STATE FARM'S HEAD ON A PLATTER
What Gulf Coast Congressman Gene Taylor wanted the Easter Bunny to bring him.
South Mississippi Living 4/07

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Shake, Rattle, and Roll in the Miss. Insurance Commissioner Race

The 5.6-quake that closed this supermarket in San Jose on Tuesday may have raised the danger of a strong temblor on the Hayward Fault, scientists say. Tuesday's quake was the strongest in the Bay Area since the 1989 Loma Prieta event. www.sfgate.com

Stirring up powerful emotions, San Jose's earthquake has shaken up more than the ground, more than the residents in the 10th largest city in the nation, more than the friends and relatives of the many million who live in the area. Earlier this year while visiting at a friend's home in San Francisco, I experienced a baby earthquake.

I was sitting on the couch watching TV when it hit. I had thought her cat had suddenly ran across the back of the couch. When I realized that Cole was no where in that part of the house, I got frightened. "Oh, God, I don't want to deal with an earthquake," I remembered thinking.

You can't see them coming. There is no way to really be prepared all the time. Sure, I can get water and canned food--and I did. I can earthquake proof my home. But, what if I'm out shopping, say, at the Eastridge Mall in San Jose when an earthquake hits such as the one that hit last night? Canned food and water at my apartment miles and miles away won't be terribly convenient. Thankfully I have not ever experienced an earthquake the size of the 1989 Loma Prieta one.

Last week, many Californians were battling against fires. the rest of us were battling our ongoing disgust at learning that FEMA has continued the fake news cycle that has remained tradition in the Bush White House. Remember? Two years go, the mainstream news got wind of this.

Fake News Gets White House OK
Washington Post

Under Bush, a New Age of Prepackaged TV News
New York Times
Until earlier this year, however, I lived in San Jose, Calif., and I could have been there for this earthquake. All that comes to mind now is the safety of all of my friends out there, the accuracy of the news reports. All that comes to mind is whether we, as a nation, are equipped to handle multiple natural disasters--either simultaneously or one after the other.

Of course, the ongoing battle with insurance companies scamming there way out of paying legitimate claims--and their loyal accomplices in the industry's post-disaster endeavor. Who are these accomplices? For starters, any state insurance commissioner who is in the back pocket of Big Insurance.

Here in Mississippi, we have an election in just six days that is a battle between an enthusiastic apologist for Big Insurance and an ardently enthusiastic advocate for policyholders.

Mike Chaney has taken tens of thousands of Big Insurance dollars. Proudly proclaiming he'll return the money "when pigs fly." In this regard, Mike Chaney is the same as current insurance commissioner George Dale--a 32 year incumbent--who lost the Democratic nomination to Gary Anderson in large part because Dale is in Big Insurance's back pocket.

I loved it when Anderson referred to Chaney as a lap dog for Big Insurance.

Just as I'm certain that last night's earthquake rattled and rolled my former home in California, I am hoping that in Mississippi's election next Tuesday, we'll be rattling and rolling right here in my home state. I'm hoping that we'll go to the polls and vote for the only insurance commissioner candidate who has pledged and consistently demonstrated that when disaster hits, we can count on Gary Anderson to be on our side, to be looking out for our pocketbooks, to be casting a watchful eye upon the way in which insurance corporations are treating policyholders--who are also the voters in this state.

I'm hoping that when we wake up next Wednesday, we will wake up to a brand new era of our own making, having shaken, rattled and rolled the status quo shaking up the Big Insurance powers that be with the power of the votes cast for Gary Anderson.

That will spell relief for policyholders whether here along the Gulf Coast or our friends and relatives in the Delta or in the central and northern part of the state.

That will spell disaster for Big Insurance, and that is a disaster all of us can live with easily.

© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Unimitigated Gall of Bush's Corps of Engineers

by Ana Maria

The unmitigated gall of Bush’s Corps of Engineers Susan Rees burns my grits. First, she walks into this tiny town and announces a never-before-heard of plan from Bush’s government to buy up 2/3 thirds of our homes. Then, she has the audacity to blame our outrage on the press.

“. . . at Monday's meeting, Rees blamed the press for at least part of the ensuing public reaction.

She also described Hancock County residents and public officials as "gullible."

"We never envisioned that people were so gullible that they'd believe the federal government would come in and buy up 17,000 properties," she told the local officials.”
My outrage was at what she herself told hundreds of us at a public meeting held at the local high school. Gullible? The only gullible ones at that meeting were Bill Walker, executive director of Gov. Barbour’s Department of Marine Resources, and Susan Rees representing Bush’s U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Sun Herald aptly described the pair.
Walker and Rees were the same officials who threw shock waves across Hancock County in September when they held a hastily assembled public meeting at Bay-Waveland Middle School.
The pair apparently forgot that before giving any kind of a speech it is important to know who comprises the audience. One of the things that I really love about having come home to Bay St. Louis, Miss.,--one of the tiny beach towns that comprise Katrina’s ground zero—is that I’m surrounded by people who have well-refined BS detectors and who speak their mind instantly and do so in such a way that leaves no question as to their meaning. What a breath of fresh air!

God knows that whether I was living and working in the capitol of Silicon Valley, Calif., or Nashville, Tenn.—the capitol of country music, or around our nation’s capitol—Washington, DC, it always seemed to me that I needed a dictionary or a thesaurus to understand people who were born and raised right here in the USA. They didn’t seem to routinely be able to just speak what is on their minds. Too much ambiguity for my tastes.

I come from direct-speaking folk, and because many of us down here have accents similar to those in New York AND because we’re direct in our verbiage—a directness that is often associated with New York, some mistake me as being from New York. Fine by me!

Somewhere along the way, I learned that the migration patterns for the Italians and Irish were similar in New York, Boston, and New Orleans, and thus our speech patterns find kinship. With all due respect to my New Yorker friends, I have often tell folks that I’m like a New Yorker . . . with charm. You know, tell you that folks that they are idiots for their foolish comments then turn around and offer ‘em something to eat to ease their pain of facing a new piece of information about themselves. Directness with a side dish of charm. Kinda has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it?

Well, Ms. Rees apparently is using the White House talking point to blame the press for delivering accurately the pathetically ill-designed plan to buy up the private properties in this community. I was there along with the rest of my community when she presented Bush’s wall-and-haul proposal. Wall off this beach town with 40 foot seawalls along the beach. Haul off the residents who’ve been here for decades. My own family moved here from New Orleans in 1953. That’s 54 years.

As I’ve written before I find it no mere coincidence that Bush’s “wall-and-haul” proposal was reserved for Congressman Gene Taylor’s (D-MS) hometown. He’s not offering to buyout the 9th Ward in New Orleans or Lakeview at the other end of the economic spectrum of that beloved treasure of a city. No, Bush’s Administration is targeting the itty bitty hometown of the man who is pushing through Congress a bill that will radically alter one aspect of the financial services industry—the property insurance end.
Personally, I think the discussion of the buyouts is politically motivated, political revenge because Gulf Coast Congressman Taylor (D-MS)—a man whom the Bush Administration could count on to vote with the White House on its Iraq and social conservative policies—had demonstrated clearly that his moral values included using the government levers of power to help the American people of every political, economic, and religious stripe and size.

You see, once Taylor’s ground breaking multiple peril insurance legislation is signed into law, the Big Insurance Scam days are O-V-E-R. Immediately, REAL competition for REAL insurance enters the market.
I don’t believe that the buyout plan was ever intended to do more than to mess with Congressman Gene Taylor through riling up his constituents who would then flood his office with frantic phone calls and emails taking up precious time and energy that Taylor and his staff has been using successfully to push through the U.S. House of Representatives the Multiple Peril Insurance legislation. That legislation is beginning to get traction in the Senate. Bush’s folks need a way to slow it down and kill it. I think this wall-and-haul proposal is part of the White House arsenal.

Ms. Rees can take her White House drafted talking points blaming the press for our outrage then calling us gullible for being rightfully angry that the Bush Administration can drag its oil drenched, blood-soaked feet when it comes to helping us get back ON our feet and just stick it where the Mississippi Gulf Coast sun doesn’t shine.

All the while she is over here doing the Bush Administration’s dirty work, Bush’s buddy Rush Limbaugh is pretending everything is honky dory.
You know, nobody ever talks about Gulfport Mississippi and all these places in Mississippi that were literally leveled during Hurricane Katrina, and they're back on their feet or they're in the process of getting back on their feet. You never, ever hear about the misery and the destruction that they went through, because they're not whining and complaining about it. They're out there fixing it, just like they're doing in California.
Yeah, well, if we were doing just fine, Bush and Barbour wouldn’t be proposing a wall-and-haul policy.

Alas, Bush and Barbour are in bed with the insurers while Rush and Rees parrot the White House talking points.

If both Bush and Barbour had pushed the insurance industry to pay up immediately and in full on the wind policies of our homeowner insurance policies, we would be fixing up the place. Rush Limbaugh’s comments would, then, make history reflecting reality with which everyone down here could agree. Susan Rees would be memorizing her White House talking points to deliver to another part of the nation where I would hope she would continue to experience the wrath of Americans she erroneously dubs gullible.


© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Alternate to buyout program proposed

Posted on Tue, Oct. 30, 2007
By J.R. WELSH


BAY ST. LOUIS -- Local elected officials hammered out a possible compromise with state and federal representatives Monday, aimed at derailing plans for an ambitious private property buyout that has thrown shadows over the Hancock County economy since last month.

During a two-hour evening meeting that excluded the public, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the state Department of Marine Resources said they may be willing to drop the buyout plan in favor of strengthening an existing program that allows the federal government to buy repetitively flooded lands from private owners.

That would likely narrow the scope of any buyout and ease fears by local officials that a grand-scale buyout would jeopardize redevelopment, devour Bay St. Louis and stop any progress that has been made since Hurricane Katrina.

"It's a lot easier to support than a potential buyout of two-thirds of Bay St. Louis," Mayor Eddie Favre said following the meeting.

Favre, members of the City Council and the county Board of Supervisors attended the meeting, along with Waveland Mayor Tommy Longo and Board of Aldermen representatives. Bill Walker, executive director of the DMR, and Susan Rees of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, were present.

Walker and Rees were the same officials who threw shock waves across Hancock County in September when they held a hastily assembled public meeting at Bay-Waveland Middle School. That night, they enraged some local residents by announcing a wide range of flood mitigation possibilities the corps had in mind for the county.

Those included a massive land buyout that would turn hurricane-vulnerable private properties into green space.

Since then, local elected officials have said construction has slowed, developers and investors are backing off the county, and homeowners who have already rebuilt are fearful of what might come next. But at Monday's meeting, Rees blamed the press for at least part of the ensuing public reaction.

She also described Hancock County residents and public officials as "gullible."

"We never envisioned that people were so gullible that they'd believe the federal government would come in and buy up 17,000 properties," she told the local officials.

"I don't think people here are gullible," Tax Assessor-Collector Jimmie Ladner Jr. responded. "People are scared."

Corps maps of the plan showed buyout areas that included all of Shoreline Park and other newly annexed neighborhoods stretching back to Cedar Point. That proposal brought loud protests and an opposing resolution from the Bay St. Louis City Council.

In an effort to find a solution, Monday's meeting was arranged by Tish Williams, executive director of the Hancock County Chamber of Commerce. During the discussion, official after official expressed how deeply the state and federal plan has wounded the county.

"Real estate has been slow," said Bay St. Louis Councilman Bobby Compretta, also a Realtor. "But when this buyout hit the newspaper, it hit rock bottom."

Under the compromise idea, Walker and Rees indicated they would consider dropping the overall buyout for Hancock County and meet with a three-member committee of elected officials to craft a new plan. It would involve possibly broadening an existing FEMA program that allows owners of property that floods repetitively to sell out to the federal government.

The current program calls for FEMA to pay 75 percent on such buyouts. Local governments are responsible for a 25 percent match, but hurricane-strapped governments now can't afford that. If the corps were to assume the buyout power instead of FEMA, the federal government might then shoulder 100 percent, officials said.

Meetings between the state, the corps and the local committee will begin as soon as possible. Rocky Pullman, president of the Board of Supervisors, will represent the county. City Council President Jim Thriffiley will represent Bay St. Louis, and Alderwoman Lili Stahler will represent Waveland.

Meeting tonight
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' proposed buyout program will be the focus of Jackson County Supervisor John McKay's town hall meeting at 6:30 p.m. tonight at Ocean Springs Middle School.

The corps is seeking public input about a proposed flood prevention plan which would buy hundreds of low-lying residential homes in the county's flood plain with federal funding.

