and in my situation i am paying $1,800 per year for coverage in which my house is exempt from any payments. thank you. guest: we did mention that cap that you also brought up, which is true. the really high value homes, the $10 million home, is there what flood insurance to cover that value, they will have to go into the private market. if they have damage, they can still insure up to that cap. they are not excluded from the program entirely, but they will not be able to ensure the vast amounts of their home value. in terms of the other piece, there are a variety of roles in the program that are meant to do two things. one is meant to encourage people to build their homes in ways that reduce their flood risk, so elevating homes and so on.

also, the exclusions in the program are built around those rules and regulations, so it is true, there will be certain types of risks that are not fully covered by the program. part of the reason for that is to remain solvency and keep rates lower. if they cover those types of risks that you are mentioning, what would happen is in order to maintain solvency they would have to increase premiums as well. they're trying to strike a balance between keeping premiums low and covering the most important risk, but of course, whenever you try to strike a balance, there is going to be people that are not happy with that. unfortunately, there are not private markets that could go in and supplement really in this area. what would be optimal as if you wanted coverage in addition to what the flood insurance program provides, you could go into our private market, pay more money for additional coverage. host: very quick question.

caller: i would like to clarify something. the rates on flood insurance is not based on risk anymore. it is only based on the amounts of mortgage you carry. guest: no, i am sorry if i was unclear about that. your rates are based on your risk as well. and in the amounts of insurance you are carrying. that is ultimately what will week to determine the premium. host: the house of representatives is about to come into session and will be debating national flood insurance. and as our guest explained, this is not a restructuring of the program, which is currently $19 billion in debt. but with minor modifications and an extension of the current program. guest: it is not comprehensive reform that is needed to get the program back in shape.

host: thank you for helping us understand how the program works which was created in 1968. thank you for your time. and the house session begins today. that is the major piece of legislation on the agenda. thank you for being with us. we will be back tomorrow morning beginning at 7:00 eastern time. we hope to see you then. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] . . [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, reverend john cross -- dr. john cross, south biscayne church, florida.

the chaplain: heavenly father, thank you for being so kind, gracious, holy and just. thank you for demonstrating your endless love through jesus. thank you for giving us the honor of living in our great country. thank you for those who've gone before us. we pray for those who are serving now to protect our freedom. please give them safety. we pray for peace. we pray for our president, congress and all who lead our country. please give them wisdom and direction as they make decisions. may we look to you as our source, not our economy. in these days of global terror, may we remember you as our security. use us to be instruments who bring hope to the underserved and safety for the unprotected. may we be a nation who humbles ourselves before you.

we bless you and please bless america. in jesus name, amen. the speaker: thank you, dr. cross, north port, florida. the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announced to the chamber thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from texas, congressman poe. mr. poe: join me in the pledge. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will receive a message. motorcycle madam speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: madam speaker. the speaker: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has passed s. 1288, cited as the emergency management of grant act of 2009

in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker: thank you. without objection, the gentleman from florida, congressman buchanan, is recognized for one minute. mr. buchanan: madam speaker, it's my privilege today to introduce or thank dr. john cross who gave the opening prayer. the senior pastor at biscayne church in florida, he represents a county that i'm in, the largest county in sarasota in north port, our largest city. he's joined by his lovely wife today, dawn, and his five children. they're both celebrating their anniversary. dr. cross, the very innovative, spiritual leader. i've seen him many times on friday nights in jeans and t-shirt working with the youth.

he's taken a church from 150 to over 2,000. he's serving his second term as president of the southern baptist convention. i commend dr. cross for his longstanding service and it's a pleasure to have him and his family here today. god bless. sfoik the chair will entertain up to 10 further one minutes on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania rise? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker: without objection. mrs. dahlkemper: madam speaker, last week i attended the big butler fair in butler county in western pennsylvania and what was the number one question my constituents asked? what are you doing about the deficit? i visited senior centers and what did our seniors say to me? stop the unnecessary spending. today i'm proud to tell my constituents that we are taking action. we are cutting wasteful, unnecessary government spending to the tune of $98 billion.

that's how much federal agencies sent in improper payments and overpayments in 2009. $98 billion is how much we stand to gain with the improper payments, elimination and recovery act. this bill will save taxpayer funds and increase transparency by maake making federal agencies accountable for the money they spend. i'm telling my constituents right now, we're cutting wasteful spending and we have a powerful new tool to do it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the chair lays before the house this enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 5502, an act to amend the effective date of the gift card provisions of the credit card accountability responsibility and disclosure act of 2009. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered.

mr. poe: mr. speaker, the american people are opposed to the administration's ban on deepwater drilling. almost 3/4 of american people, 73%, say it's not necessary, but in spite of the will of most americans, in spite of two court rulings that say the moratorium is arbitrary, capricious, they are killing drilling in the gulf. the president's moratorium on drilling is destroying lives, and good people are being put out of work on purpose by this administration. these are not statistics. they're real people, hardworking people. how do they buy groceries and put gasoline in their cars? the largest drilling company had to move another deepcals water rig to the -- deepwater rig to the middle east. all of the good-paying jobs are going with it. mr. speaker, the moratorium on drilling is the second disaster in the gulf of mexico, and it's brought to us by this

administration. and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? mr. sires: i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. sires: mr. speaker, right now 15 million out-of-work americans are relying on congress to work together and immediately extend unemployment benefits to help them make ends meet. while they're looking for a full-time job. right now the unemployment in my state in new jersey is 9.7% with nearly half a million out of work. now is not the time to stall in providing assistance to those who need it most. earlier this month the house passed a bill to restore emergency unemployment benefits for unemployed americans and their families through the end of november. the senate must now follow our lead and act swiftly in passing an extension of benefits to send to the president's desk. doing so will not only help

unemployed americans, it makes economic sense. it is one of the most cost-effective and fast-acting ways to stimulate our economy. it's our duty to act now to provide relief to unemployed americans and their families. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. reichert: let's get real. the system is broken. you know what i'm hearing, the government's broken, the american people are sick and tired and so am i. they're tired of partisan games and business as usual. so am i. why can't we work together to solve this country's problems? why can't we get it right? why are we not listening to the american public? why? that's the big question the american people are asking. why can't we as members and representatives of this country, this great country, each and every district that we represent, stand here together

on this floor in this house and work together to solve the problems that this nation is facing? it's about freedom, it's about jobs, it's about our country, it's about our people, it's about our children and our grandchildren. mr. speaker, let's listen to the american people. this government is broken. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. . for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? without objection, so ordered. >> mr. speaker, by july 17 more than 112,000 people in the state of ohio will lose unemployment benefits due to the senate's inaction. mr. wilson: for out-of-work families these benefits help pay the rent, they buy food, they pay for health care when there isn't a paycheck coming in. during these tough economic times, extending unemployment benefits is one of the most efficient and fast acting ways to stimulate our economy. that is why on july 1 i voted in

favor of the six-month unemployment benefits extension. which would continue benefits until november 30. with ohio unemployment rate growing to 11% in june, this emergency relief is absolutely necessary for ohio and i will continue to fight for the passage of a long-term unemployment package. and i urge my colleagues in the senate to pass the six-month extension immediately. the time to act is now. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, seven proposals have been brought to this floor for a vote directly from participants in the interactive forum youcut. these proposals are sken cost savers of the people's money. house republicans have listened to the will of the people and

voted to save billions by reforming fannie mae and freddie mac, by selling excess federal lands, and by preventing taxpayer subsidized union activities. yesterday the house had another opportunity to save money by getting rid of propotional stimulus signs. a year and a half after the spending stimulus passed, unemployment has risen to 10% as the so-called stimulus has failed to create jobs. but liberals cleverly came up with propaganda to push americans on this failed policy. at a cost up to $10,000 a sign, stimulus signs are nationwide. $20 million could be saved if we elem-r limb nated this waste. when it comes to wasteful washington spending, all signs point to the stimulus. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new york rise? without objection. recognized.

mrs. maloney: mr. speaker, unemployment benefits are a necessary lifeline for jobless workers trying to make ends meet. and also provide a boost to the economy. these benefits are crucial when there are five job seekers for every available job. unemployment benefits keep workers attached to the work force, preventing some workers from shifting to other more costly programs such as social security, disability insurance. by the end of 2010 the joint economic committee estimates that 290,000 unemployed disabled workers will exhaust their benefits. shifting these workers from the labor market and on to the social security disability insurance, the cost of inaction, is a staggering $24 billion lifetime cost. contrasted with $721 million this year by extending the benefits. extending unemployment benefits is both morally right and the

fiscally responsible thing to do. providing a boost to the economy and a savings to the government. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. neugebauer: mr. speaker, the democratic leadership got their credit card bill yesterday and it wasn't a pretty picture. the treasury department announced that the federal deficit for 2010 hit the trillion dollar mark at the end of june. that's a staggering amount and that's not all. there's still three months to go in this year. the only time the federal deficit has ever reached this level was last year. the american people know when you hit your spending limit, you stop spending, but president obama and democratic leadership in congress don't seem to get it. they have taken a nation to an unprecedented spending spree that's hurting economic growth, slowing job creation, and put be an incredible burden on our future generations. we have a trillion dollar deficit but congress doesn't even have a budget or a plan.

running deficits of $1 trillion or more is completely unsustainable. we got to cut up this credit card and stop this reckless spending. it's time to -- it's not whether we should do something we have to do something. the future of our nation depends on it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker, today i rise to honor randa flynn, a teacher at northeast high school in oakland park, florida. she was selected as one of only 10 society for science and public fellows in the country. she earned this monor for her hard work in inspiring excellence and research among her students. this fellowship includes an award of $8,500 to use directly in her classroom and full support to attend a fellows institute here in washington where i will have the personal pleasure of thanking her for her contributions to our schools and community.

mr. klein: my mother was a public school teacher and i know how hard they work to help our children learn and grow. that's why mrs. flynn and her actions in shaping our future leaders and scientists of our country and her efforts are an inspiration to all of us. thank you to her and all the teachers in south florida. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky rise? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> mr. speaker, enough is enough, the democrats' failure to lead is now putting a strain on the troops by refusing to pass a clean emergency supplemental war bill. mr. rogers: yesterday, the pentagon announced that it's putting together an emergency plan in case congress fails to do its job and does not pass the upcoming supplemental. if the democrats continue to

play political games with this bill, the pentagon will not be able to make payroll for active duty troops at war. this is a disgrace. funding our troops is a national priority. our brave men and women in uniform do not deserve to suffer because the majority party cannot agree on the precise amount of pork they want to put into this wartime supplemental bill. we need to pass a clean supplemental and we need to do it today. i'm tired of excuses, tired of the bickering. let's put aside election day politics by doing the right thing for the troops. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new mexico rise? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. heinrich: the people of new mexico's first congressional district are deeply saddened by

the tragic shooting that took place at the manufacturing plant in albuquerque on monday morning. in a brutal act of workplace domestic violence, six community members were victimized, including michelle turner and sharon cunningham, who were killed. and four others who were wounded. this kind of tragedy is every community's nightmare. but this tragedy must also recommit all of us to confronting and preventing the serious problem of domestic violence to ensure that a tragedy like this never happens again. we are grateful for the heroic actions of the many employees as well as albuquerque's police and first responders who arrived on the scene within minutes of the first call and some of whom rushed in to the active shooter situation without waiting for backup. we hold the victims in our hearts, we pray for all touched by this, and we will find the strength as a community to come together and overcome.

mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana rise? mr. pence: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. pence: in the worst economy in a quarter century, american families are hurting. businesses are struggling in the city and on the farm, and that's obvious to almost everyone in this country except the obama administration. remarkably yesterday the white house issued a report saying that the stimulus bill passed a year and a half ago had, quote, saved or created 2.5 million to p.6 million jobs. -- 3.6 million jobs. as my three teenagers might say to me in like circumstances, really? 2.5 million to 3.6 million jobs. unemployment was 7.5% when the stimulus was passed, it's 9.5% today. it's important the american people know that the report

issued by the administration yesterday isn't even based on actual numbers. it comes from what economists in the administration say is a highly inflated projection of how much economic growth is created for every government dollar that's spent. the facts come from the bureau of labor statistics. they speak for themselves of the since the stimulus was enacted, more than three million jobs have been lost in this country. a net job loss of 2.4 million jobs. enough with the talk. the stimulus bill has failed. it's time for new ideas across the board tax relief and fiscal discipline now. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. speaker, i rise in support of today's flood insurance reform legislation but also to express my deep frustration with fema's decision to increase flood insurance rates for many residents of the stockton,

california. mr. mcnerney: prior to issuing new flood maps last year for central stockton, fema encouraged residents to purchase flood insurance early so they could take advantage of the lower cost preferred rate. in may fema decided to extend those rates for two years, a welcomed decision. but for reasons that remain difficult to understand, fema delayed the effective date of extension until january of 2011, effectively creating a doughnut hole in the availability of preferred rate coverage. as a result, residents who must renew their policy before the end of the year are suffering rates many times higher than what they expected, placing a serious burden on family budgets. i urge fema in the strongest possible terms to allow stockton residents to renew their policy without delay. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise?

>> mr. speaker, by direction of the committee on rules i call up house resolution 1517 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 214, house resolution 1517, resolved that at any time after the adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 5114, to extend the authorization for the national flood insurance program, to identify priorities essential to reform an ongoing stable functioning of the program, and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 21. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and

controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on financial services. after general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on financial services now printed in the bill. the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived except those arising under clause 10 of rule 21. notwithstanding clause 11 of rule 18, no amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report. shall be considered as read. shall be debatable for the time

specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to demand for division of the question. all points of order against such amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 21. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment, the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. section two, the chair may entertain a motion that the committee rise only if offered by the chair of the committee on financial services or his designee. the chair may not entertain a motion to strike out the enacting words of the bill as scribet in clause 9 of rule 18 -- described in clause 9 of rule 18. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlelady from california is recognized for one hour. ms. matsui: thank you, mr. speaker. for the purpose of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from florida, mr. diaz-balart. all time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material into the record. . the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. matsui: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. matsui: mr. speaker, house resolution 1517 provides for consideration of h.r. 5114, the flod insurance reform priorities act of 2010 under a structured rule. the resolution waives all points of order against consideration of the bill except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 21. the resolution provides one hour of debate on the bill. the resolution provides that a substitute amendment recommended by the financial services committee shall be

considered an original bill for purpose of amendment and shall be considered as read. the resolution makes in order those amendments printed in the rules committee report accompanying this resolution. the resolution waives all points of order against such amendments except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 21. the resolution provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions, provides the chair may entertain a motion to rise only if offered by the chair of the house financial services committee or his designee. lastly, the resolution provides that the chair may not entertain a motion to strike out the enacting words of the bill. mr. speaker, i rise this morning in strong support of the rule for the flod insurance reform priorities act and in strong support of the underlying legislation. i'd like to applaud the sponsor of h.r. 5114, chairwoman maxine waters, for her leadership in bringing this important bill fought floor. and i want to commend chairman

frank and ranking member bachus for being so open to improvements of the bill. i am grateful for the long-standing advocacy of my legislation, h.r. 1525, which is incorporated into the underlying bill before us today. both of them and their incredible staff have been valuable in this process. mr. speaker, it's critical that our constituents have access to a stable flood insurance program. toward that end, h.r. 5114, which i am pleased to co-sponsor, would re-authorize national flood insurance program for five years and implement necessary changes that are essential for its continuing viability. floods have been and continue to be one of the most destructive and costly hazards to my hometown of sacramento and to other communities throughout the country. the nfip is an invaluable tool to mitigate against future

disasters. the program assures that families have access to affordable flood insurance while making certain that their safety is protected. in fact, the nfip is a primary source of reliable, affordable flood insurance in this country providing 95% of the flood insurance policies nationwide. it covers 5.6 million households and insures $1.2 trillion in property. from the sacramento region to the louisiana bayou to the plains of the midwest, communities are improving their flood protection infrastructure in order to keep residents safe and secure. however, as we work to provide certainty to our recovering housing market, these communities are seeking clarity to meet the changing dynamic to federal standards. it's for these reasons that i'm thrilled that this legislation contains provisions i authored that would provide technical changes to federal flood zones. in my district, the deepest flood departments would be in a

region -- zones would be in a region in the sacramento area. the state of california will have spent upwards of $350 million repairing levees in the atomis basin. hundreds of people have not been acknowledged by fema and the remapping process. unfortunately, fema's current flood zone certification process does not always take local and state funding into account. a year ago i introduced h.r. 1525 which would fix this problem and has been included in the bill we are considering today. in addition to making flood insurance available to millions of americans, this bill also provides communities clarity in order for them to continue their ongoing efforts to improve flood defenses. it would update current law to

take local, state and federal funding into account when determining flood zone determination. this must be recognized by the federal government. local communities, states and the federal government must all be thoughtful and committed partners because protecting our constituents from the danger potential floods pose needs a comprehensive approach. i have serious concerns about families being forced to incur higher insurance rates during an economic recession. increased rates on top of the annual flood protection assessment that many residents are paying each year compounds this problem which is why i'm grateful that h.r. 5114 includes another provision i strongly support that would reduce the shock of higher insurance rates by facing them in over five years. it would apply retroactively to september, 2008, to areas that

haven't been already remapped. most importantly, for the thousands of homeowners across the country that have recently gone through the remapping process, h.r. 5114 would lower their flood insurance rate. without this bill many of our constituent would likely be forced to pay more than four times of the deferred risk policy rate. mr. speaker, the flood insurance reform priorities act was unanimously approved by the financial services committee on april 27, 2010. it is budget neutral and is supported by numerous organizations in the property insurance field. congress has not re-authorized nfip since 2004. it is time for us to do so and to make essential changes to the program to ensure its sustainability. as many of my colleagues can attest, providing for the security and safety of flood-prone regions like the one i represent needs to be at the top of our priority list. mr. speaker, i am proud to be

part of the solution and to help make sure residents of sacramento and other flood-prone communities across the country so they can afford to purchase the flood insurance they need to protect their families, their businesses and the livelihoods of our communities. i, therefore, urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying legislation, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i'd like to thank my good friend from california, ms. matsui, for yielding me time, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: in 1993 i first arrived in congress right in the aftermath of the greatest natural disaster that had ever hit south florida. august 24, 1992, hurricane andrew, category five storm with wind gusts of over 200 miles per hour hit our community and devastated it.

that storm caused over $26 billion of damage to south florida, entire communities were destroyed. until hurricane katrina hit the gulf coast in 2005, hurricane andrew was the costliest natural disaster in american history. we in south florida were very fortunate to receive generous assistance from our fellow americans in the wake of hurricane andrew. that assistance was vital for our recovery. i won't forget the support and compassion of my colleagues in this chamber demonstrated during those difficult times. the national flood insurance program established by congress in 1968 was designed to provide an alternative to disaster assistance and to reduce the costs of repairing flood damage to buildings caused by hurricanes or inland flooding of rivers, lakes or streams.

approximately 20,000 communities across the country participated in the program by adopting and enforcing floodplain management regulations to reduce future flood damage. in exchange, federally backed flood insurance becomes available to homeowners, renters and business owners in those communities. the nfip was self-supporting through policy premiums and fees until 2005 when the program incurred approximately $17 billion in flood claims caused by hurricanes katrina, rita and wilma. currently, the program is over $18 billion in debt. re-authorization of the nfip is very important to the economy in south florida. without the program, homebuyers are unable to close on new homes. suppressing home sales at a time when they're desperately needed in south florida.

for example, a constituent, chris o'neil, wrote to me last month asking for congress to re-authorize this program because the majority had let the program lapsed, he and his family were unable to close on their new home and they faced being homeless because their current landlord had forced them to vacate their home. mr. o'neil's case wasn't an isolated incident. a number of my constituents have been unable to close on their new homes, and it's my understanding that many throughout the country face a similar situation. this legislation, the underlying legislation, would rectify that problem and re-authorize the nfip through 2015. the bill provides premium discounts to assist residents in newly designated flood hazardous areas that would be subject to a new requirement to purchase flood insurance during a phase-in period of five years. other provisions include extelling the severe repetitivive loss grant program

to reduce program losses in the long term. the bill also allows for premiums to be paid in installments for lower income property owners, thereby, helping them to afford flood insurance and encouraging them to continue to purchase protection. although i support the underlying bill, mr. speaker, it could have been better. especially if the taylor-scalise amendment had been made in order. their amendment would allow coastal homeowners to buy an option for both wind and flood insurance coverage from the nfip. this option would be extremely helpful to coastal communities like south florida and the gulf coast. unfortunately, the majority in the rules committee decided to block even debate on that emmed a. and not only did they block the taylor-scalise amendment, they blocked out 90% of the republican amendments submitted to the rules committee. while allowing nearly 2/3 of

