Flood Maps Rescinded for DC

The Washington Post reports here on FEMA's decision to rescind new flood maps which would have "drastically expanded the 100-year flood zone for downtown" DC thus "sparing the need for stricter insurance requirements and tougher building codes for private and government buildings." DC had filed a suit against FEMA calling the new flood maps "arbitrary and capricious." The District has agreed to spend $2.5 million on a flood control plan specifically to "strengthen its levee system at 17th Street and Constitution Avenue NW."

This story points out, once again for those that missed it after Katrina,  the complicated issue of flood protection in the US. And you would miss it indeed if one only listened to the wingnuts spouting the nonsense that the only problem is people living below sea level---Jeez just Move out of New Orleans. Are we to move out of DC or the many towns and cities along the Mississippi River which support critical commerce? Then there is worse with the odious simpleminded drivel from Rush Limbaugh that black people do not know how to deal with floods as white people do. There's the problem--as though in effect telling the white bread basket of America that they can break out in a neener neener and racist cheer of "We're better than You Are" will solve their insurance problems or make their towns and cities safer next time.

Meanwhile the realities of the complicated issue are hitting home for many thousands.  50 communities in WI had opted out of the Federal Flood Insurance Program. One was Lake Delton. Angry residents there didn't even know of this, only having learned of it after an "Army Corp of Engineers embankment failed" thus draining their lake and taking thier their million dollar shoreline homes with it into the WI River.  Lake Delton officials "had  pulled out of FEMA’s flood-plain coverage" back in 2001 because they said "the agency’s elevation maps were grossly inaccurate."  Who knows those officials may have been correct given as WaPo points out in the above cited article that FEMA has a review program of "90,000 flood maps across the country." But regardless what would have been the cost to be in compliance then? Or even in the future? How are cities much less small towns to find the funding to meet the standards?   Are each to resort to suing the federal government as DC did to ensure a more favorable and less costly deal? Also keep in mind that "since 2001, key federal disaster mitigation programs, developed over many years, have been slashed and tossed aside."

Of course that just begins to outline the problems with flood protection. Needed reform of the National Flood Insurance Program  has sat on the table and stymied Congress for some years. As Insurance Journal had pointed out last year, "Congress has shown little enthusiasm for taking the unpopular steps that experts say are necessary to fix the nation's main flood insurance program." They are now wrestling with it as the "National Flood Insurance Program expires this year and must be reauthorized by Congress." The House and Senate passed bills but they differ and must still be reconciled.  The Senate bill which doesn't include the House bill's wind protection provision allows the following and  tell me there won't be more than a few unhappy constituents:

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the government group that runs the NFIP, to raise its rates up to 15% each year (up from 10%), (ii) requires more at-risk homeowners (i.e., those protected by dams or levees) to buy insurance, (iii) gradually ends subsidies for vacation homes or properties that experience repeated losses, and (iv) requires FEMA to adjust its rates according to risk as shown by flood insurance rate maps.

Yes it's complicated and there are difficult and costly choices to be made and I haven't even discussed the state of our infrastructure. In  Wisconsin alone, "during the recent flooding, five dams have failed, 18 have significant damage and 25 are awaiting further inspection because they remain under water. Hundreds of dams are still awaiting repairs from August's floods." Compound that with damage in other states and think of the cost. And as Senator Landrieu pointed out the other day we have spent less and less over the years on infrastructure:

So once again Oh the Water raises the problems we face. Serious problems in need of serious solutions for ALL of us. And it will be interesting to see what if anything occurs. As U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon, D-Napoleonville who has fought for insurance reforms post Katrina said recently:

"I'll find it very interesting to see, when I get back to Washington this week, how many people in the Midwest are going to start paying attention to what we've tried to bring forward" and how many will have a better understanding of and empathy for what Louisiana and other coastal states have been trying to achieve, Melancon said.

If only we will see we are all in this together. The so called "whining and moaning" from New Orleans of which Rush spoke is neither. It was instead a warning from those on the Gulf Coast. Rather than ignoring and/or chastising them we should finally recognize that they have had a larger message...

...to be heeded and finally dealt with before even more is lost.

Comments

[GentillyGirl]

Right on Darlin'. We swamp kids are just the first to get screwed.

It's time to take care of home first before starting expensive and unjust wars.

[MapleStreet]

Keep it up Scout.

I'm expecting quite a backlash from the flood insurance this time. If a community hasn't done certain things, you can't get it at any price. If things are changed, it can take quite some time for the maps to be updated.

If you live above the 500 yr flood maps, your ability to get it goes down dramatically - but the flooding in some citys has been at above the flood map.

To be honest, as a gamble, if my home were above the 100 yr map, I might consider whether to get it or not.

But with global warming and weather pattern changes, the 500 year mark may change. Admittedly, we're dealing with a statistical event, but we've had a lollapalooza of a flood on the Missisippi both now and 1993.

[oyster]

Damn, Scout. This post is wonderfully researched and written. Great job!

And thanks from New Orleans.

[Texas Reader]

I like that Senate Bill language. For too long cheapo flood insurance has protected vacation homes of wealthy people and encouraged them to build close to the water. I don't want my taxes subsidizing their vacation homes, or paying for multiple rebuilds of homes in flood prone areas. I have wealthy friends with a vacation home/rental property who benefit from the low flood insurance rates and I don't begrudge them their great vacation house, just their subsidy via cheap flood insurance.

[scout]

Texas Reader...I agree but as I said that language will probably piss people off and I think it is part of the mess in that Congress has feared making some tough but necessary choices.

[Karin]

thanks for the reminder, scout. Great post.

[New Orleans Ladder]

Sorry to be so late on this one but snagged it off of the blog slabbed today. I love the way such a great post will live for weeks and months or longer to bounce around in and out of an issue as that issue changes over time and in some cases as a result of that very post.

Such is da'wake of your Draft. And this one is a perfect example.

When will this whole USACE+FEMA+Insurance=Antitrust?

Thanks for a tight right post!
Editilla