"This is a great opportunity for Jackson County's residents to learn about the corps' buyout program in person," McKay said. "This meeting is open to all county residents and officials. We are going to have the people who can answer the important questions."



© 2007 Sun Herald. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.sunherald.com

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Katrina aid bill advances

Old rules had hampered recovery
By MARIA RECIO
SUN HERALD WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON -- The House passed a bill Monday which will aid areas hit by hurricanes Katrina and Rita by retroactively changing federal rules that have hampered recovery.

"Sometimes it seems that public schools and city and county offices will be the last buildings rebuilt on the Mississippi Coast," said Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Bay St. Louis, in a statement.

"This bill will help resolve any remaining problems so that local officials can start construction. The bill also provides flexibility for alternate projects and for mitigation grants so that the new facilities can be built better and stronger than the buildings that were destroyed."

The bill, which passed by voice vote, would change the Stafford Act in a number of ways, notably by increasing the federal share of constructing relocated buildings or "alternate projects," as they are called, from 75 percent to 90 percent.

"The Stafford Act was not written for disasters the magnitude of Katrina and Rita," said Rep. Charles Melancon, D-La.

The bill also would allow work already done by local communities to strengthen structures and infrastructure to count toward the 25 percent state match for federal hazard mitigation grants, a change that could mean as much as $145 million to Mississippi. It would permit work done by the state and localities to count for the state's match requirement under the Stafford Act to access Mississippi's $434 million in FEMA's hazard mitigation funding.

The bill will now be considered by the Senate, where Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., is poised to champion it. "We're supportive of the bill," said Landrieu press secretary Stephanie Allen. "We're still reviewing it but we expect to usher it through the Senate Homeland Security Committee." Landrieu chairs the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee's Disaster Recovery subcommittee.

Taylor was not present for the House vote, which was done under suspension of the rules, a device usually reserved for noncontroversial bills.



Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Monday, October 29, 2007

Perverted Priorities: Fires, Fema, Fake News

by Ana Maria

“Tell me where you spend your money,
and I’ll tell you where your priorities are.”
Throughout my growing up years here on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, my mother would often mention one or another variation of that saying. Sometimes she would end it with “and I’ll tell you where your heart is.” For Bush’s FEMA, their priorities remain in making Bush look good with self-created PR pretending to be reporters posing those big softie questions. FEMA is not in actually doing the excellent job that the agency should be doing, just posing and pretending.

For example, Bush’s Chertoff pretended to scold his own agency with his spokeswoman stating "Stunts such as this will not be tolerated or repeated."

Ever since Bush and Cheney cheated their way into the White House and deceived the American people—including our congressional officials into a war of choice, the Bushies modus operandi has been betrayal, deceit, and abandonment. So the FEMA stunt is part and parcel of the Administration’s ongoing way of operating our government.

While the people at FEMA should have lost their job for deliberately deceiving the American people with a fake news conference, no one has. To be sure, Bush’s man Chertoff faked his admonition that such a “stunt” would not be “tolerated.” What a joke. And I’m not laughing.

The other joke at which I’m not laughing is comparing FEMA’s response to the California wildfires to its response to Hurricane Katrina’s devastation throughout the Mississippi-Alabama Gulf Coast region and the breaching of the US Corps of Engineers levees in New Orleans. The comparison needs a bit of evening up before we jump to happy conclusions.

Now, let’s forget about the fact that the fires raging were well publicized in California while no one saw coming the breaching of the New Orleans levees.

Oh, wait. The night before New Orleans flooded, the White House had seen photos of the levees being breached and deliberately failed to inform the Louisiana state authorities of this important factor.
“FEMA knew at eleven o’clock on Monday that the levees had breached, at 2 o’clock they flew over the 17th St. Canal and took video of the breaches, by midnight on Monday the White House knew, but none of us knew.”

Ivor Van Heerden, Deputy Director of Louisiana State University’s Hurricane Center
Ooops.

Still, the residents themselves—as well as the local officials—didn’t see the levees breaching, and the prep time for the emergency shelters were zilch.

Let’s forget about the fact that folks in California drove and parked to their shelters while New Orleans folks walked to the Superdome with their children, babies, and grandparents in tow.

Let’s forget about the fact that there were no massages, yoga classes, or ventriloquists inside the New Orleans Superdome.
Free newspapers were available, National Guard troops kept watch, ventriloquists and balloon artists entertained kids, and even massage therapists were trying to help the 12,000 to 15,000 evacuees relax as they fretted about the fate of their homes.
The relative comfort of the California evacuees is well recorded, and here is one such video capturing it.

This is where the generosity of the comparison ends. Let's incorporate some of the conditions from the Superdome days.

The floodwaters surrounded the Superdome making escape impossible. So, let’s put provide the same conditions for my fellow Americans in Southern California who have had the horrendous tragedy of being evacuated from their homes not knowing what condition they may find upon return and let’s put the fires immediately outside of the Qualcom Stadium. Escape from the stadium, just as with the Superdome, is impossible.

After all, it isn’t as if we have flood and hurricane fighters flying overhead pouring chemicals on the floodwaters and the hurricane force winds that will stop the devastation.

Next, the food and water inside Qualcom Stadium runs out just as it had in New Orleans both inside and out of the Superdome Stadium.

Let’s add another factor. No communication between and among public officials. No telephone lines, no Internet access. Remember, the Bush Administration has yet to create national emergency communication system. Too busy trying to war with the countries strategic for the untapped oil and gas reserves in the Baltics for such essential homeland security items here at home, imho.

Next, we have to have the fires surround the stadium just as the flood waters surrounded the Superdome.

With no food or water in the California stadium, hunger pains retch the stomachs of the evacuees and those of their kids. The evacuees are surrounded by thousands of others who are also hungry and thirsty. They know—not just wonder, but know—that everything that they owned, their entire communities, their livelihoods, their homes were going up in smoke.

Now, tell me, would the people inside Qualcom Stadium be reading newspapers, getting massages, doing yoga, and talking with reporters? Or would they be going crazy with fear and desperation like we witnessed inside the Superdome?

Ahhh, the view becomes more clear. You see, without the same critical circumstances of Katrina disaster, comparing the two reactions is erroneous. Though it does serve the White House in another rendition of government by pretension.

Now, what comes to my mind is the movie Trading Places with Eddie Murphy and Dan Akroyd. For the purpose of this little exercise, Akroyd’s character represents Southern Californians. The movie analogy is so appropriate.

Louis Winthorpe, III, Akryod’s character, is stripped of his social standing and financial success. In the movie, Winthorpe ends up living in horrendous conditions, acting in ways that he would never have thought possible for him from his previous socio-economic position.

Were the victims in the Qualcom stadium subjected to the same circumstances—and I wouldn’t wish those circumstances on anyone . . . other than, perhaps, the Bush Administration and their accomplices in FEMA and counterparts in Congress and the Senate—then to what extent would we witness them reacting just as the Americans in the New Orleans Superdome had?

What I expect to be similar is for the insurance industry to figure out a way to scam California home and business owners out of paying off in full on their policies. What I expect to be similar is for home and business owners to sue the hell out of their carriers to get—perhaps years down the road—the check that should be provided within days of the devastation.

In August, Bloomberg News already exposed the ravages of insurers in Southern California in its August expose: Home Insurers' Secret Tactics Cheat Fire Victims, Hike Profits.

On average, those of us inside of Katrina’s wake may not have the financial resources or the educational level as the average person in Southern California possesses. What we do have, however, is a sophisticated view of the insurance industry and its deceptive tactics to keep our premiums in its coffers at our expense, which is an industry-wide priority.

We understand that Big Insurance priorities are not those of the policyholders. We understand that Big Insurance is its own racket which the federal government does not regulate in the least.

From our painful experiences, we understand that Big Insurance will screw over the powerful like a U.S. Congressman (as in Gene Taylor) or Senator (as in Trent Lott) as quickly as it will screw over its average policyholders be they high or low income, white or black or Asian, Republican or Democrat. We're pretty sophisticated and gladly share our experience so that others will benefit from our own tragedies.

Since there continues to be no federal regulation of the insurance industry, we could eventually hear of companies again ripping off California home and business owners just as they have in the past and just as they did to Katrina survivors. [Read the Bloomberg article.]

You see, the only priority of the insurance companies is to increase their profits, pad the bonuses of its board of directors, and inflate the income of its CEOs. that they do so with great deceit to its policyholders, its customers, is of no consequence. They sell us on financial security their products allegedly provide. Hhowever, when we need our insurance policies to pay off, the companies often only concern themselves with their own financial security. In that regard, Big Insurance has its own priorities, however pathetic and perverse they may be.

Rest assured, though, the good people inside this Katrina-ravaged region will be empathetic to the plight of those families and business owners in Southern California whose lives the insurance companies may very well end up ruining. Our hearts are filled with empathy. Unlike Big Insurance, we have our priorities straight.


© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Friday, October 26, 2007

Anderson Accuses Chaney of Pocketing Big Insurance Contributions



Jackson 10/25/07

by Jon Kalahar
jkalahar@wlbt.net


Both candidates for insurance commissioner agree this is the most important race coming up in the November general election. Gary Anderson and Mike Chaney each believe they're the one to lower insurance rates and generate more economic growth in the state.

But there's plenty they disagree on. The issue of campaign contributions is again at the forefront. Should an official who will regulate insurance in Mississippi be allowed to accept contributions from insurance agents and companies?

Gary Anderson says no. Mike Chaney says there are more important issues facing the state.

Gary Anderson blasted Mike Chaney for his alleged ties to big insurance.

"A lap dog for big insurance isn't protecting your pocket books. This will lead to higher insurance rates for all of us," said Anderson.

But Chaney isn't trying to hide the fact he has accepted money from insurance agents and companies.

"I will take money from independent agents all day and I'll take it from domestic companies. I do not take money from large, big insurance companies," said Chaney.

Anderson believes by accepting those contributions Chaney is more susceptible to favoring those contributors rather than running the department of insurance independent of outside influences.

"I call on Chaney to return every dime of the insurance money that he's taken, over 70 thousand dollars. I call on him to return that money and come clean," said Anderson.

Chaney says he will do no such thing.

"Will you return the money you get from insurance agents, and I said, ' When pigs fly.' ," said Chaney.

Are voters concerned who contributes to either campaign? Ole Miss professor, Larry Cox says there are definitely bigger issues that need to be addressed.

"I certainly think the nitty gritty of straightening out the markets of the coast as best they can and again attracting new competition will provide us with the most competitive rates are by far and away the most important issues," said Cox.

Finding ways to bring in more insurance companies into the state seems to be the key to lowering rates for Mississippians. Gary Anderson favors cracking down on waste and insurance fraud. While Mike Chaney says to increase economic progress, the state needs available, affordable and accountable insurance.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Anderson: Chaney Wrong on Right to Vote

Says Insurance Commissioner Should Be Appointed and Not Elected

Anderson Reaffirms His Pledge to Remain Independent of Insurance Interests as Mississippi's Insurance Regulator

Jackson, Mississippi - Insurance Commissioner Candidate Gary Anderson held a press conference at 10:00am at the State Capitol Building. Anderson blasted Mike Chaney for his position on whether the Insurance Commissioner's post should be appointed rather than elected.

On July 26 th at the Neshoba County Fair, Chaney said, "As Commissioner, I will ask the legislature to make the position of Insurance Commissioner appointed and not elected."

On September 17 th , the Commercial Dispatch reported, "a way Chaney sees to make it [insurance] more affordable is to make the Mississippi Insurance Commissioner a position appointed by the Governor rather than elected by voters."

"Mike Chaney wants to take away the right of voters to elect or remove the Insurance Commissioner. He wants to turn over control of the office to big insurance," said Anderson at the press conference. "Here is another example of how Mike Chaney wants to work on the side of big insurance. The people of Mississippi need checks and balances in place; they deserve an Insurance Commissioner working on their side who they can elect or remove. Mike Chaney wants to answer to big insurance instead of to the people."

Anderson also called on his opponent Mike Chaney to come clean with the voters of Mississippi about pocketing over $70,000 in insurance money since he entered the race against Anderson. Chaney's most recent financial disclosure report shows thousands collected from insurance company executives, insurance PACS, insurance agents and insurance companies.

"I have not taken a single dime from insurance companies or any insurance special interests," said Anderson. "Mr. Chaney cannot protect the pocketbooks of the insurance ratepayers if he is taking money from insurance interests. Taking money from an industry you would be responsible to regulate is a direct conflict of interest. I call on Chaney to return every dime and come clean with the people of Mississippi," said Anderson.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Schumer seeks expanded flood insurance program


By Keith Herbert - Newsday, October 23, 2007

More New Yorkers are turning to unregulated insurers for property coverage, further proof that federal regulation is needed to stabilize the homeowners' insurance market on Long Island, Sen. Charles Schumer said Monday.