the democrat amendments. so today we will continue three minority amendments and eight majority amendments, plus another 10 majority amendments included in the mappinger's amendment. that's quite a contrast. it's especially unfortunate when you consider that we were told that the process was going to change, that it wasn't going to be this way. the distinguished speaker promised the american people that her party would run the most open and bipartisan congress in history. yet, week after week the majority continues to block an open process. we have yet to consider even one, even one rule, open rule during the entire 111th congress. not even on the historically open appropriations bills. that's quite sad. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from california. ms. matsui: mr. speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from maine, my colleague on the rules committee, ms. pingree. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. pingree: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you to my colleague for yielding the time. mr. speaker, today, the house will consider h.r. 5114, the flod insurance reform priorities act. in maine, fema is remapping york and cumberland counties. the new maps will help homeowners and businesses assess the flood risk they face. in portland, initial models fema used showed much of the city's waterfront would be damaged by waves during a storm. fema's maps -- portland harbor is not a barrier island nor is it a community built on shifting sand. rather, portland harbor is a working, thriving waterfront that has endured for hundreds of years. after working with the city, fema recently improved the

accuracy of their model taking into account the impact of the city's working waterfront on the wave action as well as new data provided by the city. in the next few weeks, fema will issue preliminary maps as a result of hard work by the city and the maine congressional delegation. together we were able to save portland's working waterfront, but other communities in york and cumberland counties in my state face similar issues and do not have the resources to hire engineers and collect new data. our working waterfronts are the economic and cultural hearts of our coastal communities. we need to make sure they are treated fairly and assess -- in assessing the risk they face. in one, one boat yard spent thousands of dollars to show fema that they were not in a flood zone and the maps showed wrong. they could not be rebuilt if they were burned down and a new facility had to be built away from the water. you know, fema may be correct

in their models that these piers and buildings are in a flood zone and at risk for being damaged or destroyed in a once in a life -- once-in-a-lifetime store. during a hurricane or nor'easter they may get flooded or battered by waves. our coastal communities deserved to be mapped using the best models that fema has. i helped craft language that was included in the manager's amendment to show how models are applied to working waterfronts and to study how it's done. we owe it to the american people to make sure that all of our communities receive accurate information about flood risks they face and all of our communities deserve to work with fema in a true partnership. . i urge my colleagues to support the rule, the manager's amendment, and the underlying bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: how many remaining speakers does she

have? ms. matsui: at this moment i have three remaining speakers. mr. diaz-balart: we will reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from california. ms. matsui: mr. speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from new york, my colleague on the rules committee, mr. arcuri. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for three minutes. mr. arcuri: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my friend and colleague from the rules committee, ms. matsui, for yielding me the time. i would like to compliment her on her hard work over the years and leadership with respect to protecting individuals who have been devastated by the effects of floods, which brings us here today. i speak in support of h.r. 5114, the flood insurance reform priorities act, which will provide stability necessary for businesses, realtors, homeowners, and plan effectively to reduce the potential economic loss and cost of repairing damages from future flooding without stifling and preventing otherwise safe development. as fema works to update and modernize flood maps from communities across the country,

thousands of families across upstate new york are facing a new requirement to purchase flood insurance as they are remapped into new flood zone boundaries. it is imperative that these maps are accurate and protect our communities without unnecessarily burdening them or stifling economic development, especially during these very tough economic times. h.r. 5114 seeks to strike the proper balance by allowing property owners a sufficient grace period to account for the need to buy flood insurance or appeal the determination that their property is within a flood plain and also phases in flood insurance premium rates over a five-year period beginning as soon as the property owner negotiates the flood insurance policy. in recent years, i have assisted communities in my district and successfully appealing updated draft flood maps saving countless home and business owners from unnecessarily having to purchase flood insurance. instances like this illustrate why the grace period in h.r. 5114 is so important. so property owners have a

five-year delay of flood insurance purchase requirement within which to appeal fema's preliminary determinations. this grace period would apply retroactively to any final updated flood map that was enacted since september 1, 2008. i'm also pleased that h.r. 5114 would create an office of flood insurance advocate within fema to assist policyholders in filing flood insurance claims, settling disputes between policyholders and fema, and streamlining the claim's process. this is a provision i fought to include in the flood insurance reform legislation in the last congress and i applaud the committee for including these provisions in the underlying bill today. i encourage my colleagues to vote for the rule and underlying bill. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california. ms. matsui: mr. speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for three minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the gentlelady's courtesy in permitting me to speak on the rule as i have appreciated her work in her community over the years dealing with the consequences of flooding an water damage. -- and water damage. i rise in support of the rule and reluctantly supporting the underlying bill. i have great sympathy for the work that was done by the financial services committee. i understand what horrible timing it is to try and deal with the huge losses in housing value, other real estate markets, as well as unemployment and the economic slow down. people are reluctant to put any additional pressure on people who are located in harm's way. but i will tell you having worked on flood insurance reform now for over a decade, there is

never a good time to fix this program. the tragedy of katrina five years ago dramatically illustrated both the need for and the flaws in our flood insurance program and environmental protection. for generations, local and state governments and sadly in some cases the federal government itself, has encouraged people to live in harm's way. over time this has become a much more expensive program while we have accelerated the potential for disastrous floods, as we engineered our rivers, while we have encouraged filling in wetlands that used to be nature's sponges, and we have more people in the areas that are subjected to even more flooding. now we have the situation where

global warming is creating weather instability, extreme weather events, brutal rains and winds that make what was once a one in 100 years, or one in 500 years sadly routine. we have seen on the floor of this house people come to the floor dealing with 500-year floods that have happened in relatively short time frames. and it's going to continue accelerating in the future. we need to make sure that fema has the resources to do this important mapping job properly. and we need to have the gumption to support fema after we have gone through the process and done the mapping right, to enforce that mapping. we need to make sure that people who are in harm's way are

encouraged to protect their properties and after repeated damage that we don't just keep putting people back in harm's way but help them be located more safely. may i have an additional 30 seconds. ms. matsui: yes, you may. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. blumenauer: it is important that we no longer put the taxpayer on the hook for massive losses and have the rest of the people who pay flood insurance pay higher premiums while people who should start making some modifications are waiting 10 years before they pay their own way. this bill is a compromise, but i'm hopeful that congress can do more work to make a compromise that is more effective and long term because this is the tip of the iceberg and if we don't get it right, we are going to be back here time and time again on the hook for more and more money

and more loss of life and property. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: does my friend have any additional speakers? ms. matsui: i have no additional speakers. mr. diaz-balart: we yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california. ms. matsui: mr. speaker, i yield myself the balance of the ime --time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. matsui: i want to start by thanking the staff for their diligence in working with me on this important legislation. tom of the financial services majority staff has been especially helpful. mr. speaker, as we are all well aware, flooding is the most common natural disaster in this country. the national flood insurance program, nfip, is the primary source of reliable, affordable flood insurance in the united states today. the last re-authorization of nfip occurred in 2004. since 2008, it has operated under a series of short extensions with the current law scheduled to expire at the end

of september. to ensure that individuals nationwide have access to a stable and reasonable flood insurance program, we need to pass the flood insurance reform priorities act. this legislation would re-authorize the nfip and implement other critically important changes that would guarantee the program's sustainability. in particular, it would help the sacramento region and other areas answer ongoing efforts to improve their flood protection. additionally, the bill would lower the burden of higher insurance rates and remap communities by phasing them in over five years. according to the congressional budget office, h.r. 5114 would have no impact on the budget over the next 10 years. in fact, the c.b.o. has stated that the measure would increase revenues by $5 million over 2010 to 2015, and by $10 million over 2011 to 2020. it would address the nfip

serious financial challenges by directing it back to our fiscal health and sustainability. this legislation, which was unanimously approved by the financial services committee earlier this year, would provide certainty to our recovering housing market and assure public safety. mr. speaker, h.r. 5114 is an important bipartisan bill that would help protect the communities from catastrophic flooding. with that in mind, i urge a yes vote on the previous question and on the rule. i yield back the balance of my time. >> would the gentlewoman yield before she yields back her time? ms. matsui: i can't yield at this point in time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yield time to the gentleman from mississippi? ms. matsui: certainly, mr. speaker, i yield the gentleman one minute. mr. taylor: thank you, ma'am. yesterday up here before the rules committee i offered an amendment that would allow people in coastal america to buy

wind insurance has an option to their flood insurance. a measure that is identical to what had happened this house less than three years ago as a part of the base bill. it is my understanding that that was not made in order. my question to the rules committee is, since the speaker says she is for it, since majority leader hoyer says he's for it, since the chairwoman of jurisdiction of jurisdiction, ms. waters says she's for it, i got to admit my amazement it was not made in order. again, since it's already passed this house by about 270 votes three years ago. i was hoping if the gentlewoman could enlighten those of us who are in support of that amendment what happened. ms. matsui: mr. speaker, if i may respond. one of the amendments was not germane, one amendment was made in order because it was germane.

mr. taylor: the amendment again that has already passed this house as a part of the base bill of an identical bill three years ago, i'm having a little trouble understanding -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. taylor: the only -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. ms. matsui: reclaiming my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california. ms. matsui: may i just say that the -- just to clarify, the bill that mr. taylor's talking about was germane to that bill was not germane to this bill. so if i may continue. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california. ms. matsui: mr. speaker, h.r. 5114 is an important bipartisan bill that would help protect the communities from catastrophic flooding. with that in mind i urge a yes vote on the previous question and on the rule. i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yield back her time. without, the -- without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of

the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the resolution is agreed to. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: we request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 239. the nays are 182. the resolution is adopted. without objection, a the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. waters: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on h.r. 5114, and to insert extraneous material thereon. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the house will be in order. will members please take their conversations off the floor. pursuant to house resolution 1517 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for

consideration of h.r. 5114. the chair appoints the gentleman from arizona, mr. pastor, to preside over the committee of the whole. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of h.r. 5114 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to extend the authorization for the national flood insurance program, to identify priorities essential to reform and ongoing stable functioning of the program, and for other purposes.

the chair: the house will be in order. the committee will be in order. we will proceed when members remove themselves from the floor. remove their conversations from the floor. please move from the aisles. including staff. and members. pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as read the first time. the gentlelady from california, ms. waters, and the gentlelady from west virginia, mrs. capito, will each control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california.

