That headline may seem incendiary, but it actually seems to be true. A new bill titled the "Homeowners' Defense Act" (H.R. 2555) has been moving through the House, recently passed a committee vote, and now seems likely to be successful on the floor, given the support of Speaker Pelosi.
And yet, environmental groups believe it amounts to a "beach house bailout" that will destroy our coastlines.
Am I the only one who is confused here? Why haven't we heard more about this?
The bill itself appears benign enough, setting up a federal fund to help reduce insurance rates, which I know a lot of people could use help with.
So why, then, do the National Wildlife Federation and Sierra Club oppose it? According to the NWF, the insurance subsidy would encourage commercial development in ecologically sensitive areas, threatening more and more coastline.
More from the Sierra Club:
The House is expected to vote soon on the "Homeowners' Defense Act," which would create a federal bailout program principally designed to subsidize property insurance for wealthier coastal residents in Florida. It would provide an incentive for new development in environmentally sensitive coastal areas and wetlands; these areas are vitally important to fish and wildlife and protect communities from flooding. With climate scientists warning of escalating sea level rise and stronger hurricanes, the last thing the federal government should do is to provide a financial incentive for risky new development on Florida's sensitive coastal areas.
For something so important and potentially far-reaching, this issue sure hasn't been making a lot of noise. I know there's a huge environmental disaster going on in the Gulf right now, but I really had to dig to find these groups' views on this legislation.
The other thing is, the proposal doesn't simply help people out with insurance premiums the way a public insurance plan or means-tested, direct benefit would. What it appears to do instead is set up a federal backstop for hurricane risk that is essentially designed to make selling insurance more profitable, and to protect them if a big storm hits (at our expense).
And as NWF points out, most of the economic benefit appears to go to predominantly wealthy coastal property owners. Not exactly the best deal.
Does anyone know what is going on here? Why is Speaker Pelosi supporting this? My best guess is that it may be an effort to give an electoral boost to Rep. Ron Klein (D-FL), who has been pushing for it. But it seems like a really steep price to pay, and some truly terrible public policy. Isn't "our side" better than this, even in an election year?
As bad as things are on the Gulf coast right now, I can't help but think that we're overlooking a major policy shift happening right under our noses -- and which could have long-term implications just as bad.
Update:
I guess I should have an "ask" in here. If we can still assume that our representatives listen to us, we should all write and call to let them know they should oppose H.R. 2555:
https://writerep.house.gov/...
Maybe also write a letter to your local paper, because I really doubt too many people have read about this.
Update 2:
1BQ posted a couple of good links on this below.
South Florida homeowners get a break
CBO estimates $1.7 billion program cost
Notwithstanding the above CBO estimate, I just tracked down some other figures that indicate the cost could be more like $200 billion per year:
http://www.google.com/...