During a news conference at the home of a Huntington homeowner, Schumer (D-N.Y.) cited the trend to support his call for legislation that would expand a federal flood insurance program to include hurricane wind damage.

Private insurers fearful of a catastrophic storm hitting Long Island have been unwilling to cover wind damage, so the federal government should add "multi-peril coverage" to its flood insurance program, Schumer said.

"I think this would solve the problem once and for all," he said of legislation being considered by a Senate banking committee he serves on.

Since early last year, a half dozen insurers, including Allstate, Liberty Mutual and State Farm, have not renewed thousands of area homeowner policies. They cite concerns a catastrophic storm is overdue for Long Island, forcing large payouts for losses they would be unable to cover.

The nonrenewals have left many homeowners facing hard-to-find coverage, increased premiums and high wind-storm deductibles.

"We all complain about tax increases," Schumer said. "This is the same thing -- more money going out to keep your house."

There are 1.7 million homeowner policies in coastal New York areas, according to the state Department of Insurance.

Schumer said that in New York State the number of people seeking so-called excess line property insurance has jumped from 3,100 in 2002 to more than 7,000 as of last month.

Without providing detailed figures, Schumer said more and more Long Islanders have been forced to buy homeowners insurance from the excess-line market, whose companies aren't licensed by the state.

Such policies are more typical for homeowners with unusually expensive homes or whose property is close to a potential hazard, such as water. They often can't secure insurance from licensed underwriters. The premiums are also much higher than regular homeowner policies and involve more risk because state regulators don't monitor rates. However, the state does regulate the brokers who provide excess-line coverage.

Schumer spoke from the driveway of Denise Laimo, 55, who turned to an excess-line company after her previous insurer, Allstate, didn't renew her homeowners policy.

In January 2006, Laimo said her furnace malfunctioned and flooded her basement, prompting her to file a claim with Allstate. Six months later, she said she received a letter that her policy was not being renewed because her home was prone to flooding.

Laimo said she was unable to find insurance after shopping other providers, and turned to Utica Insurance. Her policy premiums increased from $960 a year to $2,400, but her new policy covers more.

"I have better coverage, but it more than doubled," Laimo said of the premium.

Copyright © 2007, Newsday Inc.



© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Vitter puts hold on insurance bill



By Bruce Alpert - Times Picayune, October 23, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Sen. David Vitter, R-La., has put a hold on a flood insurance overhaul bill because he says it doesn't raise coverage limits or expand the program to provide wind-damage coverage to address a shortage of affordable policies in Gulf Coast communities devastated by hurricanes in 2005.

Because the Senate calendar often is set by unanimous consent, letting a single senator block a bill's consideration, Vitter's hold puts passage in limbo. Members put a hold on a bill in an effort to get the sponsors to negotiate changes.

Vitter said Monday that he's looking for several changes in the bill approved last week by the Senate Banking Committee.
He wants to increase the current maximum levels of flood insurance to for residential properties from $250,000 to $335,000 and for commercial properties from $500,000 to $750,000.

The program, Vitter said, also should be expanded to allow policyholders new lines of optional coverage for business interruption and to provide full replacement of contents.
Congress should take steps to alleviate a shortage of wind coverage along the Gulf Coast and other coastal areas, he said.
"Lack of available or affordable general liability coverage, including wind coverage, is now one of the single biggest obstacles to recovery," Vitter said in a letter to Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, and Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, the panel's top Republican. Either the flood insurance program should be expanded to provide wind coverage, or Congress must take other steps to address the crisis, Vitter said.

Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., also has concerns about the Senate bill, spokesman Adam Sharp said. Landrieu is concerned that the Senate bill allows for bigger increases in premiums than the House-passed bill, and, like Vitter, would like to see a wind coverage option added to the program, Sharp said.

Landrieu plans to consult soon with Rep. Richard Baker, R-Baton Rouge, to develop a strategy to win changes in the Senate Banking Committee bill, Sharp said. But for now she is not joining Vitter in placing a hold on the measure.
. . . . . . .
Bruce Alpert can be reached at bruce.alpert@newhouse.com or (202) 383-7861.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Vitter stalls bill on flood insurance




By Sean Reilly - Press Register, October 23, 2007

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Sen. David Vitter, R-La, is blocking action by the full Senate on a flood insurance overhaul, saying that it should include higher coverage limits and optional protection for windstorm damage.

The overhaul, sponsored by U.S. Sens. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Richard Shelby, R-Tuscaloosa, won unanimous approval from the Senate banking committee Wednesday.

But in a Monday letter to his two colleagues, Vitter said the legislation should have increased coverage levels, as a House-passed measure would do. The House bill also would allow flood insurance policyholders to add wind coverage; Vitter urged the Senate to consider a similar provision or take other action "to address the broader insurance crisis."

In a news release accompanying the letter, Vitter said he was placing a "hold" on the bill to prevent it from going forward until his concerns were addressed.

Saying he has not seen the letter, a spokesman for Dodd, who chairs the banking committee, had no immediate comment late Monday.

Together with Louisiana's other senator, Democrat Mary Landrieu, Vitter blocked a Senate vote last year on a similar measure to strengthen the flood program, which is now crippled by billions of dollars in debt to the federal treasury. The Senate bill would write off that debt, but also phase out cut-rate premiums for vacation homes and business properties. Last week, a Landrieu spokesman also sounded concerns about the bill's lack of wind coverage and the potential cost to Louisiana policyholders.

The federally backed flood insurance program has more than 54,000 policyholders in Alabama, the bulk of them in Mobile and Baldwin counties.

© 2007 Press-Register



© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Vitter to put hold on bill for insurance




By Kate Magandy - Sun Herald, October 23, 2007

Louisiana Sen. David Vitter said Monday he's putting a hold on the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007.
According to the Senate Web site, a hold is "an informal practice by which a senator informs the floor leader that he or she does not wish a particular bill or other measure to reach the floor for consideration. The majority leader need not follow the senator's wishes but is on notice that the opposing senator may filibuster any motion to proceed to consider the measure."

Vitter, in a press release, said the current bill is similar to last year's and doesn't include provisions that were approved by the House. Vitter particularly addressed the need for greater flood coverage through higher limits and new optional lines of coverage as well as the need for wind-related measures to stabilize general liability rates.

The senator asked the bill's authors, Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and ranking member Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), to meet with him to discuss his concerns.

"This bill looks to be a lot like last year's, and that's disappointing," Vitter said in his release. "Last year and again this year, the House companion bill at least addressed some of the missing pieces, but the bill reported out of Chairman Dodd's committee leaves out these needed reforms.

"I hope the drafters of this bill will open up the lines of communication and work with those states directly impacted by this legislation to ensure that we pass a flood insurance bill that best serves those affected areas," he said.

Vitter also said he plans to organize a meeting between himself, U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu and Mississippi senators Trent Lott and Thad Cochran to discuss what is needed to improve the current version of the bill.

Lott spokesman Lee Youngblood said Monday that Lott also is concerned with the current version of the bill and is committed to getting results for the people of South Mississippi.

"He's going to try any way he can to get a result, whether it's in committee or on the floor," Youngblood said.

"The bottom line is, they didn't include (the wind provision) the other day. He will try to help in any way he can. He has a stake in seeing the wind provision added."


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Mike Chaney as 'Mini Me' in Miss. Insurance Race

by Ana Maria

Two weeks from today, Mississippi can make history in a good and positive way. We have an opportunity to elect Gary Anderson as our state’s insurance commissioner. In the August Democratic primary, Anderson defeated George Dale, a 32-year incumbent bought and paid for by the insurance companies he had been elected to regulate to the benefit and on behalf of Mississippians.

On November 6th, Mississippians like myself will cast their ballots choosing between Anderson and Republican nominee Mike Chaney—the George Dale stand-in candidate. See, Anderson beat out George Dale through pledging not to take money from Big Insurance. Chaney is the George Dale stand-in candidate complete with taking money from Big Insurance just as his good friend Dale had done. Chaney’s recent financial disclosure forms reveal the man sticking his hand out to receive well over $40,000 of Big Insurance campaign investments.

Now the political campaign is going to heat up, and we can write the script Chaney and his team will use. First, Chaney’s team will pretend that taking money from Big Insurance, which has royally screwed over tens of thousands of families and businesses here in Mississippi’s part of the Katrina-ravaged region alone, is the same as money from our legal warriors who successfully protect us from Big Insurance screwing us.

Let’s see. The Chaney campaign believes that the legal protectors of our property are the same as the bullies who steal our homes and businesses. That’s some kind of perverted logic. The Chaney campaign must be desperate.

See, Democratic nominee Gary Anderson had long ago pledged not to take money from Big Insurance.

That made Anderson stand out from George Dale who had raked in over $200,000 in Big Insurance contributions. See pledge here.

Chaney did the “me, too” pledge.

"I will not take money from big insurance companies," Chaney said in a recent telephone interview. "I have not taken money from big insurance companies. I have taken money from insurance agents and from smaller insurance companies that are domiciled in the state.
Of course, Chaney revoked his pledge when he began to take in the over $40,000 in Big Insurance checks. Not the $200,000 that his buddy George Dale raked in during the primary, but a substantial amount more than say, uh, $0. Chaney is doing his best to imitate George Dale whom he likes. Said so himself.
I like George. I’m just worried that he might not get the nomination.
Apparently, Chaney ran to keep the George Dale tradition of having someone in the back pocket of Big Insurance. Chaney is George Dale lite. Kind of the 'Mini Me' in the Mississippi insurance commissioner campaign.

Photo from here.

Just as George Dale did unsuccessfully in the primary, Chaney is banking on painting lawyers in a bad light. Well, a funny thing happened when corporate insurance giants began stealing homes and businesses from families and communities in South Mississippi. Folks looked around to fight Big Insurance with the biggest legal ammo they could find. Big Insurance treated Republican Senator Trent Lott and Congressman Gene Taylor so badly that even they brought in the big guns in the form of Dickie Scruggs of the Scruggs Katrina Group. Without putting the big guns to Big Insurance, Lott and Taylor—along with plenty of other Mississippians—would still be whistling Dixie, as the saying goes around here.

Since Insurance Commissioner George Dale wasn’t protecting Mississippians from Big Insurance, folks rightfully turned to the courts to protect their rights. That’s why Dickie Scruggs and other attorneys have stepped in. They offered to help get the money Big Insurance owed Katrina families and businesses.

Sure, Dale and his supporters such as Big Insurance and Mini were plainly agitated during the August primary. Scruggs gave $250,000 to a political committee named Mississippians for Fair Elections, which ran a fantastically effective ad campaign informing voters that Big Insurance was denying claims all over the state while giving $200,000 in campaign contributions to George Dale.

Big Insurance has already given at least $40,000 to Mike “Mini Me” Chaney. Now Mike “Mini Me” Chaney has his Big Insurance talking points, and the Chaney campaign is probably pleased that those talking points are echoing in various parts of the state. I wouldn’t count those campaign chickens before they hatched, Mini Me.

With Big Insurance’s $40,000, Mini Me is surely considering putting up a racist-tinged ad campaign reminding Mississippi voters that he, Mike 'Mini Me' Chaney, is the WHITE candidate. We know it is coming. This is as predictable as much as banking on Chaney continuing to hold out his hand for Big Insurance campaign money.

I hope that we see another round of ads blowing Chaney’s cover as the Mini Me of the race.

Look for “Mini Me” Chaney to pull out the racist card, to hide behind the color of his own skin as a rationale for our vote. He will do this to hide the fact that he is taking money from Big Insurance who screwed us regardless of our race, religion, ethnicity, economic status, educational background, or political clout.

The only colors that Big Insurance cares about are green and red. Green for the profits it makes and red for sticking us with the bills Big Insurance should pay. We have the opportunity to make our lives better than this.

Mississippi families depend on insurance as part of their financial security to protect their property—their homes and businesses. We depend on insurance for our financial security. As Mississippians, we depend on our insurance commissioner to protect us with fair regulation of the insurance industry. Mike “Mini Me” Chaney will do as George Dale did and protect Big Insurance. In two weeks, Mississippians have the opportunity to make history and elect Gary Anderson as our insurance commissioner the only candidate who has the financial background, integrity, grit, and backbone to protect us from Big Insurance taking advantage of us. We can depend on Gary Anderson to protect us.

In two weeks, we can show the kind of insurance commissioner we believe we deserve. Big Insurance is banking on Mike “Mini Me” Chaney. For me, I’m casting my vote Gary Anderson—the candidate on whom home and business owners, regular folks like you and I can bank on to protect us from Big Insurance.


© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Anderson for insurance commissioner




Editorial


For the first time since 1975, George Dale won't be on the ballot for state insurance commissioner.

Dale, the longest serving insurance commissioner in the nation, was defeated in the Democratic Party primary by Gary Anderson.

Anderson, 51, now faces Republican Mike Chaney in the Nov. 6 general election.

We believe Anderson is the right man for the job.

Anderson served as the state's chief financial officer before an unsuccessful campaign for Mississippi treasurer four years ago. We believe he can use his financial experience to bring needed change to the agency.

However, we are concerned that trial lawyer Dickie Scruggs, who has made millions suing the tobacco industry and is involved in litigation against insurance companies for their response to Hurricane Katrina victims, contributed at least $250,000 to Anderson's campaign.

Chaney, 63, has served in the Mississippi House and Senate, where he chaired the Senate Education Committee. Like Anderson, he is intelligent and brings some good ideas to the table.

But we believe Anderson will be more aggressive in dealing with the insurance companies that for too long have held much sway with the state agency that regulates it.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Monday, October 22, 2007

Canceling Barbour's Reverse Robin Hood Robbery

by Ana Maria

Look, I grew up right here at ground zero for Katrina. No, that isn’t New Orleans—though as a kid, I spent plenty of time there visiting my ton of relatives that live in that internationally beloved city which is but an hour’s drive west of the real ground zero. That city’s problems are definitely because of poorly constructed levees that crumbled under Hurricane Katrina., crumbled because engineers, bureaucrats and politicians failed to develop world class levees. When I talk of Katrina’s ground zero, I’m talking all about Mother Nature’s doings—hurricane force winds ripping apart houses that were 50, 100, 200 years old and tearing up the beautiful trees equal in age with which this region had been so blessed.

I grew up in Bay St. Louis, Miss. This is about a good 20-minute ride from a new ground zero for Katrina—the hotbed of dispute over housing money. After Katrina, Congress appropriated $5.5 billion for our recovery, including housing—as in for people, families, kids, the elderly, the disabled, the sick and the healthy.

Seems our Republican Governor Haley Barbour cannot figure out the difference between housing Mississippians whose homes Hurricane Katrina substantially damaged or destroyed and housing multi-national and multi-billion dollar corporations that use the Port of Gulfport. While the port is another aspect of our recovery, that is not the point. Rather, this is a straight out matter of fiscal responsibility, of Barbour’s failure to comply with the purpose of those monies. Period.

Just last night, I mentioned to a relative who comes down here regularly from his home in another state that to this day I can cross the bridge that connects my hometown of Bay St. Louis to the rest of the Gulf Coast. I can drive along Highway 90 from the other side of the bridge which puts me in Pass Christian and continue for at least 40 miles until I reach Biloxi. Not a single gas station has been rebuilt. Not a single one. Yes, I almost ran out of gas when I attended a fundraiser in Biloxi for the now Democratic nominee for Insurance Commissioner, Gary Anderson. I make certain that my gas tank is full before I leave the Bay. Upon hearing the revelation that no gas stations exist, my relative became aghast.

I told him that not that long ago there was an article in the local Sun Herald telling of a man pretending to be a cop. He’d turn on police lights on his fake car, pull them over, and well, the rest isn’t so pretty. The advice from one law enforcement officer was to turn on our emergency lights and keep driving until we get to a gas station. The follow up comment was that we wouldn’t have to drive more than five miles.

Oh yeah? Where? He must have reverted to pre-Katrina memories. That happens. We forget that we live in a world where basic things we all take for granted—like gas stations—just don’t exist for the time being.

Hardly any construction along the beach for that entire stretch. Now, folks, if there is no boom along those fabulous beach front properties, there is no construction boom for the rest of the communities here either and that includes for those with fewer resources for housing. The miles and miles of land along the beach are barren save for some trees that survived Katrina’s hurricane winds. The question is not whether the pre-Katrina residents will survive. Breathing alone is the definition of mere survival. The question is how they will survive, how will they get the opportunity to thrive.

This is America. We’re Americans. We can do better than all of this. As cynical as too many of us have gotten, we still harbor a desire to do better in our own lives, our communities' lives and the life of our country. We took Hurricane Katrina as an opportunity to channel all those pent up feelings that the best of America existed in the days before the stolen presidential election of 2000 and we poured them into compassionate volunteering of time and energy and money all across the U.S.

The thing that gets me is that there really should not be any federal government money for Governor Barbour to swipe for his corporate cronies. Every one of those housing dollars should have already been spent or encumbered for housing.

Barbour is smooth-talking, back slapping, glad handling former lobbyist who is used to sweet talking or strong arming his way into whatever he wants. I’m sure that he can find other ways to fund the port’s refurbishing. The Los Angeles Times reported

Reilly Morse, a senior attorney for the Mississippi Center for Justice's Katrina Recovery Office, says officials are operating according to a "reverse Robin Hood logic." Port officials, he said, have enough insurance and FEMA funding to recover from Katrina damage, and can explore further funding sources. "They do not need to rob the poor," he said.
And that is it in a nutshell. Reverse Robin Hood.
Our funds do not allow us to provide assistance to all of those 169,000 homes," said Donna Sanford, director of disaster recovery for the development authority. "We have to make difficult decisions."
Most of us outside of Katrina Land fully anticipated that everything would have long ago been completed. To think that most of the recovery hasn't begun and to realize that here in Mississippi the money is stuck in the state's capitol where Governor Barbour, a Republican, is doing his best to develop his Reverse Robin Hood skills . . . well, this is crazy!

There has long been plenty of money appropriated to help rebuild those 169,000 homes. Our federal government sent money for disaster relief for housing. The foundations should have long ago been poured, the 2x4s erected, the roofs and walls put on. Paint stores should have a steady stream of trucks unloading boxes of paint cans. That housing money would cycle through this area again and again and again. A vibrant recovery would ensue.

Rather than the headache of yet another Republican Reverse Robin Hood stealing money from the poor to hand to his rich buddies, we’d be complaining of the joyous noise from construction hurting our ears and then laughing about the headaches from all the banging and hammering and clanging. For over two years now, we’ve been looking forward to those headaches.

Before we can begin to raise hell about the GAWD-awful construction noise at all hours of the day and night, we need to raise a little political hell to shake those dollars lose from the hands from these Reverse Robin Hoods. These are federal dollars. Let's channel our energy into pouring a bit of fuel on the fire in the belly that Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) and Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) have already demonstrated. Each
have asked the Department of Housing and Urban Development to deny Gov. Haley Barbour's request to divert $600 million in Hurricane Katrina housing money for homeowners and spend the money repairing, expanding and improving the Port of Gulfport.
These two strong Democrats with backbones of steal have no need for a dose of Spineocrat. Mark Fiore, San Francisco Chronicle's fantastic video cartoonist, created this fabulous piece on Democrats and backbone.

Contacting Frank and Waters will encourage them to keep the pressure on HUD to spend the money on housing families.

This is how we can help to cancel Barbour's plans for his public Reverse Robin Hood robbery.

© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Housing funds for the port?

Many of Mississippi's poor still await financial help with Katrina damage. But Gulfport has other plans for HUD money.

By Jenny Jarvie, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 22, 2007

GULFPORT, MISS. -- Most days, Luvenia Thomas sits in a wheelchair outside her dank bungalow on 21st Street. She says she cannot breathe inside.

More than two years after Hurricane Katrina tore up her roof and flooded her home, brown water stains darken her ceilings, and her floors are bare. She has pulled up most of her carpeting, but still she says she cannot rid her home of mold.

"I don't know what to do," said Thomas, 54, who is disabled and living on a fixed income. She has not been able to receive state assistance because the damage was caused by wind rather than flooding. "The roof needs fixing, the walls need fixing, the floors need fixing. The whole house needs fixing."

In low-income neighborhoods across coastal Mississippi, many homeowners are still patching their roofs with blue tarp, positioning plants to collect drips from living room ceilings, and taping paper over window cracks. Most say they have yet to receive financial assistance from Mississippi officials.

Advocates for the poor have long argued that Mississippi has skewed federal hurricane recovery funds toward the wealthy. But criticism has become particularly charged since the Mississippi Development Authority announced plans to divert $600 million in federal housing funds to restore and expand the port of Gulfport.

With nearly 15,000 Mississippi families still living in Federal Emergency Management Agency trailers, and many more struggling to repair their damaged homes, a growing number of ministers, aid workers and attorneys say the plan shortchanges the poor.

Reilly Morse, a senior attorney for the Mississippi Center for Justice's Katrina Recovery Office, says officials are operating according to a "reverse Robin Hood logic." Port officials, he said, have enough insurance and FEMA funding to recover from Katrina damage, and can explore further funding sources. "They do not need to rob the poor," he said.

Yet many local and state officials say that housing is no longer the region's most critical priority. They say redirecting funds to the port will reinvigorate the coastal economy.

"We can give someone a little money for new shingles or we can give them a job for the rest of their life," said Gulfport Mayor Brent Warr. "Most people in Gulfport want this because it means jobs, jobs, jobs. The city could become the corporate headquarters of the state of Mississippi."

The plan, which has yet to be submitted to the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, would create 1,300 direct jobs in the next 10 years -- 528 more than the port had before the hurricane. The Mississippi Development Authority is requesting a waiver from the requirement that one full-time, permanent job is created for every $35,000 of HUD funds used. Critics estimate that only one job would be created for each $460,000 spent.

Investing $600 million in the port, valued at $127 million before the hurricane and estimated to have incurred $50 million in damage, represents a significant expansion. Already, the port has hazard insurance coverage of at least $108 million, and it expects an additional $54 million from FEMA.

"We don't want to recover just to the point where we were on Aug. 29, 2005," said Donald R. Allee, executive director of the Mississippi State Port Authority. "We plan to get bigger and we plan to get better."

Development authority officials say that enough housing money will remain to give grants to an estimated 30,000 homeowners to restore or rebuild property. This represents fewer than a fifth of the estimated 169,000 Mississippi homes damaged or destroyed.

"Our funds do not allow us to provide assistance to all of those 169,000 homes," said Donna Sanford, director of disaster recovery for the development authority. "We have to make difficult decisions."

Advocates for the poor have repeatedly questioned the manner in which the development authority has distributed the $5.4 billion it received from HUD through the Community Development Block Grant program.

Established to improve housing and economic opportunities for the poor, the program requires that at least 70% of funds benefit people with low or moderate incomes. After Katrina, Congress lowered that requirement to 50%. Mississippi has gotten this requirement waived for 80% of its programs.

Last year, attorneys with the Mississippi Center for Justice considered suing after state officials announced the first phase of their program to distribute federal aid. By offering grants of as much as $150,000 to homeowners who had insurance but lived outside the flood zone, they argued, officials denied help to many in the hardest-hit areas.

The second phase of the state's program provided as much as $100,000 for people who had flood damage, regardless of whether they were insured. Yet the program in Mississippi did not cover wind damage, so tens of thousands of homeowners did not qualify.

Although nearly half of Gulf Coast residents lived in rentals before Katrina, only about a tenth of housing aid has gone toward rebuilding rental units. Now there is a shortage of units, and rents have increased by 30%.

Last week, U.S. Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) urged the federal government to deny Mississippi's request, describing it as an "unwarranted diversion of funds and a disservice to displaced Mississippians still in need of affordable housing."

Yet patience is wearing thin among some residents who have rebuilt their homes.

In Gulfport's dilapidated business district, Jerry Maddox, 56, said it was time to invest in encouraging businesses back to the city. "Some people just want the government to do everything," he said. "I wouldn't wait if it was me. I would be moving on."

Several blocks west, William Janas, 65, walked through a FEMA trailer park, clutching a letter notifying him that the park would close by month's end. "I got nowhere to go," he said. "I don't give a damn about the port. The housing recovery is not over."

jenny.jarvie@latimes.com


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

No money for the FEMA trailer park children


Sunday, October 21, 2007
Letter to the editor

A 6-year-old child, Blake Pendergrass, was struck and killed by an automobile in Escatawpa the other day. Escatawpa is about 20 miles from my home in Ocean Springs. I didn't know him. I would imagine something like that happens somewhere in America every day -- at least every week. But this one hurt me. Hurt me bad. You see, the little boy lived in a FEMA trailer park -- a Katrina FEMA trailer park in Escatawpa. Escatawpa is -- well, if you were plotting out a Monopoly board, it ain't Boardwalk. It's more like one of the purples right past "Go" -- you know, the ones where the rent for landing on the space is $2.00.