the gentlelady will suspend. the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. waters: mr. chairman, i'm proud to bring my bill, h.r. 5114, the flood insurance reform priorities act of 2010, to the floor today and i stand in strong support of its passage. . moreover, i'm proud that this is supported by my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. mr. chairman, this bill is essential. the flood insurance program provides valuable protection for approximately 5.5 million homeowners, but unfortunately the lack of a long-term

authorization has placed the program at risk. the program has lapsed three times now since the beginning of this year but for two days in march for 18 days in april and again from june 1 to july 2 when president obama signed my bill to provide for a short-term extension to the program through the end of this year. this meant that fema was not able to write new policies, renew expiring policies or increase coverage limits. these claze also meant that 1,200 homebuyers who wanted to purchase homes located in floodplains were unable to close on their home. given the current crisis in the housing market this instability in the flood insurance program is hampering that market's recovery and must be addressed. mr. chairman, in drafting this

bill i also wanted to address the challenges posed by communities by the imposition of new flood maps. i saw these challenges firsthand in my city of los angeles. earlier this year i was able to assist homeowners in the park mesa heights area who had been mistakenly placed in a floodplain. in this case, fema acted quickly to correct the mistake. however, there are thousands of homeowners nationwide who now find themselves in flood scomblones and subject to mandatory purchase requirements. h.r. 5114, the flood insurance reform priorities act of 2010 would restore stability to the flood insurance program by re-authorizing their program for five years. it would also address the impact of new flood maps by delaying the mandatory

purchases -- purchase requirement for five years and then phasing in actuary rates for another five years. the bill also makes other improvements to the program by phasing in rates from prefirm properties raising maximum coverage limits, providing notice to renters about contents insurance and establishing a flood insurance advocate similar to the taxpayer advocate at the internal revenue service. mr. chairman, we must re-authorize the national flood insurance program and pass the reform included in h.r. 5114. this country is reeling from major floods in tennessee, arkansas and oklahoma, and we are now officially in hurricane season with south texas still recovering from hurricane alex. i urge my colleagues to stand with me in support of this important extension.

in closing i would like to recognize the many members on both sides of the aisle who have approached me with their concerns about flood insurance programs. i'm further gratified that through this bill we're able to address many of those concerns. i remain committed to working with members on ensuring that this program works for their communities and their constituents. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentlelady from west virginia. mrs. capito: thank you, mr. chairman. i'd like to thank the chairwoman, chairwoman waters, for her hard work on this very important piece of legislation. i'd like to i yield myself such time as i may consume. -- i'd like to yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. capito: this bill provides for the long-term re-authorizing form of the national flood insurance program extending it for five years through september 30, 2015. the bill would phase out

subsubsidized premium rates for certain properties, increase the annual limit on premium rate increases and impose minimum deductibles for all policies. the bill before us today i believe makes constructive reforms to eliminate certain subsidies and strengthen the financial soundness of the nfip. unfortunately, it also includes wasteful government spending. while i wish the bill went further to place the program on a path toward self-sufficiency and limit taxpayer exposure i will support the final passage of this bill. the nfip is currently running through a short-term extension after experiencing its third lapse this year. h.r. 5114 makes constructive reform to eliminate certain subsidies and strengthen the financial soundness. in addition, serve republican proposals have been incorporated in h.r. 5114 to strengthen the reforms in this bill including provisions to eliminate subsidized rates over time for homes that were sold

to a new owner, impose minimum deductibility for all insured properties, require report on the feasibility of incorporating recognized building codes into the nfip floodplain management criteria and to direct the nfip to report to congress with a plan to repay its debt to the treasury within 10 years. the nfip is facing serious financial challenges and cannot afford to continue on its path. the g.a.o. has included the nfip on its annual list of high-risk government programs since 2006 because of its ongoing potential to incur billions of dollars in losses. with an $18 billion debt to the treasury now and the persistence of subsidized premium rates for properties in high-risk areas, the nfip continues to be underfunded and federal taxpayers remain at risk. unfortunately, recent temporary lapses of the nfip created

uncertainty in the housing market and resulted in negative consequences for homebuyers trying to purchase flood insurance protection in high-risk areas where it it is required. while many property owners depended on flood insurance for some measure of financial security and many more should consider purchasing it from protecting itself from potential losses, fundamental reforms are needed to make the flood insurance program more sufficient, reduce the potential for losses and minimize the financial risk to taxpayers. in the long run, i said it is my hope along with most of my republican colleagues that all flood insurance premium rates subsidies should be eliminated and underwriting risks should be referred to the private insurance market to the maximum extent possible. in this respect the provisions of h.r. 5114 to phase out and eventually eliminate certain premium rates subsidies represent very positive steps. the bill includes constructive measures to eliminate

subsidized rates over time for nonresidential properties and nonprimary residences including second homes and vacation homes. h.r. 5114 also raises the cap on rate increases from 10% to 20% which will allow the nfip to charge premiums more appropriate to the risk within a shorter period of time. these useful reforms are overshadowed, unfortunately, by provisions authorizing almost $500 million in new federal spending for new mitigation and outreach grant programs. and to establish an office of flood insurance advocate within the -- within fema which administers the flood insurance program. while there is a definite need to improve fema's communication with communities and to increase advocacy about the impact of the new flood risk map, republicans believe that this effort should be undertaken using the existing nfip funds rather than new federal spending in this time of historic deficit.

i know some of my republicans offered amendments to do just this, to address these concerns, and i wish that they had been made in order today as their inclusion would have enhanced our debate. the nfip was originally intended to reduce the need for emergency disaster assistance from federal taxpayers to local communities. and the program has a long ways to go to reach the point of being self-funded and self-sustaining. furthermore, i believe that congress has an obligation to u.s. taxpayers to challenge the premise that most flooding hazards will never be insurable by the private insurance market. i remain committed to enacting comprehensive reforms that not on modernize the national flood insurance program so that homeowners will continue to have access to flood insurance access but at the same time help the american taxpayer. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: mr. chairman, i yield to the gentleman from illinois, two minutes,

representative costello has been the leader on this issue of the maps, the remapping and because of him we have a strong bill. he worked very hard and i'm very grateful and i'd yield two minutes to him. the chair: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for two minutes. mr. costello: i thank the gentlelady and, mr. chairman, i rise today in support of h.r. 5114. i have worked on this issue as representative waters has said. she chairs this committee, has provided great leadership with chairman frank and i thank them for their leadership on bringing the bill to the floor today. we authored provisions included in this bill to delay the onset of mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements in the newly remapped areas for five years and then phase in insurance rates over the next five years. this will give communities time to rebuild levees and allow our constituents to make their own

decisions regarding the purchase of flood insurance. in august of 2007, fema announced that through the remapping process that the levees protecting the metro east illinois along the mississippi river which had been protected for -- protecting our area for decades included in the major flood of 1993 would be dessert find and treated for flood protection purchases as if they didn't exist. as soon as the new maps became final, any homeowner or small business with federally backed mortgages would have to purchase flood insurance. it could cost literally thousands of dollars annually. let me say, mr. chairman, that we have made la of progress as part of this process. local officials continually ask for some relief. what we do in this legislation in the provisions i described earlier in this legislation, the bill allows fema the flood remapping process to proceed and requires communities to have evacuation and communication plans in place

which must include information about the availability of flood insurance and the consequences of having a flood. i want to be very clear at this point while it is not mandatory i continue to encourage all of my constituents in the affected area to purchase flood insurance, but that decision should be theirs. the federal government needs to work with local officials to solve these local and national issues. i strongly support h.r. 5114. i thank chairman frank and chairlady waters for all of their work. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. costello: i ask my colleagues to support the bill. the chair: the gentlelady from west virginia. mrs. capito: yes. i'd like to yield five minutes to my colleague from texas, mr. hensarling. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. hensarling: i thank the gentlelady for yielding. mr. speaker, this house recently passed the financial markets regulatory restructuring bill which in essence unfortunately will create a new federal insurance program or bailout authority for large financial companies that take on too much risk.

i wish we would leave, given the state of the national debt, i wish wee would leave the safety -- we would leave the safety net and instead ultimately i fear we will be looking at taxpayer subsidies to cover the likes of goldman sachs, a.i.g., lehman brothers. i wish we leshed our lesson from the national flood insurance program which we know was most -- supposed to never rather any taxpayer funds, any general revenue. but unfortunately we know today -- we know today already $19 billion is owed to the federal taxpayer. and we look at the other federally administered insurance program, social security, long-term deficit of $15 trillion. federal pension benefit guarantee corporation, debt of $22 billion. projections of $34 billion by 2019. federal crop insurance, medicaid, the list goes on and on and on. this bill adds to the tab, and

the congressional budget office has projected this bill will increase spending by roughly half a billion dollars over 10 years even by washington standards i hope we consider that to be significant funding. now, i wish the federal government wasn't in this business, but we are in this business. and if we are in this business we have to ensure that we are not subsidizing and insenting people to live essentially, put them in harm's way and put them in harm's way at the tkspears' expense. if they are going to put themselves and their property in harm's way that's the decision they need to be making, but we shouldn't be a party of incenting them to that. we're asking people in my district, a factory worker in mesquite, texas, who may be making $50,000 a year, to

subsidize the flood insurance of someone who is making half mall dollars a year. maybe because nevada a condo on a beach. -- maybe because they have a condo on a beach. that's not fiscally sound or one that i think is fair. i want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their work and there are a number of improvements in this legislation that will help improve the program. i want to thank the chairman for incorporates a modest amendment i offered in 2007 that would at least require the nfip to conduct a study within the next six months of how do you end up repaying the taxpayer at least over a 10-year period so they can recoup their losses on a program they were never supposed to bail out in the first place. . i appreciate it will raise the annual cap on premium rate increases. i appreciate the leadership from the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett, who offered an amendment that was incorporated that would eliminate subsidies

over time for homes that are sold to new owner and phases in actually sound premiums on second homes. there's also language in here that will impose minimum deductibles. all of these are several steps in the right direction to help ensure that the taxpayer doesn't suffer further losses. but unfortunately the bill really doesn't do anything to deal with the current almost $19 billion of funds that are owed to the taxpayer today. nothing in the bill will help recoup that particular loss. it delays the implementation of actuarial rates which i think, again, puts the taxpayer in further harm. it does not phase out the taxpayer subsidies. we still have insurance that subsidized rates creating perverse incentives that encourage people to essentially live in harm's way.

just like fannie mae and freddie mac which have already cost the taxpayer $150 billion roughly and counting, those programs ultimately need to be returned to competition, so does this program ultimately need to be returned to market competition. i know we can't outlaw hurricanes, we can't outlaw floods, but we can at least make sure that the factory work in texas in my district doesn't have to keep picking up the tab over and over. and very importantly. this is a program that authorizes almost a half a billion in new spending on an outreach program and one already exists. we cannot afford it. and with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: thank you very much, mr. chairman. i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from arkansas who has fought so hard for his constituents and making sure that they have a strong advocacy program in this bill.

