking for money when it turns out the carrier is on the verge of bankruptcy, you may have grounds to be sick. Neither happened, so your points are pointless.
In this case, people bought policies thinking the federal govt had an endless supply of other people’s money. The solution is to put all of us deeper in debt so some well-to-do folks and/or those who knew the risks can enjoy living on coastal property at the expense of others. Yes, I think I have a right to be sick that I scrape by to cover my own insurance premiums and deductibles on my un-glamourous property and then am expected to go deeper in debt through higher taxes so some coastal property owners can enjoy reduced expenses as they spread the risk of their property on to everyone else.
These are the same people who want govt in charge of healthcare too. Who will they complain to when getting an MRI takes 8 months to get approved and another 5 months for an appointment?
This is what I’m talking about that really makes me sick. See stories such as these two:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/cuomo-christie-sandy-aid-vote-194833623.html
http://news.yahoo.com/york-governor-ask-federal-government-cover-sandy-storm-200420294.html
This is not about some flood insurance claims, “nothing more, nothing less.” We are out of money. States should take care of themselves. Citizens should also be more self-sufficient. Alas, we are so far past that point in our country.
One other note. I’ve tried hyperlinking the stories but I don’t think that’s permitted here. These states are not simply looking for some simple flood insurance claims to be paid and “nothing more.” Quoting from two recent stories:
” New York state on Wednesday asked the U.S. federal government to pay all the costs of cleaning up and repairing damage from massive storm Sandy that tore through the Northeast this week and crippled New York City.
Governor Andrew Cuomo said he is asking fellow Democrat, President Barack Obama, to pay 100 percent of the estimated $6 billion bill, at a time that state and local government budgets remain constrained by a weak economic recovery.”
Christie and Cuomo: “But they also want Congress to approve a much larger $51 billion package that’s due for a vote Jan. 15.”
In NJ: “The state wants the federal government to pay for at least 90 percent of the cost of the Sandy cleanup and recovery effort instead of the usual 75 percent.”
Sure, “nothing more” than simple flood claims.
NFIP Take Some Responsibility, you are exactly right when you say NFIP would be out of business if it were a private company. That’s why this monstrosity should be abolished: so the market can set rates that reflect the reality of the risk. What is really disgusting is the way NAMIC supports this boondoggle. Nearly every day I read propaganda from NAMIC about how vital NFIP is. Baloney. Lacking a market pricing mechanism, it will never work, no matter how much it is “reformed.” I no longer support NAMIC’s PAC because of the way it constantly pushes for NFIP. This is lobbying at its worst: an insurance industry group pressuring lawmakers to keep sticking it to the taxpayers so its member companies can continue to write other coverage for structures that never would have been built in the first place if the owners had been quoted realistic prices for flood coverage.