I visited the scene where Blake was killed. The park in which he lived has no playground. Blake was killed while he was crossing the street attempting to get to his "playground." The trailers are stacked in compactly, like sardines in a can. There is no room for a playground, just trailers. And more trailers. All identical. That's how you identify a FEMA trailer park. The trailers have no amenities -- no "identities." Every one is just the same. Twenty-four feet long. Eight feet wide. White. Stacked right together. No thought is given to the children. No parks, no playgrounds, no sidewalks -- the park just screams, "You're just a bunch of poor kids and we don't care."

Immediately across the street from the trailer park sits an abandoned convenience store, complete with a parking lot -- unused. The children of the trailer park have adopted the parking lot as their unofficial playground. Only to get to it they have to cross the street. The "street" is a highway. So 6-year-old Blake Pendergrass was killed while crossing the highway to get from his FEMA trailer home to his abandoned parking lot playground. And on that same day our governor, Haley Barbour, was busy taking $600 million that the people of this nation gave to my community for housing for Katrina victims, people just like little Blake, and turning it over to the business interests at the port of Gulfport, about 30 miles away -- so Dole Pineapple and other multi-million dollar business entities could have that money instead of Blake. You think maybe the people of this nation expected the money given for housing following Katrina would be given to Blake, and not Dole Pineapple?

The people of this great nation gave the victims of that horrible storm $5 billion so we could provide housing for the children like Blake. But it hasn't happened that way. Five billion dollars is enough money to buy 60,000, $80,000 homes -- we lost 65,000 homes (and yes, one can still buy a home for $80,000 in Mississippi). I invite you to drive around my community and I ask you if you see anything that looks remotely like 60,000 homes. Or 30,000 homes. Or even 10,000 homes. Our governor has been so busy passing out money to his friends and cronies, he has managed to build not a single home to cover the needs of a child like Blake -- and there are thousands of children in just the same situation as Blake. The governor gave a lawyer friend of his in Moss Point $1 million. Northrup-Grumman, a major defense contractor was given $250 million. The Hancock Bank, our largest, got the benefit of hundreds of millions. The business entities at the port of Gulfport, $600 million. All diverted from the funds intended to provide housing for Katrina victims.

There are flowers on the side of the road marking the spot where little Blake was killed -- a tribute of sorts I guess. I started crying when I saw them. Oh the horror, the horror. I'm so sorry little fella. I've tried so hard. I've written letters to the editors of dozens of newspapers. I've called Congressmen, Senators. But I am an old man now -- I am tired -- and for the first time in my life I have to own up to it -- I am beaten -- I have failed. I am so sorry Blake. My governor went to Washington, D.C., and got $5 billion. But all he got for you was those damn flowers.

Briley Richmond

Ocean Springs


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Barbour's agenda on Gulf Coast drawing fire

By Ellen Ann Fentress
Special to The Clarion-Ledger

Post-Katrina, Gov. Haley Barbour has kept his Teflon aura, certainly longer than George Bush managed to do post-9-11.

Yet Barbour's agenda is gathering its critics, too. Several legislators complain Barbour's administration isn't forthcoming on specifics of spending the $5.5 billion in aid appropriated by Congress. Also frustrated are Coast community advocates who keep butting up against the reality that the state's recovery is being engineered by an astute politician with more affinity for the well-to-do than those at the bottom.

Barbour chapped both groups recently by proposing to move $600 million in federal relief funds to the state port at Gulfport from its current purpose for housing efforts. The money is part of the $5.5 billion in Community Development Block Grants, the vehicle Congress used to channel hurricane aid to Mississippi.

In defense, Barbour says that the $600 million was intended for the port all along, offering a general breakout for the $5.5 billion, port included. The initial thought was to seek $500 million from the Department of Transportation and $100 million from the Corps of Engineers, he wrote in a letter to House Speaker Billy McCoy. "Congress decided to lump most of our various requests into one pool of money from one department, Community Development Block Grant," the letter said.

PORT MONEY IN QUESTION

That is subject to dispute. After Congress acted in December 2005, port repair money was still considered up in the air in July 2006. A front-page Clarion-Ledger story on July 16, 2006, was headlined "Miss. still without funds to fix port." In the article by Ana Radelat of the paper's Washington bureau, port authority director Don Allee acknowledged he was unsure how much the port would get. That report indicated port money was no done deal.

Even now, the Mississippi Development Authority Web site labels the port proposal as an amendment "redirecting $600 million of the $2.15 billion allocated for Phase I of the Homeowner Assistance Grant Program to the Port of Gulfport Restoration."

"There is no question that that money was appropriated for housing," said Rep. Cecil Brown, of the Legislative Budget Committee. He agrees the port needs funds, but complains neither Barbour nor the port authority offers specifics on spending the $600 million.

During the 2007 session, some House Democrats pushed Barbour for more transparency on doling out the funds. The House passed a bill, which died in the Senate, calling for a legislative advisory committee on recovery spending.

Neighborhood activists - including the Mississippi Center for Justice and the NAACP - have complained that recovery a la Barbour favors the well-to-do over the less fortunate. Phase I of the Homeowners Assistance Grants, by definition, targeted homeowners, and insured ones to boot. Phase II was for homeowners as well. Owner-occupied housing is coming back faster than rentals-perhaps 40 to 1, according to construction permits - and more expensive homes faster than modest ones, found a report last month by the non-profit Rand Corporation. Further, stalled recovery in the rental market has driven rent prices up by 20 percent.

HOUSING STILL LIMITED

The findings came out, ironically, as Barbour's critics complained about rerouting the housing money. Rand stated affordable housing "remains limited - a factor that has, no doubt, slowed the overall pace of economic recovery along the U.S. Gulf Coast."

Rep. Diane Peranich agrees the state port is important to the Coast's return. "But you won't find anybody say it's at the expense of the homeowners," says Peranich, who moved back into her Delisle home only a few weeks ago after two years in a trailer. Peranich's mother remains in a trailer.

Barbour's letter noted the plan, under discussion, to transfer the present shipping container area inland, would make the port safer in future hurricanes. He did not mention that moving the containers inland would also help clear out a 45-acre tract of the port property, a prospect that has drawn the interest of condo and casino developers.

Meanwhile, an estimated 17,000 households, perhaps 50,000 people, remain in FEMA trailers.

Wouldn't it be nice if when Coast residents hear the phrase "trickle down," it refers to what their new roofs keep out when it rains? "Trickle down" shouldn't be the architecture of the recovery.

Ellen Ann Fentress is a regular contributing columnist to The Clarion-Ledger.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Friday, October 19, 2007

Reps ask HUD to reject port request



By Ana Radelat
Clarion-Ledger Washington Bureau

October 19, 2007

WASHINGTON — Two Democratic lawmakers have asked the Department of Housing and Urban Development to deny Gov. Haley Barbour's request to divert $600 million in Hurricane Katrina housing money for homeowners and spend the money repairing, expanding and improving the Port of Gulfport.

In a letter to HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson released Wednesday night, Reps. Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Maxine Waters of California said the move "would constitute an unwarranted diversion of funds and a disservice to displaced Mississippians still in need of affordable housing."

But the lawmakers' request may be premature.

HUD spokesman Brian Sullivan said the agency has not received Mississippi's proposal, which has been in the works for more than a year.

Barbour spokesman Pete Smith said the proposal has not officially been submitted to Washington.

The governor proposed giving the port $600 million because it is "crucial to the economy of our state and essential to the revitalization of the Gulf Coast region."

Barbour also said enough money is available in the $2.25 billion Community Development Block Grant program for hurricane victims to divert the money to the port.

About 27,000 homeowners in Mississippi have applied for grants, designed to help hurricane victims rebuild their homes or pay off their mortgages.

The proposal to divert housing money to the port provoked dozens of critical responses during a public comment period in September.

Residents, advocacy groups and pastors said they want to keep the money in the housing program.

Franks and Waters said housing for low- and moderate-income families in Mississippi "remains a critical issue for the state's recovery."

They said 13,800 small rental units were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina but only 6,000 units would be repaired under state recovery plans.

The Democratic lawmakers also said more than 17,000 individuals and families in the state are still living in travel trailers and mobile homes.

Frank has authority over HUD programs as chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services, but the agency may not be able to comply with his requests.

Under certain conditions, Community Development Block Grant money can indeed be spent for economic development.

Barbour already has received permission from HUD to give millions of dollars in grant money to Mississippi utility companies hurt by Katrina.

Congress last year approved a total of $5.5 billion in HUD Community Development Block Grants for the state. But Sullivan said Mississippi has spent only about $1.6 billion.



Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Schumer Vows Push To Add Wind Coverage To Flood Insurance Program Overhaul Approved By Senate Banking Committee

Reports Estimate That One Million U.S. Homeowners in Northeast Have Had Homeowners' Insurance Policies Cancelled Since 2004

Plan To Cover Wind Damage Would Help Provide Affordable Insurance Policies for Coastal Residents—Proposal Has Already Passed House

October 17, 2007

WASHINGTON—Following the Senate Banking Committee’s passage today of a bill to update the federal flood insurance program, U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer vowed to continue to push for the program to include wind damage. The provision—omitted in today’s unanimously approved legislation—would address the rising tendency of insurance companies to deny homeowner insurance policies on coastal areas in the aftermath of natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina.

Schumer said adding wind damage to the flood insurance program—as a House-passed measure would do—would offer protection to homeowners on coastal areas like Long Island, and keep insurance premiums there low. He noted how just this week, published reports estimated that since 2004, one million homeowners in the Northeastern United States have seen their policies cancelled.

“This bill takes important steps towards upgrading the flood insurance program, but covering wind damage is a logical, necessary next step,” Schumer said. “Winds from coastal storms can often inflict even greater damage than rising water, but private insurers are leaving homeowners high and dry.”

In recent years, at least half a dozen companies have either stopped writing policies on Long Island, or refused to renew existing policies, some of which were decades old. Allstate, MetLife, Travelers, Liberty Mutual and Nationwide are among the insurers who have begun to pull out of Long Island, citing overexposure and risk due to a potential hurricane strike. Despite a state law that prohibits companies from dropping more than 4% of policies in a year, some companies have found a way around the rule, convincing customers to move to other companies, or offering bonuses to agents who persuade “high-risk” customers to drop coverage. However, for those homeowners that are able to maintain coverage, the spiking premiums can be equally devastating.

To address the crisis, Schumer has proposed a series of updates to the nearly 40-year-old National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which is administered by FEMA. Schumer has said the Senate should consider increasing the maximum coverage level above the current limit of $250,000, which he said was “simply too low for areas with higher construction and rebuilding costs.” Significantly, Schumer also called for the NFIP to cover losses caused by wind, not just water. After Hurricane Katrina, many homeowners suffered uncovered losses when companies sought to classify the damage as caused by rising water, which is covered by the federal program, instead of by wind, which isn’t.

Both measures are contained in a bill that has already passed the U.S. House of Representatives.

Late this summer, at the start of the hurricane season, Senator Schumer called for a bipartisan Commission on National Catastrophe Risk Management and Insurance. The Commission would be comprised of 16 members with backgrounds in emergency management, engineering, financial markets, insurance, construction, meteorology, and policy ownership, and would be required to submit a report on their findings and recommendations to the Senate Banking Committee, of which Schumer is a member.

###

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Senate drops wind from insurance bill




Posted on Thu, Oct. 18, 2007
By MARIA RECIO
SUN HERALD WASHINGTON BUREAU


WASHINGTON -- The Senate Banking Committee approved a flood insurance reform bill Wednesday that does not include wind damage, as Gulf Coast lawmakers had hoped, after key senators decided not to offer an amendment expanding the federal program to cover wind.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., dropped their plans to amend the bill with a wind provision when it became clear that the chairman, a ranking Republican, and others from non-coastal states opposed it.

"We weren't going to get it through," said Martinez. "We're going to try and do something on the floor." The Florida Republican said that he was disappointed "but I never had my hopes extremely high."

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said during the "mark-up" of the bill that he had concerns about the costs of adding wind coverage. "The problem here is we don't know the implications of that," he said. Dodd prefers to rely on the findings of a study commission, already approved by the panel, to look at all-perils coverage.

"It's a very legitimate issue," said Dodd of expanding the program to cover wind damage. "We couldn't answer the implications of cost."

The flood insurance program had to borrow nearly $20 billion from the U.S. Treasury after hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which the bill would forgive FEMA from having to repay. The flood insurance program is part of FEMA.

Sen. Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss., who lobbied banking panel members, said he would continue to press for wind coverage. "We're going to assess if we can even get it up for consideration," said Lott. "I'm interested in results."

Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Bay St. Louis, the prime mover behind a House-passed flood insurance reform bill that includes "multiperils" of wind and water, remained optimistic.