the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. berry: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, madam chairman, for the great job you have done and the concern for the people that you have exhibited. for the time that fema has existed, the exception being during the clinton administration when james lee wit ran that agency, fema has exhibited an incredible inability to get anything done and accomplished. fema, in my part of the world, is worse than the natural disaster that they came to deal with. when we see fema show up, it strikes fear in the hearts of grown men and women and small

children. so i thank the chairman for this bill. the constraints she put in this bill as it relates to the flood plains and the designation. and urge the passage of this bill. thank you, madam chairman. the chair: the gentlelady from west virginia. mrs. capito: thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to yield three minutes to my colleague from michigan, mrs. miller. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. mrs. miller: i thank the gentlelady for yielding me some time. mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to this program and to this bill. i would once again remind my colleagues that this program is a very, very bad deal for my constituents in the great state of michigan, the great lakes state. it's a bad deal for most all the states that are in the great lakes basin. as an example, my constituents in michigan are paying very high flood insurance premiums, yet we rarely receive any claims. i'll give you an example. since we have instituted this

floodplains -- flood program in the nation, since 1978, in michigan we have received $44 million in claims, however we paid in over $200 million during that time in premiums. this year alone in michigan our citizens are going to pay $19 million in claims, which means in just two years, in just two years of paying premiums we will have covered all of our losses for the last 32 years. the g.a.o. report on this program that was published in april found that nearly one in four property owners are paying subsidized rates for their flood insurance that do not reflect the full risk of their flooding. this same report found that repetitive losses represent only 1% of the all of the policies but over 25% of all the claims. in short, we keep paying over and over and over again claims for some americans to live in flood-prone areas. it is no wonder that this program is $19 billion in debt. unfortunately, the rules committee didn't make one of my amendments in order that would

have addressed this problem of repetitive losses. this is the case in so many properties. they just keep rebuilding and refiling their claims over and over and over again. i just don't think that's fair to the rest of the nation. if you insist on rebuilding, then you should assume the risk. mr. speaker, quite frankly my home state of michigan feels like the a.t.m. machine for this flood program. i think this program is very, very unfair. one thing i would say in michigan, we actually look down at the water. we don't look up at the water. and we are very sympathetic, mr. speaker, very sympathetic to areas in other parts of the country that are prone to floods, that are prone to hurricanes, etc. we appreciate the challenges that they face, but i don't think it's fair that citizens in a state like michigan have to pay for those kinds of things. i think we need to have a national catastrophic fund that establishes more fairly the

burden on this rather than looking for states like michigan, i'm not opposed to redigitizing the map and using the state-of-the-art technology, i think that's important. we want to know the elevations, proper elevations. you can use it for planning, local municipalities need it, etc. but in michigan i can tell you tens of thousands of properties that are now being included in this floodplains that have never been included previously that have no history of flooding. in the last couple years the great lakes have had historic lows. i'm going to be voting against this. i urge my colleagues to vote against this bill, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back her time. the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: thank you very much. i yield to myself 30 seconds to make sure that the gentlelady understands that we are moderating the subsidy in several ways. on second homes, on nonresidential property. and when the homes are sold. that's an important point that we'll have discussion on later.

at this time i would yield to the gentleman from georgia who has been responsible for making sure that we give homeowners an opportunity to pay installments instead of up front all these premiums that they will be responsible for. thank you so very much for your work. i yield one minute to the gentleman from georgia. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you so -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. davis: thank you so very much. i extend accolades to ms. waters to has done an excellent job on this bill. mr. speaker, you know nothing is more devastating or heartbreaking than for individual families to lose their homes. and if there ever was a time that the role of government plays its most important role, it is to come to their rescue immediately, quickly, and help them to recapture their lives as quickly and to make sure that they have the insurance that is needed. mr. scott: nowhere has that been

more devastating in terms of flooding than in my own district. as you-all recall many of you sent out prayers and best wishes. as you know in my district about a year ago we had a tremendous flood, the worst flood in georgia in this century. especially in the cobb county, douglas area. this amendment which will help to provide people the opportunity that don't have to pay that insurance on one lump sum but will pay it in installments will go a long way. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from west virginia. mrs. capito: thank you, mr. chairman. i'd like to yield two minutes to my colleague from florida, ms. brown-waite. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. brown-waite: i thank the gentlelady. mr. speaker, i rise today actually in support of h.r. 5114, the flood insurance reform priorities act. and since the word priorities is mentioned in the title, i wanted to share a few of my

constituents' priorities. on balance they would say this is a good bill, particularly given the fact that over the last few weeks i received numerous calls from realtors and would-be home buyers who could not close on houses because of the lapse in the national flood insurance program. while the situation has been taken care of temporarily and the home buyer tax credit closing deadline was pushed back, i think my colleagues can understand the frustration back home in florida that this simply is not how we should be handling issues in washington, d.c. as for the bill we have on the floor today, i want to draw my colleagues' attention to one provision in particular that gives me pause. section 5 of the legislation effectively raises homeowners' insurance costs for struggling homeowners. there are a lot of things that keep floridians up late at night -- unemployment, hurricane season, the solvency of social security and medicare, and among

others homeowners insurance premiums. you have to remember that the nfip was self-sufficient until hurricane katrina. and frankly it should continue to be. but raising rates during this recession in gulf states already devastated by hurricanes, oil spills, and failed stimulus plans is a horrifically bad idea. i offered an amendment at the rules committee that would have prevented these increases, but unfortunately my democrat and republican colleagues in flood-prone areas around the country will not have an opportunity to vote on that amendment. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yield back her time of the the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: i'd like to yield one minute to the gentlelady from new york who has worked very hard on these issues and we have the manager's amendment some of the work that she did. i yield to the gentlelady, one minute. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute.

mrs. mccarthy: i thank the gentlewoman and i thank her for the work on bringing this issue to the floor. she basically has covered everything that certainly a lot of my constituents were concerned about. i want to thank her also for accepting a number of my amendments that will encourage local government agencies to receive grant funds under the outreach program to coordinate with agencies that have experience with certain populations in the community such as the disabled older americans and minorities. we know that this is a complicated formula but i believe that with this legislation it's going to be much easier to go through it. my other amendment would clarify that once borrow sufficiently demonstrates to a lender they have purchased flood insurance within the 15 days, the lender must terminate the placed insurance. it's something that is put in place until the insurance comes through and i thank ms. waters for her work with me on getting

this legislation through. it is going to help our constituents. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yield back her time. the gentlelady from west virginia. mrs. capito: i would like to continue to reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves her time. the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: thank you very much. to my colleague from california, linda sanchez, who has given a lot of her time to this effort, i yield one minute. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. sanchez: thank you, mr. speaker much rise today on behalf of residents of southern california. in recent months i heard from a number of constituents who will soon be required to pay more than $1,000 a year in flood insurance premiums even though they live in a virtual desert. that's right. southern california is officially a semiarid region, near desert region, but many of my constituents are being told to pay $1,000 a year or more to guard against floods. these families want to know why their home was considered safe just months ago but is now

considered to be in a flood zone under new fema map. they want to know what has changed in a short time to threaten their safety, particularly give the recent infrastructure investments in the l.a. river basin. let me be clear, i support the national flood insurance program because floods can devastate a community, but where flood maps are outdated they should be corrected to better protect communities. however local residents should be involved in the process and given a chance to be heard before their homes are rezoned. this bill will allow families the choice to pay their premiums in installments and allowing families to lessen the burden on their budget. i thank congresswoman waters and i urge passage of the bill. the chair: the gentlelady from west virginia. mrs. capito: i would like to continue to reserve my time. the chair: she reserves her time of the the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: thank you very much. i would like to yield one minute to the gentlelady from d.c., miss eleanor holmes norton. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. norton: i'd like to thank

chairwoman waters for not only today's bill but for her comprehensive bill, the first since 1994. also chairman frank for his work in making sure we got to the floor today as well. i sit on the subcommittee with primary jurisdiction over fema and understand how important chairwoman's comprehensive bill is. . i understand also what a wakeup call katrina was. the most important thing we do in this five-year grace period and appeal period, it's the least we can do for property owners faced with a new and expensive, instead of facing property owners with a new and expensive mandate in the middle of an economic crisis that began with a mortgage crisis with hundreds of people waiting

to close, others newly in a flood map zone. this is needed relief and the least we can do before we go home. we've had our separate fights, let's get this temporary bill done and get on to comprehensive reform. the chair: the gentlelady yields back her time. mrs. capito: i continue to reserve my time. the chair: the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: i kwleeled one minute to the gentleman from -- i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas whose state experienced a lot of hardship with katrina and alex, mr. green for one minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. green: quickly, i would ask two things. one, this bill helps us to stabilize the housing market. there are many persons who seek to buy home who was not been able to buy homes because the flood insurance was not available, yet required to make the purchase. we also have persons who were concerned about the hurricane

season. we have extended the flood insurance program but this helps us stabilize it and stabilize the housing market. my final point is this. auto insurance is not something i necessarily want to have. i don't use it regularly. there are many who purchase it and never use it. but it sure is good to know that you have it in the event of an accident. but insurance is -- flood insurance is something we need not because we know it will happen to us but because of the possibility. i thank the chair, i thank the ranking member. i beg that we pass this legislation. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. the yealt from west virginia. mrs. capito: could i ask the chairwoman if she has additional speakers? ms. waters: i are have no additional speakers, i reserve the right to close. mrs. capito: then i would like to say, this is an effort moving forth as we say, we've

had lapses in this program across the country that caused a lot of problems for folks trying to purchase new homes or refinance. i think we need a permanent extension of this for five years. again, i do have reservations about the additional spending, $500 million at this time of high debt of -- high debt and deficit and high unemployment is, i think, improperly placed but this bill does have another purpose to make sure that homeowners and home purchasers have the access they need for the flood insurance program. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: i'd like to thank the ranking member from west virginia, mrs. capito, for her cooperation and the work that she has put into the formulation of this very, very important bill. i'd like to thank members on both sides of the aisle for the

cooperation that we have seen exhibited on this bill. i think that the members on both sides of the aisle have done a fabulous job representing their constituents -- constituencies on this issue. it is time for us to have a re-authorization for five years, given the lapses that we have had and the risk we have placed homeowners at when we don't have flood insurance coverage. and so, members have come one by one on this issue explaining what is going on in their district and of course we have had a lot of criticism about fema. we have had members explain that neighbors are getting together to fight some of the mapping that is being done. all that has been brought to our attention and we have been able to deal with most of those complaints not only in this bill but of course in the

manager's amendment, we have some people that are going to bring amendments to the floor from both sides of the aisle and i'm confident that with the work that has gone into this bill, the amendments we will have on the floor are -- many of them will be adopted that we will see a good, solid piece of legislation move from this floor that will address the concerns of so many of our constituents across the country. i'm proud of this legislation, i thank not only the members on both sides of the aisle but the staff from both sides of the aisle who have worked so hard to ensure that we address these concerns. so now, with this authorization for five years, with the delayed time so people have the opportunity prepare with the installments, with the way we have done all of this, including putting an advocate in, our constituents are going to get some justice, some real

attention, and i think they will be proud of the work we have done and i will yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back her time. all time for yen debate has expire. pursuant to the rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five minute rule and shall be considered read. no amendment to the committee amendment is in order except those printed in house report 111-537. each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report by a member designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and on ponet, shall not be subject to an amendment and shall not be subject to revision of the question.

it is now in order to consider amendment number one printed in house report 111-531. for what purpose does the gentlelady rise? ms. waters: i have an amendment at the desk made in order under the rule. the chair: the chloric -- the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number one printed in house report 111-513 offered by the gentlelady from california, ms. waters. the chair: the gentlelady from california and a member opposed each will control five minutes. ms. waters: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. waters: the manager's amendment i submitted to the committee would make further improvements on the bill and contribute to the stability of the flood insurance program by phasing in actuarial rates for severe repetitive loss properties and properties

sustaining substantial damage. the financial solvency of the program would also be protected by a provision that would make sure that homeowners receiving preferred rates who deliberately drop out of the program are charged actuarial rates if they rejoin the program. the amendment also stresses protection for homeowners by allowing all homeowners to pay flood insurance premiums in installments, providing grants to homeowners receiving repeated flooding to mitigate their flood risk are, requiring fema to take a second look at areas that may be incorrectly map and requiring them to study the program on working water fronts. i'm pleased this amendment also incorporates amendments offered by many members including mr. hinchey, ms. herseth sandlin, mr. hare, ms. markey, and mr.

pascrell. i thank these members and other who was made suggestions to me for their constructive addition to this amendment. this amendment makes significant improvement to the underlying legislation and i urge an aye vote on the bill. mr. chairman, i reserve the plans of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves her time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from west virginia rise? mrs. capito: i climb -- i claim time in opposition to the amendment though i'm not opposed. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. capito: the chairwoman's manager's amendment does make good improvements to the underlying bill by phasing out taxpayer subsidies for severe repetitive losses. the nfip is facing serious financial challenges and the program can't afford to go on its current path. in this respect, i think chairwoman waters' manager's amendment is a positive step in the right direction. in addition, the manager's

amendment includes additional -- additional reforms that seek to reduce subsidies over time that continue to wurd the program. it includes several programs to address local community concerns we've heard in our district resulting from new flood risk maps and the ongoing flood control projects resulting in delays of purchase requirements and higher rates in certain cases. i would like to point out that while i believe phasing out subsidies for severe repetitive loss properties is important, if you look at the accounting for these losses over the last several year the repetitive loss properties only account for 1% of the total policies in the program nationwide. yet the repetitive loss properties account for almost 30% of the claims paid annually. i think there's a sense of fairness about this and most of us recognize that this is unfair, the subsidies that folks who continue to live in

retept -- repetitive loss property areas continue to run up the losses in this very important flood insurance program. the high number of claims have cost the national flood insurance program more than $2.7 billion since 1978. with the reform system that the chairwoman made in the manager's amendment, i support the manager's amendment and i would yield back the balance of my time the chair: the gentlelady yields back her time. the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: i have no other speakers and i reserve the right to close. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. waters: i think everything has been said that need to be said. i simply wanted to wanted to thank all the members who have been involved and i'm pleased that we are finally responding to the concerns of all our constituents, particularly about new mapping. there are a lot of concerns about that, but the way that we

delay implementation will give our constituents an opportunity to prepare the installment plan, the way we deal with the actuarial rates, i think this is some of the best work that could have been done to honor the concerns of our constituents and i will yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back her time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes visit. the amendment is agreed -- the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. to it is now in order to consider amendment number two printed in house report 111-537. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. putnam: thank you, mr. chairman. i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number two printed in house report 111-537, offered by mr. putnam of florida.

the chair: the gentleman from florida, mr. putnam and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. putnam: i rise to outline a minor issue but an important issue. hurricane season began june 1 and in florida, the seventh largest state in terms of flood insurance claims and the third high nest foreclosure rates, we can't afford any more uncertainty in our housing market. legislation recently failed to move on two separate occasions that would have provided for a temporary extension of flood insurance. i heard from my constituents that were beyond the point of frustration that they could not close on a home or renew an expiring policy and they had every right to be frustrated. florida and texas combined represent half of the properties covered by the national flood insurance program. it prohibits the issuance of new flood insurance policies and renewable of expired ones.

our communities along the gull -- our community is located along the gulf coast. if they are damad by a storm, only flood insurance would cover the cost of those repairs. for a program continually placed on the g.a.o.'s high risk list of programs since 2006, this is unacceptable. it is time for congress to reform and provide for a long-term extension of this important program. floods are the number one most common disasters in the united states and since 1991, the program has been temporarily extended six times. the nfip provides an opportunity to guard against loss of property. we should encourage individuals and families to protect their properties before the storm hits, not just those communities in high-risk flood zones. given the financial and management challenges facing nfip this provides a step in the right direction in working

toward the necessary reform to assist in the long-term viability of the program. . not extending the perils it covers, as well as rates over time and charging premiums that more accurately measure the risk, some of these reforms that will strengthen the nfip. while the nfip still has a long way to go to reach self-sufficiency, i applaud the bill's sponsors for taking the necessary steps and encourage the senate to act on the long-term extension as well. this amendment would require fema to submit to congress, though a report on the effectiveness of a portion of the bill that relates to new grants created and awarded to local government agencies for outreach to owners and renters thresm port would include the activities conducted with those grants and an assessment of the results, assessment of the effect those activities have on the retention or purchase of additional flood insurance. .

i calling whether this is the most fiscally appropriate approach. the underlying legislation appropriates $250 million for new outreach grants over a five-year period. a tomb of record deficits and spending and frustration over a lack of transparency, and accountability in our nation's government, it's imperative that this new spending be fully accounted for. clearly there's a need to improve fema's communication with property owners and communities concerning flood risk maps and threats of flooding, but this is a large sum of new money to appropriate to an agency that is currently 18.75 billion in debt to treasury and consistently on the high-risk list. that's why it's essential to guarantee that the management and utilization of grant funding is completed in an effective and transparent way. i further encourage fema to go above and beyond and provide

this information in an easily accessible form on the website so the taxpayers are aware how the money is being spent. we must ensure the grants are used to increase participation in the program and educate owners and renters on flood preparedness and mitigation efforts which lower risk. this annual report will be a an important first step in doing so. with that, mr. chairman, i reserve the balance of my time. i want to thank the sponsor of the legislation for her work on this issue for two consecutive congresses and urge adoption of the amendment. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from california. ms. waters: i rise to claim time in opposition although i am not opposed. the chair: without objection. the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. waters: thank you very much, mr. chairman. i'd like to thank the gentleman from florida for offering this amendment. the underlying bill authorizes grants to local communities to reach out to homeowners and communities about the flood insurance program and flood risk. as we know the purpose about

which homeowners receive notification of new flood maps is severely lacking. too often homeowners learn they are in a flood plain when they receive a letter from their mortgage company informing them that they have 45 days to buy flood insurance or it will be purchased on their behalf. local communities are supposed to inform residents about new maps, however communities often receive little notification from fema themselves. also some communities simply lack the resources to do the type of notification that is necessary to ensure that homeowners are aware of changes to the flood map. by providing a grant program to assist communities, the underlying bill would address this problem. the gentleman's amendment would require the director of the flood insurance program to submit annual reports to the congress on the effectiveness of these grants. i think that's important. and i think that congress should know how these grants are

working and how these funds are being spent. so i support the gentleman's amendment and i'd urge an aye vote. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from california yield back the balance of her time. the gentleman from florida. mr. putnam: i appreciate the kind comments. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from florida yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 3 printed in house report 111-537. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3 printed in house report number 111-537, offered by mr. driehaus of ohio.

the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1517, the gentleman from ohio, mr. driehaus, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. driehaus: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. driehaus: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank you and i want to thank the chairman of the committee, ms. waters, for her tremendous work on this legislation. also the co-sponsors of this amendment, mr. welch and mr. hinchey. this amendment is pretty straightforward. it would authorize the administrator of the federal emergency management agency to reimburse property owners or entity or jurisdiction acting on their behalf for any expenses they incur in order to file a letter or map an amendment if they are ultimately successful in petitioning the exclusion of property in the flood zone from fiscal year 2007 in the present or future. the problem is this, mr. chairman, we have thousands of property owners who are challenging these maps as fema is currently drown them. they find out about them after the maps have been drawn, after the maps are official. they then want to challenge that

designation. they hire the surveyors, they hire the engineers, they go ahead and enkur that cost. and in many case when is we find out that in fact the property owner was correct and they should not have been included in the designation to begin with, they are excluded, yet they have incurred the cost. this amendment simply says, that if that's the case and we find that the property owner is correct, or if we find that the municipality or jurisdiction is correct in challenging the map, that they will be reimbursed by fema. c.b.o. has scored this and said it would be negligible in terms of cost yet it would relieve thousands of homeowners from the burden they currently seek in terms of incuring these costs. under current law fema's authorized to reimburse property owners, lessees, and communities for engineering and surveying expense that is they incur for petitioning the inclusion of a property in the flood done prior to the enactment of a new flood map. this doesn't serve the folks we are talking about. i have a community, harrison, ohio, where over 370 households have been included in the flood map.

now, they didn't start the process of challenging the map until after the map was already official. so they are well beyond the time period that fema currently allows for that amendment to take place. this would address what is currently wrong in that situation and that is it would allow the homeowners to be reimbursed for their expenses. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from ohio reserves the balance of his time of the the gentlewoman from west virginia. mrs. capito: thank you, mr. chairman. i claim time in opposition to the amendment. the chair: without objection. mrs. capito: thank you. while the amendment i certainly understand and i have had constituents myself who have been remapped and fall into the flood plain and questionable air a, and i understand that the gentleman from ohio's intent on his amendment. but i think it sort of opens the door a little too broadly and little too widely.

while in the amendment that he is proposing, it helps property owners seek expense -- seeks to recoup their expenses in appealing the flood map, but it provides for full reimbursement for any cost. and there's no -- there's no specification to what reasonable costs could be, but any cost. and i think this is too broad. i'd prefer to see the amendment and go back to the drawing board, reshape it, so we could address the needs and cost issues to our constituents, but also make sure that we don't leave it so -- the door so wide open that it would encourage in some possibilities maybe relooking at it, overly expensive investigations into the flood mapping. without any kind of reasonable assurances that the costs that are incurred in challenging the map would fall within a reasonable amount. with that i yield back the balance of my time.