"That particular committee was a tough audience," said Taylor. "I think the trend is in the right direction, with support from Lott and Sen. (Thad) Cochran, the home builders, the bankers and the Realtors." Cochran is the ranking Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee.

"It's trending our way," said Taylor. "We always knew it was a fight but I'm encouraged."

The Senate bill reauthorizing the flood insurance program, approved unanimously by the banking committee, would strengthen the flood zone mapping program, forgive FEMA's $20 billion debt and institute mandatory coverage areas. The House version of the bill does not forgive the $20 billion debt.


© 2007 Sun Herald. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.sunherald.com

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Senate committee votes today on flood bill

SUN HERALD WASHINGTON BUREAU

-- The Senate Banking Committee today votes on a flood insurance reform bill Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Mel Martinez, R-Fla., will try to amend to include wind damage - an explosive issue that has roiled coastal communities since Hurricane Katrina.

The House passed a flood insurance bill last month 263 to 146 that included the "multiperil" provision giving policy holders the option to purchase wind coverage, but the bill the Senate Banking Committee will consider or "mark up" will not include the wind provision.

Martinez, however, will offer the wind amendment, said spokesman Ken Lundberg, because "it's a great idea. It would help Florida and other coastal areas."

Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss., who lost his home in Katrina, said he had spoken with Chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and ranking member Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., and "Dodd said he needed to do more research and Shelby's against it."

Asked about Schumer, who raised the wind issue during a committee hearing, Lott said, "I hear he's pushing it. I hope he's successful." The New York senator has been angry about insurance companies' refusal to write wind policies on Long Island.

Martinez is concerned Florida's property insurance agency, Citizens Property Insurance, created after private insurers stopped writing policies, would be hurt by a catastrophic storm.

Gulf Coast residents have been battling private insurers over wind damage since Hurricane Katrina, with companies maintaining water, not wind, caused most of the destruction. Water damage is covered by the federal government's program, a part of FEMA.

Lott sued his insurer, State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., and settled earlier this year.

Opponents of the bill, including Shelby, insurers and some public interest groups, say the flood insurance program is essentially bankrupt and adding wind would deplete the government-sponsored program.

The flood insurance program, which is administered by the insurers, had to borrow $17.5 billion more than it took in because of hurricanes Katrina and Rita claims.

The Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007 has bipartisan support for changes in the program, which would increase premiums, phase out subsidized rates paid by vacation-home owners and raise the flood insurance fund's borrowing authority.

The Schumer-Martinez amendment mirrors the House-passed multiple-peril bill by setting a residential policy limit at $500,000 for the structure and $150,000 for contents. Nonresidential properties would be covered up to $1 million for structure and $750,000 for contents and business interruption. The bill increases the maximum coverage for flood insurance policies from $250,000 to $335,000 for residences.

The wind program would be paid for from actuarially determined premiums.

© 2007 Sun Herald. All Rights Reserved.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Cutoff contradicts congressional order

Masthead Text

Friday, October 12, 2007
By Bill Walsh


WASHINGTON -- Despite a congressional directive to make mental health services for the hurricane-ravaged Gulf Coast a financial priority, the Bush administration has rejected an application by a prominent children's program in New Orleans that now faces cutbacks.

The co-director of the Louisiana State University program, which evaluates and treats children in areas hit hardest by Hurricane Katrina, said services will be scaled back "very considerably" without the $400,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

"The children are the most traumatized in the United States," said Howard Osofsky, chairman of the psychiatry department at LSU Health Sciences Center. "If we are going to prevent the scars and give them the best chance to succeed, they really need these services."

The administration said it is still looking into what occurred but said Congress' failure to approve a spending bill last year for the Department of Health and Human Services might have played a role.

"That would certainly have a big influence on it," said Kay Springer, spokeswoman for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, which awards the grants.

Key services lacking

As the recovery from the 2005 hurricane season grinds on, the mental health of Gulf Coast residents has been a major concern, as has the shortage of services. A survey of 2,757 children returning to the New Orleans area within a year of Katrina found that 49 percent met the criteria for a mental health referral, 20 percent had been touched by a hurricane-related death or injury, and 33 percent had been separated from parents or guardians.

Concerned about the need, Congress in the $605 billion fiscal 2007 spending bill for the health department directed the agency to give "high priority" in awarding grants to programs treating victims of the Gulf Coast hurricanes as well as families and children of troops deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.

However, when the agency issued its call for applications earlier this year, it said priority would be given to the treatment of children from broken homes, refugees, those with life-threatening illnesses or those who had relatives serving in Iraq or Afghanistan. It made no mention of Katrina.

Osofsky learned in late September that his application had been rejected.

"I don't want people to panic," he said. "But without the funding we will have to cut back very considerably."

Landrieu blasts denial

The Louisiana Rural Trauma Services Center received a four-year grant in 2003 from the Bush administration and has been held up as a model program. It helps pay to send LSU mental health professionals into schools, courts and Head Start programs in Orleans, Plaquemines and St. Bernard parishes to evaluate and screen youngsters for signs of mental illness and provide follow-up treatment. The program also trains school workers to spot symptoms of mental illness.

Since the storm, Osofsky said, the need has never been greater. He has seen a rise in the incidence of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, bullying in the schools and unusually risky adolescent behavior in the parishes still struggling to recover.

Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., blasted the administration for rejecting the program when the region needs it most.

"It is shocking that during a time of ongoing hurricane recovery in New Orleans, the Department of Health and Human Services would deny funding to this renowned program that provides essential mental health services to the city's children," Landrieu said. "It is further troubling that the agency would disregard the expressly stated intent of Congress to give priority for children's mental health grants to facilities that help children along the Gulf Coast handle the post-traumatic stress of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita."

Agency blames Congress
However, the federal health department said Congress might be partly to blame.

Though the House and Senate, controlled by Republicans at the time, each passed their own versions of spending bills for the health department in 2006, Congress failed to reconcile the two versions and pass a final appropriations bill for the agency. Instead, it passed a continuing resolution, which had the effect of maintaining 2006 financing levels throughout fiscal 2007.

Springer, the spokeswoman for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration, said the agency didn't have Congress' directive to prioritize mental health grants to the Gulf Coast when it put together its program earlier this year.

"We did not have an approved appropriations bill, only a continuing resolution," Springer said. "Any language that would be included in an appropriations bill wasn't available to us."

However, Landrieu spokesman Adam Sharp noted that the agency chose to give priority to children and families of returning war veterans, a directive that was contained in the fiscal 2007 spending bill, but somehow left off hurricane victims. He said that despite Congress' failure to pass all the spending bills last year, some agencies followed Congress' policy directives anyway.

"They chose to use the Iraq language from the fiscal 2007 bill but ignore the Gulf Coast language," he said. "They were clearly picking and choosing. They can't have it both ways."

Landrieu said she hopes to remedy the situation next week. She plans to offer an amendment to the fiscal 2008 spending bill for the Department of Health and Human Services when it comes to the Senate floor. The amendment would direct $400,000 in grant financing to the LSU mental health program.

Bill Walsh can be reached at bill.walsh@newhouse.com or (202) 383-7817



Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Anderson Says, If Elected, He'll Open Insurance Office On The Coast



Oct 4, 2007 07:08 PM

Gary Anderson says if he's elected Mississippi's Insurance Commissioner, he will open an office here on the Coast to help speed up existing claims against insurance companies.

Anderson made that promise, during a campaign stop in Biloxi Thursday.

Anderson continues to pledge not to take money from insurance companies. Thursday, he also shared his plans to reduce fraud, lower insurance rates, and remove confusing language from those insurance policies.

"For so long, the policies may say one thing on the front cover and then when you flip it over on the back, and use a magnifying glass and three lawyers to interpret, it exempts the very thing that it says it will do on the very front side. I want to make sure that when the citizens of this state purchase insurance, they know exactly what it covers and what it will not cover," Anderson said.

Anderson faces Republican Mike Chaney in the November general election.



© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Helping Big Insurance See Red

by Ana Maria


As I read these articles this morning, the connection between and injustice of these two pieces really got to me. The woman deliberately applied for and received a duplicate check for property lost in Louisiana during Katrina. She was found guilty of “felony of theft of public money”. She had already gotten and cashed the first check.

On the other hand, insurance companies like Allstate and State Farm “strike it rich” with their industry-wide post-Katrina strategy in which companies “pulled back aggressively from areas susceptible to expensive storms. It did not renew many homeowners' policies. And it dramatically increased its own insurance, or reinsurance.

Of course, part of their “pull back” strategy also included deliberately denying legitimate wind claims on the home owner’s insurance policies for American families and businesses that Katrina had substantially damaged or destroyed. When these companies denied the wind claims, that also meant that the companies took themselves off the hook for the cost of living expenses for which we pay on our homeowner policies. You know, housing and the like.

When the insurance companies wrongly denied these wind claims thus weaseling out of their obligation to pay the cost of living expenses for these tens of thousands of families here in Mississippi alone, the families relied on Uncle Sam for their cost of living costs. To my way of thinking, these companies committed . . . now what was it that the woman was convicted of . . . “felony of theft of public money”. The woman deliberately had the government send her an additional $2,000 check. She got three years probation and had to pay the money back.

Isn’t that what Big Insurance has done? Hasn’t Big Insurance sent the American taxpayer a bill for cost of living expenses that the insurance companies should have paid for? Congressman Gene Taylor (D-MS) often recites 40,000 as the number of FEMA trailers here in Mississippi.
In south Mississippi at one point we had 40,000 people living in FEMA trailers, we're grateful for every one of them. But those trailers were delivered by a friend of the president by the name of Riley Bechtel, a major contributor to Bush administration. He got $16,000 to haul a trailer the last 70 miles from Purvis, Miss., down to the Gulf Coast, hook it up to a garden hose, hook it up to a sewer tap, and plug it in, $16,000.
Since folks had been living in tents—and it is hot as blazes down here, the trailers were a welcomed reprieve—even if they have since been shown to be formaldehyde-filled. Get it? The insurance companies’ deliberate failure to certify policyholders’ wind claims had American families living in tents in the hot-as-Hades sun, then in formaldehyde-filled trailers where many thousands of families continue to reside because of the housing crisis.

This crisis—along with the rest of the economic crisis throughout the Katrina-ravaged region—is caused because of a responsibility crisis. Many insurance companies have exhibited this industry-wide epidemic of shirking its financial responsibilities.

If our society finds guilty a woman who wrongfully bilked the government of $2,000 requiring her to repay the money and to be on probation for three years, what would be an appropriate sentence for corporations that deliberately bilked the federal government of billions of dollars in federal disaster aid to the Katrina region?

If the industry had responsibly paid for wind-related damages and the related cost-of-living expenses associated with those damages, the federal flood insurance program would not be swimming in Katrina-related red ink. And this red ink is the industry’s main talking point for opposing Taylor’s Multiple Peril Insurance legislation.

The audacity of Big Insurance to bilk us of our tax dollars and then turn around and use that red ink as the reason to oppose the Multiple Peril Insurance legislation! Kind of has us seeing red, doesn’t it?

When I have an abundance of something, sharing it always makes me feel fabulously. Yes, ma’am and yes, sir! Generosity is key. With this abundance of red, we can share the wealth . . . through a bit of political hell raising.

All we need to do is email or call our U.S. Senators to let them know that we support Taylor’s Multiple Peril Insurance legislation. If we’ve already called, then send an email. The more we do this, the more political momentum we build for the bill. The more political momentum we generate, the more likely the bill will pass the U.S. Senate. The quicker we do this, the quicker we graciously assist Big Insurance in “seeing red” for themselves. Maybe those millions and millions of dollars in raises and bonuses that the two-fisted greedy gutted insurance execs received will have to be returned to the U.S. Treasury. Isn't that what the woman had to do? She had to return the bonus she gave to herself? That seems like fair play to me.

And that’s the way we spread our generosity of seeing red to Big Insurance while passing the Multiple Peril Insurance legislation to protect our families and businesses. It feel good to be generous inside the political arena!

© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Allstate strikes it rich with post-Katrina strategy

Associated Press

CHICAGO (AP) — When a series of killer hurricanes walloped the Gulf Coast in 2005, Allstate tried to make sure it never again would see a quarterly loss as large as that $1.5 billion setback.

The Northbrook-based insurer pulled back aggressively from areas susceptible to expensive storms. It did not renew many homeowners' policies. And it dramatically increased its own insurance, or reinsurance.

Two years later, despite the continuing risk of a consumer and regulatory backlash, the strategy is paying off big despite substantial consumer criticism. Allstate is on a pace to exceed last year's record annual profit of $5 billion as it gets set to report third-quarter results on Wednesday.