the chair: the gentlewoman from west virginia yields back the balance of the time. the gentleman from ohio. mr. driehaus: thank you very much, mr. chair. i appreciate the concerns of my colleague from west virginia and i take those very seriously. fema does have rule making authority that allows them to address the concerns that were raised. this is an issue of fairness. an issue of fairness for property owners. you have the federal government coming on to your property telling you you have to purchase flood insurance because are you now designated within the map. when you find fema to be wrong, that payment shouldn't be inconsidered -- incurred by you the property owner, but by fema. the federal government shouldn't be in the business of taking property in the form of expense that is are incurred by the homeowners. this has impacted thousands of americans and it's wrong of the federal government making them pay the price to challenge the federal government. with that, mr. chairman, i'd like to yield two minutes to mr. hinchey, co-sponsor of the amendment. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two

minutes. mr. hinchey: thank you very much, mr. chairman. i rise today in strong support of h.r. 5114, flood insurance reform priorities act of 2010, and the manager's amendment. i want to thank representative waters for bringing forward this essential legislation which will extend the national flood insurance program and make essential reforms to assure the program works efficiently and effectively. i also thank representative waters and the committee for including in the manager's amendment several provisions which i sought to help to assist property owners with new costs they face due to the federal emergency management agency's flood map modernization program and improve congressional oversight. fema is currently working to update, revise, and digitize the flood maps for more than 20,000 communities all across the country. while nobody doubts that we need to have accurate flood maps, some home and business owners in my district and also throughout

the country are now finding out that their property is located in a flood zone, even though they may have never experienced a flood. as a result of fema's mapping process, many of these home and business owners are now required to purchase insurance. to help those who suddenly face this new and unexpected cost, the underlying legislation and the manager's amendment do several important things. first, property owners will have the option to delay the requirement to purchase flood insurance for five years. second, home and business owners will then have the option to purchase the insurance at a reduced cost for another five years. third, congressional oversight and the flood mapping process will be greatly improved by requiring fema to notify members of congress regarding key map modernization developments within their district. at a time when small businesses

and homeowners throughout new york and every place else across the country are still feeling the pinch in a recovering economy, this bill will help ensure that this remapping process doesn't provide an additional burden. again, i thank representative waters for her strong leadership on this issue. and i commend the committee for their understanding of the need for these reforms. thank you very much, mr. chairman. the chair: all time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 4 printed in house report 111-537. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. flake: mr. speaker, i have

an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 4 printed in house report number 111-537, offered by mr. flake of arizona. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1517, the gentleman from arizona, mr. flake, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. mr. flake: thank you, mr. speaker. this is a straightforward amendment and should be noncontroversial. h.r. 5114 establishes a new grant program that would provide grans to local government agencies -- grants to local government agencies, these funds from this grant program would be used -- for outreach to inform both renters and owners of the national flood insurance program. this amendment would specifically prohibit any earmarking of the funds made available under this new grant program. mr. speaker, i'm not sure it's the taxpayers and i don't think it is the taxpayers' responsibility to inform renters and owners of these flood plain

requirements. having said that if we are going to provide funds here and say that it's a competitive grant program, then we shouldn't go in and earmark it later. those funds ought to be available to those who compete for them not directed by members of congress to favored constituents or groups. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from arizona reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. waters: i rise to claim time in opposition although i'm not opposed to the amendment. the chair: without objection, the gentlewoman from california is recognized for five minutes. ms. waters: thank you very much, mr. chairman. quite simply i support the gentleman's amendment. while i believe that the bill is clear that the grants provided under the bill would be competitive and therefore not subject to earmarking, i can understand the gentleman's need for wanting to clarify that these funds cannot be used for earmarks and therefore i support

the amendment and i would urge an aye vote. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from california yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from arizona. mr. flake: i thank the speaker and i thank the gentlelady for accepting the amendment. some have asked why do this if there's no intention to earmark the program? why do we need this language? unfortunately in the past with programs that have been adopted like this, competitive grant programs, we have said and promised in congress we won't earmark those funds and we have come and earmarked them. a good example is fema's predisaster mitigation grant program. it was put in place, it was not to be earmarked, it was a grant program like this one. yet in 2007 nearly half of the funds for the program were earmarked. i just want to make sure they aren't in this program as well. i thank the gentlelady for accepting the amendment. i urge its adoption and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from arizona yields back the balance of his time of the the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. so many as are in favor say aye.

. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. waters: i demand a recorded vote, mr. chairman. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. it's now in order to consider amendment number five printed in house report 111-537. for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi seek recognition? mr. taylor: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment number five printed in house report 111-537, offered by mr. taylor of mississippi. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1517, the gentleman from mississippi, mr. taylor, and a member opposed each will control five minutes.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from mississippi. mr. taylor: mr. chairman, this amendment is to clarify a provision in the existing law and the existing provision was used to deprive thousands of homeowners of covers in the wake of hurricane katrina. it unfortunately had the additional effect of sticking the taxpayers through the national flood insurance program with billions of dollars they should not have paid. under the national write your own program we hire the private sector to prite writhe the policy no problem there. we pay them a commission of 29% to write the policy, it saves us the cost of having additional government employees. the problem comes in in that we also let the private insurance company adjust the claim. think of it. you're 29 a father of two, counting on your christmas bonus, work with state farm, nationwide, or allstate.

hurricane comes through, house is gone. you can look at it and say, i see trees falling down, indications of wind. i see trees that the wind blew up there. that mean miscompany will have to pay something. or i can say the flood did it all which means the tax pay verse to pay it all. you see, under the law, they are called upon to do a fair adjustment of the claim. but buried in the typical insurance policy, typical wind insurance policy, in the case of a state farm policy in mississippi on page 10 of a 24-page document, there's one paragraph that said if anything -- any two things happen concurrently, then state farm wasn't going to pay at all. this question was asked -- was actually raised before the mississippi state supreme court and the attorney for nationwide insurance company, mr. landau,

was asked a question by chief justice of the mississippi supreme court, justice pierce, and i'm quoting, i'm giving you the example of 95% of the home is destroyed. the flood comes in and gets the other 5%. and you know that. does your interpretation of the word sequence mean you pay zero? the attorney for nationwide insurance, mr. landau, answered, yes, your honor. see that goes beyond just hurtingndividuals on their payment. a typical insurance policy says if your home is destroyed, the insurance company will put you up until its repaired. but if they deny your claim in full, they pay nothing. our nation went out and bought 140,000 trailers at $15,000 per trailer, then paid a friend of the bush administration another

$16,000 per trailer to deliver those trailers just 60 miles, hook them up to a water line and suer line. -- and sure line. -- and sewer line. that's $1,300 million that the taxpayers paid that in almost every instance the insurance companies should have paid. on top of that for grants and loans for a total of $30 billion. i understand the concern that this program lost $18 billion, the taxpayers lost $34 billion because the insurance companies didn't pay. this amendment would prohibit the language buried in that state farm insurance policy. this amendment would prohibit the language in that nationwide policy. it would go back to, if these people want to do business with the nation under the write your own program, then they're going to stick to their obligation of doing a fair adjustment of the

claim. if the house is 50% destroyed by water, flood insurance paid 50%. 50% by wind, the wind insurance has to pay 50%. whatever the ratio is, a fair adjustment of the claim as it should have been is already spelled out in the contract with the nation. but the contract between the insurance companies and the individuals had this language buried in there that is completely contrary to what they told our nation and honestly, i would like to see which shill for the insurance companies wants to defend what they have done to individuals in the gulf coast and what they've done to the taxpayers as a whole. i yield to ms. waters. the chair: the gentlewoman from california. ms. waters: thank you, mr. chairman. i stand in support of this gentleman's amendment. in april, my subcommittee held a hearing on flood and wind insurance legislative proposals

and at that hearing, the gentleman from mississippi testified about the way the insurance industry abused the flood insurance program following hurricane katrina but claiming that if so much as a drop of water touched a home, all the resulting damage was the result of flood and not wind, even if there was damage to the contrary. insurers were able to maintain their bottom line at the expense of the solvency of the national flood insurance program. nobody has worked harder on these issues than he has. we will continue to support his instructions about what we should be doing in the future. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: does any member seek time in opposition? mrs. capito: i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentlewoman from west virginia. mrs. capito: i'd like to oppose the amendment and claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentlewoman is

recognized for five minutes. mrs. capito: my friend from mississippi we had an ongoing discussion on this. i think he knows this is not a personal issue for me but it's a very personal one for him. i certainly understand that. but i can't really even imagine being in your shoes quite frankly and a lot of your fellow mississippians and what has happened but i'm going to oppose this amendment really on -- by seeking to address the water and wind issue, which is something we do need to address. i have several issues that i'd like to bring forward. first of all, i have concerns that this could interfere with the state regulation of insurance arks we all know, insurance is regulated throughout states. it could dictate some of the processes that i think would undermine the state regulation of insurance. it's interesting that the gentleman brought up state farm because, and i'm sure he's aware that state farm has just recently announced that they are going to be withdrawing

from the w.y.o. program, the write your own insurance program, for several reasons, i believe, i'm not certain what they all are. this means 800,000 customers nationwide who bought flood insurance coverage through state farm will now need to be picked up by other write your own insurance companies. third, i think this amendment could impose, or would impose a new fiduciary responsibility on insurance companies that participate in this program. according to industry experts this could expose insurers to new lawsuits and force them to place interests of the federal program over the introves their own policyholders. i think there could be a better way to address this issue and the objectives of this amendment by working with fema officials and insurance regulators to devise a program with ratios to apportion losses fairly in the future. some states and companies are already using this approach to

help clarify potential wind versus water issues system of with that, i would like to thank the gentleman for his passion and his -- his stick-to-itiveness to solve a problem, particularly in his region of the couldn't ru, but with the way the amendment is written, i have to be in opposition to it. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: does the gentlewoman -- mrs. capito: i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back. the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from mississippi. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number six printed no russpe report 111-537.