The shift has made Allstate more an auto insurer. Automobile insurance now accounts for more than double its revenue from homeowners.

WTSP-TV (CBS, Tampa Bay/St. Petersburg) originally published here on October 15, 2007.


(Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Insurance commission nominee drops in DeSoto




Democrat Gary Anderson especially wants to help hard-hit Gulf Coast

By Yolanda Jones
Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Gary Anderson is no stranger to the insurance world.

During three years as the state's chief financial officer in the administration of former governor Ronnie Musgrove, Anderson's office oversaw the health insurance for state employees, as well as the tort claims division.

"We covered the gambit, from property and casualty insurance to health insurance for over 200,000 employees," Anderson, the Democratic nominee for insurance commissioner in the Nov. 6 general election, said during a swing through DeSoto County Monday.

"So I have the experience in the world of insurance, and that is why I am in this race -- to make sure all citizens get a fair deal in insurance."

Anderson, 51, a native of Byhalia, faces Republican nominee State Sen. Mike Chaney of Vicksburg. Gary Anderson
During a DeSoto stop earlier this month, Chaney said he was best qualified for the job because of 15 years in the Mississippi Legislature and a couple of decades in private business.

Beside qualifications, Anderson said Monday he'll be independent in making decisions.

"One thing that separates me from my opponent is that I have made a pledge to not accept a single dime from the insurance companies or their executives for my campaign," Anderson said. "These are the people I will regulate if elected, and I'm independent. I can represent the ratepayers and not the insurance companies."

The state's insurance commissioner regulates property and casualty insurance. The commissioner helps set fire insurance rates, oversees the state fire academy and deals with building codes and other issues.

Anderson said he wants to make sure residents understand their insurance policies.

"I want the policies in plain English so everyone understands exactly what they are purchasing," he said.

Anderson said he wants to help all residents, but especially those on the Gulf Coast hit hard during Hurricane Katrina.

"I want to settle those claims for residents on the Gulf Coast, so they can restore their lives and move forward," Anderson said.

He said during the Aug. 7 primary, in which he edged out incumbent George Dale, he had tremendous support from Gulf Coast residents.

"I unseated a 32-year veteran as insurance commissioner," he said.

Anderson, a consultant, is head of his own business, Anderson LLC based in Jackson. After campaigning in DeSoto County Monday, he headed to Tupelo.

"I want residents from the northern part of the state where I grew up and citizens throughout the state to know that I am out to get affordable insurance for all residents," he said.

-- Yolanda Jones: (662) 996-1474


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Home Insurers Canceling in East



James and Ann Gray, who live 12 miles from the shore, have lost their homeowners’ insurance. Photo: Michelle V. Agins/The New York Times

Published: October 16, 2007

GARDEN CITY, N.Y., Oct. 15 — It is 1,200 miles from the coastline where Hurricane Katrina touched land two years ago to the neat colonial-style home here where James Gray, a retired public relations consultant, and his wife, Ann, live. But this summer, Katrina reached them, too, in the form of a cancellation letter from their home-insurance company.

The letter said that “hurricane events over the past two years” had forced the company to limit its exposure to further losses; and that because the Grays’ home on Long Island was near the Atlantic Ocean — it is 12 miles from the coast and has been touched by rampaging waters only once, when the upstairs bathtub overflowed — their 30-year-old policy was “nonrenewed,” or canceled.

The Grays signed with a new company, but their case attracted the attention of consumer advocates and, in turn, the New York insurance commissioner, Eric R. Dinallo.

Mr. Dinallo’s sharp rebuke last month of the Grays’ company, Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, reflected a shift in how public officials view a new reality in the homeowners’ insurance business, advocates say.

In the last three years, more than three million homeowners have received letters like the Grays’ as insurance companies, determined to avoid another $40 billion Katrina bill, have essentially begun to redraw the outline of the eastern United States somewhere west of the Appalachian Trail.

Public officials in Southern states from Florida to Texas have been fighting insurance carriers for years over rising rates and withdrawal of services, but officials in the Northeast have only recently joined the fray.

Companies including Allstate, State Farm and Liberty Mutual have “nonrenewed” policies not only in hurricane-battered places like Florida and Louisiana, but in New York and other Northern states that have not seen hurricanes in years. Since last year, those three companies and others have turned down all new homeowners’ insurance business in New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland, Massachusetts and the eight downstate counties of New York.

An independent insurance agents’ group puts the Grays among about 50,000 residents of the New York metropolitan area — and about one million homeowners in the Mid-Atlantic and New England states — whose policies have been canceled since 2004. While most homeowners have been able to find coverage with other major insurers, or with smaller companies, in most cases it is at higher rates and with larger deductibles.

The companies say they are obliged to avoid undue risks where they see them, and to remain solvent. “Considering what happened between 2003 and 2005,” said Robert P. Hartwig, president of the Insurance Information Institute, an industry lobbying group, “and considering that the best meteorological minds are telling us that for the next 15 to 20 years hurricane activity will be heavier than normal, if we didn’t do something to reduce our exposure, we’d be out of business.”

In response to a growing torrent of complaints, state officials and lawmakers have lately begun to push back, if gingerly, against the industry, which they see as overreacting to the hurricane threat in the Northeast. “My concern is that this situation is being manipulated by the insurance companies in order for them to get higher rates,” said State Senator Kenneth P. LaValle, who calls the cancellation of policies in his eastern Long Island district “more than a problem — it is a crisis.”

Mr. Dinallo, the commissioner, has focused his attention on the law: It was a single line in the Liberty Mutual letter sent to the Grays that prompted him to issue his rebuke. The line noted that one consideration in dropping their policy was that they did not have car insurance with the company.

That, Mr. Dinallo said, is illegal. Predicating one policy on another, or so-called “tie-in business,” is a violation of state insurance law, he said. Liberty Mutual said the tie-in was a secondary issue, but in response to Mr. Dinallo’s warning, Liberty Mutual, State Farm and the largest insurer in the state, Allstate, agreed to stop the practice.

Earlier this year, Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut attorney general, also challenged insurers’ tactics, subpoenaing records from nine insurance companies that were requiring homeowners to install storm shutters if they wanted to keep their policies. “The insurers are making record profits,” Mr. Blumenthal said in an interview, “and the dire predictions of disastrous hurricanes, fortunately, have been very wrong — fortunately for everyone, including the insurers.”

Meanwhile, heated public hearings were held this year in the Rhode Island General Assembly about the lack of homeowners’ insurance in coastal areas, which include most of the state.

In Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York, lawmakers and regulators this year proposed requiring all insurance companies doing business in the states to set aside billions of dollars to help defray losses from future catastrophic storms.

At a public hearing of the New York Senate Insurance Committee last Tuesday, Senator Charles J. Fuschillo Jr. said the retreat of major home insurers had hurt the housing market. (Home insurance is required by all banks that make home loans.)

“We have people who cannot buy a house because they can’t find insurance,” he said.

Amy Bach, executive director of United Policyholders, a California-based consumer advocacy group, has watched the situation in the East with both professional and personal interest, since the policy on her parents’ Long Island home was recently canceled. Crisis or not, she said, the pattern is familiar.

“Wide-scale nonrenewal has been the knee-jerk reaction of the big insurance companies after every major disaster: hurricanes, earthquakes, wildfires,” she said.

Florida set the pattern for states in picking up the risk shed by major carriers. Its state-created Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, the insurance pool for those unable to find home insurance anywhere else, has become the state’s largest homeowners’ insurer, with 1.3 million policies.

But Massachusetts, last hit by a moderate hurricane in 1991, has also found itself in the insurance business. Its high-risk pool has doubled in size in the last five years, reaching 200,000 policies this year, which makes it the largest single homeowners’ insurance carrier in the state. On Cape Cod, 44 percent of homeowners are covered by the plan.

In New York, Connecticut and New Jersey, the number of people covered by state insurance pools has remained relatively low. The New York plan, known as the New York Property Insurance Underwriting Association, carries about 70,000 policies, most for homes in coastal areas; this year, officials said, the state pool was expecting 10,000 more.

To some extent, insurance brokers in the New York metropolitan area have closed the gap left by the major carriers by finding policies with subprime insurers, also known as the excess and surplus market. Figures provided by the Excess Line Association of New York, a group representing those insurers, show that 7,689 such policies were sold last year, and almost as many, 7,456, in the first seven months of 2007.

Robert J. Hunter, director of insurance for the Consumer Federation of America, said the extent of the retreat by major insurers “will depend a lot on what happens this year, hurricane-wise.”

Insurance companies have condensed their projections of risk, he said.

“They used to project 20 years in the future, but now it is more like 4 or 5,” Mr. Hunter said, a practice that has driven the current pull-back along the Northeast coast, where a big hurricane is overdue, according to computer analysis.

Mr. Hartwig, of the Insurance Institute, said it was more complicated than that. “What insurers are worried about is not just a hurricane in New York, but hurricanes in New York and Florida at the same time,” he said.

Betty Clark, a retired waitress living on a fixed income in a modest house where she raised her children in Eastham, Mass., on Cape Cod, said she had no idea how the tussle between insurance companies and public officials would play out. But after years of paying $742 a year, her home insurance doubled last year, to $1,440, which she would not be able to afford if not for some help from her children.

“I’ve never made a claim in all these years,” she said by telephone. “And yet, here it’s possible I’ll lose my home,” she said.

And not to a hurricane, she added.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

FEMA will provide $1.14 M for gas lines



Posted on Tue, Oct. 16, 2007

WAVELAND -- STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
Mississippi's two U.S. senators said Monday that Waveland will receive $1.14 million from the federal government to help replace gas lines and distribution equipment damaged by Hurricane Katrina.

Waveland gas lines were damaged by saltwater corrosion and uprooted trees. Federal money will pay for pressure testing of the high-pressure main line; repair and capping of existing branches off the main line; re-establishment of easements; and installation of a high-density polyethylene main line, service lines and termination caps, according to a press release.

Mayor Tommy Longo said the funding announcement is good news for a gas line project that is "already about 98 percent complete." The lines will provide natural gas service to hundreds of homes and businesses throughout the city, although a precise number was not available late Monday afternoon.

However, he said, "Many of our homes and almost all of our commercial businesses have some form of gas service. It was our goal for our residents to have heat in their homes this winter, and it looks like we're going to be able to do that."

The money is coming from FEMA, said Republican Sens. Thad Cochran and Trent Lott.

"Our citizens and their cities and counties have worked so hard to rebuild, but federal assistance is still needed," Cochran said in a news release Monday. "Without essential utilities and infrastructure, cities like Waveland cannot completely regain the quality of life and business it once had."


© 2007 Sun Herald. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.sunherald.com


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Monday, October 15, 2007

Insurance Execs: Two Fisted Greedy Gutted Goons

by Ana Maria

Insurance execs' pay up dramatically , the article’s title read. Brazenly flaunting their ability to fleece the American people, these two fisted greedy gutted people ought to be hung out to dry for their deliberately irresponsible behavior to the American policyholders and taxpayers.

Two fisted greedy gutted goons.

I’ve heard the phrase used to describe a zealously gluttonous individual. The phrase refers to someone who fails to use the common sense born to those with the socially acceptable moral compass found most often in people reared with traditional manners of please, thank you, yes, sir and no ma’am. I’m definitely from the old school in that department.

I remember my ire in one statewide campaign in which I was working. Responsible for providing the meals to volunteers at headquarters during the final four days of the campaign, I dubbed myself Food Goddess. Determined NOT to have one more meal of pizza, the menu I put out a week ahead of time included food from the area’s various ethnic restaurants.

Pizza is the standard campaign fare. By the end of the season, campaign volunteers and staff are sick of it. So, I was determined NOT to have one more meal of pizza. To my thinking, I could encourage MORE hours of volunteer time if the food coming in was a veritable feast. And a feast it was. Log before the weekend arrived, I posted the menu all over the HUGE headquarters. Why? That’s simple: to entice volunteers to schedule more time during the final push to victory.

I met my youthful greedy gutted wonders moments after announcing meal time. Oh my GAWD! The young guys piled high on their plates tons of food! I was aghast when I realized that their ill-mannered behavior had left very little for the more elderly volunteers among our many hundred volunteers. The next meal—merely hours away, I fixed their little you-know-whats.

First, I personally went to each of the elderly volunteers and whispered to them “dinner’s ready” as I winked and told them to go fill up their plates. Once each of them had their meals, then I announced mealtime for the rest of the volunteers. When the greedy gutted wonders returned to the line eager to exhibit another round of gluttony, I told them they could take ONE of anything and that was it!