for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition? mrs. miller: i have an amendment at the desk made in order under the rule. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number six printed in house report 111-537 offered by mrs. miller of michigan. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1517, the gentlewoman from michigan, mrs. miller, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from michigan. mrs. miller: my amendment call farce g.a.o. study to study the ways the private insurance market can contribute to insuring against flood damage to further study the impact on the national flood insurance program if communities decide not to participate in the program and to study the feasibility of recognizing the national flood insurance program so there is no cross-subsidization between the regions. the united states, mr. speaker is the only industrialized nation that uses our form of government to administer flood

insurance. in every other industrialized nation this is done by private insurance companies. 9/11 canada or the u.k. they use the private industry to do this. i believe the role of government is the creation and maintenance of act rat flood maps and to have those who live in flood prone areas pay their own way by purchasing flood insurance. since congress established the nfip, we have engaged in subsidizing our fellow americans who do live in flood-prone areas and as a result more than half of the u.s. population now living in coastal watershed counties or floodplain areas. my constituents in michigan, that's the reason i offer this amendment, mr. speaker are paying very, very high flood insurance premiums and yet we really rarely receive claims. i mentioned this in general debate but i'll mention it again. since 1978, michigan residents have actually received about $44 million in claims from the

flood insurance program. however this year alone, our premiums in the state will be almost $20 million which means that in two years of premiums, we have covered all our losses since 1978. in other words, paid other $200 million in premiums, yet we've spent more than $150 million -- sent more than $150 million to other states since 1978. i would guess all the great lakes state and all the states in the great lakes basin have similar experiences my constituents and the residents of my state, i think, are unfairly carrying a very high burden, given their relatively low risk. i think it's a very vivid demonstration when you see that the average premium for flood insurance in michigan is $764, yet in louisiana, it's $647. i think, mr. speaker, again we need to have a national catastrophic fund, we are very sensitive and very sympathetic to folks that live in states that flood, that are flood-prone, that have

hurricanes, etc. but i don't think it's fair for property owners in areas that don't have this high risk to keep paying so much money for other areas. i think we should try to share the burden among the entire state. i would also ask that the g.a.o. look at regionalization of the national flood insurance program to correct this balance. fema has 10 separate regions and i believe if you did this amongst the regions, perhaps that would be a good way to reorganize the flood insurance program. each region would then have actuarially sound regions reflective of the risk of that region. i think under that plan, states like michigan would not be forced to subsidize're states that have substantially higher risk than we do. the last part of the study would be to look at communities to opt out of the program. i wrote a letter to our governor to consider having

michigan, our entire state to opt out of the program because we are so unfairly disadvantaged. although that has not happened yet, i'm going to continue to press that because i do think if ewe self-insured and got out of the program it would be much better for the state of michigan to do so. my amendment asks the g.a.o. to look at several common sense ways to fix a very severely flawed program and i would ask that my colleagues consider my amendment in support of -- and support its toppings as well. i reserve the balance of my time. . the chair: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. waters: i rise to claim time in opposition although i am not opposed to the amendment. the chair: without objection. ms. waters: thank you, mr. chairman. i support the gentlewoman's amendment. i understand that the gentlewoman has some concerns with the flood insurance program. i understand that she does bleesh that homeowners in her

district are subsidizing the cost of flood insurance for homeowners along the coast. while i disagree with her premise, i see no harm in having performed the staudy described in her amendment to look into the role of the private insurance market in providing flood insurance. the impact on the program if communities drop outand the feasibility of regionalizing the program. however, i would like to note that flood insurance is just that, insurance. it insures against an event that may or may not happen in the future. we have taken several steps in this bill to address the stinger shock that homeowners are en-- sticker shock that homeowners are encountering as a result of the mandatory purchasing required from the new map. however if the maps are accurate and there is a flood risk, public policy should dictate homeowners have coverage for that risk, because if they don't the federal government will have to pick up the tab.

therefore i disagree with the problem the gentlewoman has with the program, but i see no harm in her amendment. so i would support that amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from michigan. mrs. miller: i would say i'm very appreciative of the gentlelady's acceptance of my amendment. i do think it will help the nation lead us forward on a path to fairness and equity in this issue of flood insurance. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from michigan yields back the balance of her time. the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from michigan. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 7 printed in house report number 111-537. for what purpose does the

gentleman from iowa seek recognition? mr. boswell: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 7 printed in house report number 111-437, offered by mr. boswell of iowa. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1517, the gentleman from iowa, mr. boswell, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from iowa. mr. boswell: i thank the chair. mr. chairman, i rise today to thank the chairman of the committee and my good friend, the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. frank, and the ranking member, baucus, for their leadership on this issue, as well as chairwoman waters and ranking member capito. unfortunately the iowans i represent know all too well how flooding can ravage a farm, a neighborhood, a city. much of the state is still recovering from the devastating floods of the 2008 as high rivers and creeks are threatening their homes and businesses yet again. neighborhoods are sandbagging and some residents have left their homes for iowa flooding is

real and tangible. just last weekend as i arrived back in my district to my capital city i met the mayor, city manager, public works and we went to the leffees -- levees and we were worried whether we would make it through the night. we understand it very well. the bill before us is a good bill. i intend to support it, however i rise today to offer a straightforward amendment that will strengthen this legislation for iowans and the residents of other states that are often affected by flooding. i rtainly understand after being there and seeing the aftermath, the threat and concerns that congressman taylor and his constituents had when they faced katrina. where to go? how to get there? under section 6 of this bill, state and local government must provide flood risk and crisis information to residents in order to be eligible for a five-year delay in the effective date of the mandatory purchase

requirement of new flood hazard areas. this amendment would require that these entities also provide appropriate evacuation routes. floodwaters rise quickly and when people are forced to evacuate we must make sure that residents have the information they need to do so in a way that are safe. additionally, my amendment would help residents and property owners to obtain flood insurance by including information about flood coverage in the outreach activities listed under section 1326. this amendment is about providing our constituents with the best possible information to keep their families and their property safe. i ask my colleagues to support this important amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from iowa reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from west virginia seek recognition? mrs. capito: i seek recognition in opposition to the amendment although i am not opposed. the chair: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes.

mrs. capito: i would like to speak very briefly in support of the gentleman's amendment. i think we shuss had -- we have all had in our states issues with knowing the correct way to leave and evacuate certain areas. i sort of was hoping this area of information was already covered and so i want to thank the gentleman for bringing this amendment forward. i would ask that we support the gentleman's amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from west virginia yields back the balance of the time. the gentleman from iowa. mr. boswell: i thank the gentlelady for their support and chairwoman. i thank you very much and encourage passage. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from iowa yields back the balance of his time. the question now, members, is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from iowa. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider

amendment number 8 printed in house report 111-537. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? mr. hill:00 i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 8, printed in house report number 111-537, offered by mr. hill of indiana. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1517, the gentleman from yip, mr. hill, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from indiana. mr. hill: mr. chairman, indiana has been hit with a number of severe storms over the last three years. residents in my district of southern indiana have been hit especially hard and many of our local communities continue to be devastated by flooding. while natural disasters cannot be avoided, the government's efforts in responding, preparing, and dealing with these situations can certainly improve. the amendment i offer here today would call for a very small change but one that i believe would help provide lasting benefits for american sities and towns and the overall flood insurance program. the underlying bill establishes

an office of flood insurance advocate within the -- within fema. this office is tasked with helping people in the program resolve problems with fema flood insurance and identifying potential changes to help fix these problems. my amendment would add another function to this office and calling it to identify ways to assist communities in their efforts to fund the accreditation of flood protection systems. i have heard from several of my local communities that having problems obtaining funding to meet requirements to get their flood protection systems accredited. if a levee shows adequate protection, then fema will place it in a moderate risk zone. and property owners are not required to carry flood insurance, referred to as an accredited levee. decertified or uncertified levees, however, would not be accredited. therefore the areas behind these levees will be placed in high-risk areas and flood insurance will be required for property owners.

when fema does not design, construct, fund, or approve levee system or foot wall system, in 2007 fema issued new guidelines that communities must meet. unfortunately private companies charge upwards of $500,000 to certify levees for communities. and the corps of engineer will only perform them for those who obtain a federal match. this clearly leaves out many smaller communities who are in the most catastrophic areas. if these -- cash-strapped areas. if they do not meet the due dates they'll be deemed a high-risk area. my amendment would ensure this office looks into this issue and helps find ways to assist communities in their efforts to comply with these guidelines. i have two cities that face the possibility of being placed in a high-risk flood zone because they are having trouble obtaining certifications. if we help these communities complete their certifications, we are helping them provide the

checks and inpecses needed to ensure our levees are safe. if we had safer levees and flood protections in place, not only will more americans be protected, but this will prevent the flood insurance program and federal government from taking on the high cost if the levee fails to do the job. while i support updating this important program, i believe any new office should be focused on finding ways to reduce the cost of burden for communities that are struggling during this difficult economy. my amendment would ensure that this new office focuses on communities who bear both a burden of natural disasters and cost in preventing them. i urge my colleagues to pass this commonsense amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from indiana reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from west -- the gentlewoman from west virginia seek recognition? mrs. capito: i would like to climb time in opposition though i am not opposed. the chair: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. capito: i would like to address the amendment in the

broader context of the office of the flood insurance advocate. this is creating it within this bill and i think in my opening statements i addressed this issue. it's creating a new office and in a time when we have rising debts and deficits, we are creating another bureaucracy, another obligation on the federal taxpayer where i think that we could work with an existing regulatory and administrative offices to try to accomplish the same thing. we had a discussion yesterday in the rules committee about where the chairwoman of our subcommittee talked about the need for advocacy. i don't oppose the need for helping people wind through the intricacies of fema, trying to make appeals, trying to find out when and how they are going to be paid. what their alternate living arrangements might be. and all of the things that an advocate can do in terms of winding through a large

bureaucracy like fema. but fema has assured us that they have already a functioning appeals process and on top of an inspector general and continual g.a.o. oversight of the nfip program. so i think that the advocacy office itself is representing some duplicative and unnecessary bureaucracy and spending. so i'm hopeful while i don't oppose the gentleman's amendment, if the advocacy office goes through, it's not the substance of your amendment, it's really more the basis of the flood advocate itself. office of flood advocate itself. with that i would like to reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from west virginia reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from indiana. mr. hill: i would like to thank the jal and chairwoman for the opportunity to offer this amendment. it's not a big change but within that will help local communities in my district. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from yip yields back the balance of his time of the the gentlewoman

from west virginia. mrs. capito: i yield the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from west virginia yield back the balance of her time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from indiana. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the aye vs. it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number printed in house report 111-537. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa seek recognition? mr. loebsack: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 9, printed in house report number is 11-537, offered by mr. loebsack of iowa. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1517, the gentleman from iowa, mr. loebsack, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from iowa. mr. loebsack: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i want to thank congresswoman waters for bringing this bill to the floor today. it will help address concerns

all of us have likely heard from our constituents about the flood insurance program and flood map modernization efforts. in iowa flood insurance is an issue we are all too familiar with. two years ago this issue was brought to our attention with terrible effects. iowa was devastated by the floods of 2008 which left 85 of our 99 counties presidentially declared disaster areas and caused billions of dollars in damage. the national flood insurance program was and remains an important program and has helped many homeowners recovering from the flood. unfortunately, due to a lack of notification during the process of updating the flood insurance rate maps, the digital maps, many homeowners continue to be surprised when they find out that their homes may be newly placed in a special flood hazard area and they will be required to purchase flood insurance. many homeowners don't even know many homeowners don't even know that new