You gotta picture this. I’m a rather petite woman. The young men were . . . not. They were huge, comparatively speaking. When they objected, I gave them a piece of my mind. This was free food donated to the campaign for ALL the volunteers. Their behavior was atrocious and I’m sure that their parents had taught them better manners than they had demonstrated. That as long as I was in charge of the food—and I was definitely IN CHARGE—they would follow the rules or not be fed.

I stood watch over the next few meals and guess what? These greedy gluttonous guys (yes, they were all late teen and early 20 year old guys) exhibited perfectly acceptable manners. Not only had I demonstrated that I was not tolerating bad behavior, but my rather public and strong admonition of their behavior apparently gave others permission to keep them in line as well. Group psychology in action, I suppose.

So, when I read yet another article of the greedy gutted goons that sit at the top of the insurance industry’s corporate ladder raking off millions and millions of dollars that should have gone to pay out Katrina survivors’ legitimate wind related claims, I thought of my time in Virginia. (By the way, with great team work and a fabulous candidate, Mark Warner, we won that governor's race in 2001!)

The way I see it matching up is like this.

The multiple peril legislation that Congressman Gene Taylor (D-MS) successfully shepherded through the House of Representatives last month does for the insurance industry what I did for the volunteers. The legislation makes the insurance playing field even. How? Glad you asked!

The insurance execs exhibit the same gluttonous behavior as the greedy gutted young ones in the campaign. To reign in the insurance execs requires making the playing field even. That is exactly what the Multiple Peril Legislation does. Like bullies at a buffet table, Big Insurance with its greedy gutted goons think it can take what it wants and leave the crumbs for the rest of us. If they leave us hungry, they don’t care. The greedy gutted goons care about themselves only.

Look at the latest evidence.

Insurance companies have raised rates, dropped thousands of policyholders and, in some cases, even stopped writing new business in the region, generally on the grounds that they must cut their potential losses from future storms.

But there is little sign the belt-tightening extends to top executives at those firms, when measured by pay. * * *

At State Farm, which announced in February it was dropping homeowner coverage for some 2,600 policyholders in Mobile and Baldwin counties, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Edward Rust Jr. collected about $11.7 million in salary and bonus last year - more than double the $5.5 million he received in 2004. Other top executives shared in the wealth. Michael Tipsord, the company's chief financial officer, made almost $5 million last year, compared with $1.1 million in 2004.

At Alfa Insurance Corp., which is dropping wind coverage for 4,600 coastal policyholders in Alabama, President and CEO Jerry Newby's compensation package last year totaled about $1.7 million, up by more than one-quarter since 2004. For chief executives at California-based Fire Insurance Exchange and Texas-based USAA, two other leading writers of homeowner policies in the state, the percentage increases in compensation during the 2004-06 time frame were about 75 and 150 percent, respectively.
To feed our hunger for sane insurance rates and for a single policy that covers both wind and flood damage—you know, one policy with one adjuster who will issue one check to cover damage from both wind and flood, Congress overwhelmingly passed with wonderful bi-partisan support the Multiple Peril Insurance legislation that Congressman Gene Taylor (D-MS) authored. This legislation will take away the bullying ability of Big Insurance’s greedy gutted goons.

Bloomberg News ran a superb article on how Big Insurance has been cherry picking their policyholders all over this country from California to the Gulf Coast to New York. When those policyholders file claims, Big Insurance again take out its bullying tactics to cherry pick who it will pay and who will be left holding the bag. No more!

With the Big Insurance Bullies, we can stand up for ourselves and declare cherry picking season is over. Now, it’s Senate season. It’s time for us to turn up the heat on the U.S. Senate to generate support to introduce and pass Taylor’s multiple peril legislation.

Yeah, boy, it’s political hell raising time again! Today, let’s contact our two U.S. Senators with a simple message to protect American families and businesses from the bullying tactics of Big Insurance. Better for us to raise a little hell now while we have the golden opportunity to make a difference before the next wave the industry’s bullying tactics. Passing the Multiple Peril Insurance legislation stops Big Insurance from continuing its greedy gutted behavior at our expense. Informing our U.S. Senators of our position on this legislation is how we get the ball rolling so we can achieve in the Senate the same glorious victory we achieve in the House of Representatives.


© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Chicago Real Estate Investors Deliver Win-Win for Katrina Victims

Local Chicago Real Estate Investors fund new construction housing for Katrina victims in Mississippi. Fifty-plus houses will be built for families that are part of the 17,000 people awaiting homes in FEMA trailers. Springboard Real Estate Investor Academy partnered with a Florida developer to make this a reality.

Lombard, IL. (PRWEB) October 14, 2007 -- The Springboard Academy and Ryan Real Estate joined forces to provide housing to some of the 17,000 people waiting in FEMA trailers for a place to call "home."

The two sister companies, Real Estate education academy and brokerage firm, researched numerous development opportunities in the Gulfport area over the last six months to be certain that they were providing quality construction and good neighborhoods for the people. The project they rolled out provides four bedroom, two bath custom built homes for under $165,000. "We have been looking for a way to get involved with helping those in need in the GoZone and felt like this was a win for both our investors and the people in Mississippi," says Doug Crowe, founder of Springboard Academy and host of his own talk radio show on WLS.

The development project takes advantage of the Mississippi incentive program including up to $40,000 in cash incentives for investors and 50 percent bonus depreciation. In exchange for these incentives, the investor agrees to rent out the house for a minimum of five years. "We have examined over 51 distinct investment opportunities over the past 18 months," commented Colleen Herrera, Ryan Real Estate's broker-owner. "Of all of these projects this one had the most appealing incentives for the average investor along with providing desperately needed quality housing."

Construction of the homes that are being funded by local investors are slated to begin in the next 30 days and completed within 90 days. "This will give the families a wonderful start to the New Year in their new homes," added Crowe. "For the investor, there is a distinctly short window of opportunity to invest in an area that has beaten the bubble. With over 15 percent appreciation, huge demand, limited supply and eight new casinos going in, the area is nothing short of spectacular. With the Mississippi incentives, it makes the project a home run," quipped Crowe.

Springboard Academy, founded in 2001, is an alternative to late night infomercials and books and CD programs for serious Real Estate Investors. For more information, call 630-889-9900 or visit www.springboardcorp.com.

Originally published here on October 14,2007.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Saturday, October 13, 2007

Insurance post's campaign support at issue

By ANITA LEE
calee@sunherald.com

-- State insurance commissioner candidates Gary Anderson, a Democrat, and Sen. Mike Chaney, a Republican, both pledged to eschew insurance-industry contributions for their campaigns, but Chaney's position has shifted since pre-primary days.


"I will not take money from big insurance companies," Chaney said in a recent telephone interview. "I have not taken money from big insurance companies. I have taken money from insurance agents and from smaller insurance companies that are domiciled in the state.

"The agents are not the problem. The problem in the industry are the big insurance companies. I'm not in their pocket and I'm not in the pocket of personal-injury lawyers."

Anderson's primary defeat of outgoing Commissioner George Dale, the nation's longest-serving commissioner with 32 years in office, underscored the public's dissatisfaction with a public official who accepts contributions from the industry he is charged with regulating. But Dale has said insurance companies and agents are the constituency most active and interested in the outcome of the commissioner's race.

Anderson told the Sun Herald he's beholden to no one and raised his money "the old-fashioned way," $100 here, $20 there. What he did not mention was the boost his campaign received before the primary when Oxford attorney Richard "Dickie" Scruggs contributed $250,000 to Mississippians for Fair Elections. The group gave the money to Murphy Putnam Media in Alexandria, Va., for Dale attack ads.

The contribution is not listed on Anderson's campaign reports because it is considered an "independent expenditure," according to the Secretary of State's Office, and did not go through his campaign.

"I had nothing to do with it," Anderson said. "He (Scruggs) coordinated nothing with me. I didn't even know what was happening until it happened and I saw it running on TV." In fact, Anderson was surprised at the end of the ad to see an outdated photo of himself from his race four years earlier for state treasurer.

Anderson far outpaced Chaney as a fundraiser through the primary period, but Chaney has almost caught up. On reports filed late Wednesday, Anderson listed a total of $394,930 in contributions, compared with $367,467 for Chaney. Anderson's contributions include a $100,000 loan to himself and numerous donations from attorneys who represent policyholders in insurance disputes. Anderson said attorneys who represent insurance companies also contributed.

Chaney received contributions from insurance agents, brokers and companies, plus insurance adjusting firms.

Anderson said he has focused on who funds the commissioner's race because it is the No. 1 issue for voters. Chaney said Anderson can't focus on the issues because he lacks experience, noting Anderson has skipped forums Chaney attended to talk insurance. Anderson said the two have appeared together at an event sponsored by the Stennis Institute of Government and that he missed at least one forum because of a scheduling conflict.


About the job
Only 11 states and the Virgin Islands elect insurance commissioners. They are appointed in other states. Florida was the most recent state to begin appointing commissioners; California went from an appointed to an elected commissioner 20 years ago. The states with elected commissioners: California, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Washington.

- NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INSURANCE COMMISSIONERS


© 2007 Sun Herald. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.sunherald.com


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Best of A.M. in the Morning! October 9 - 13

by Ana Maria

Blog Entries
Hey, Toledo Blade, you first 10.12.07
Hypocrisy and Independence in Mississippi’s Insurance
Commissioner Race 10.11.07
Not Buying Bush's Buyout Plan 10.10.07
Inconvenience and Truth 10.9.07

News entries
$1.3B spent on debris removal FEMA money moves slowly Clarion Ledger 10.13.07
Insurance execs' pay up dramatically Sun Herald 10.12.07

Taylor: ‘No federal buy-outs’ Sea Coast Echo 10.11.07
Insurance relief can only come from state Herald Online 10.11.07

Chaney Pockets Industry Money By Thousands According to Financial Disclosure Report 10.10.07
Gov't May Buy Thousands of Miss. Homes Associated Press 10.10.07

Ire in Gulf over buyout plan Christian Science Monitor 10.9.07
Hancock officials oppose buyout Sun Herald 10.9.07
Taylor says no federal funding for coastal buyouts Sun Herald 10.9.07

© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

$1.3B spent on debris removal FEMA money moves slowly



# FEMA reports $2.3 billion obligated for Coast recovery efforts


By Natalie Chandler
natalie.chandler@clarionledger.com


Two years after Hurricane Katrina flattened the Gulf Coast, more than $1.23 billion has been spent repairing structures and removing debris, latest recovery figures compiled by the Federal Emergency Management Agency show.

A total of $2.3 billion has been obligated for recovery efforts.

Some Coast leaders are frustrated by the pace of recovery from the Aug. 29, 2005, storm and cite multiple layers of bureaucracy for delays in getting needed funds. Federal and state agencies responsible for the money said auditing procedures, cost re-estimates and insufficient documents are factors.

FEMA pays 100 percent for all recovery projects eligible for reimbursements. They include debris removal and repairing or replacing public buildings, utilities, recreational facilities, roads and bridges and other projects. FEMA obligates the money, while the Mississippi Emergency Management Agency distributes it.

Waveland Mayor Tommy Longo said, "We've had a hell of a time getting the check." A year and a half after FEMA agreed to fully finance the replacement of two fire trucks, the agency said it would pay half the costs instead, he said.

"We are appealing it, but we had to float $2 million that we didn't have," Longo said.

FEMA also has denied Harrison County officials more than $11 million for debris removal services. It questioned rates the county paid.

Tim Holleman, an attorney for the county, said he believes FEMA will pay the bill. The state has asked FEMA to do the same.

Responding to questions, FEMA spokesman Brent McMahan wrote, "It is not unusual for final payments for estimated project work sheets to be less than originally estimated. This can occur when the final expenditures come in less than the original or altered estimates. It can occur when some expenditures are claimed by the local applicant but not substantiated by documentation."

Coast communities have problems presenting documents required for expenses, such as proof of insurance policies and "complete and accurate documentation of all disaster-related costs," he wrote.

Projects must be completed before final payments are made. Audits must be finalized before reimbursement, and projects costing more than $1 million must undergo additional reviews at the federal level, officials said.

MEMA has hired additional help to move the process along, agency spokeswoman Ashley Roth said.




Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Friday, October 12, 2007

Insurance execs' pay up dramatically

Print This Article
NEWHOUSE NEWS SERVICE

The hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 are long gone, but they left a lasting gouge on the property insurance market along the Gulf Coast. Insurance companies have raised rates, dropped thousands of policyholders and, in some cases, even stopped writing new business in the region, generally on the grounds that they must cut their potential losses from future storms.

But there is little sign the belt-tightening extends to top executives at those firms, when measured by pay. Since Hurricane Ivan struck in 2004 many industry leaders have enjoyed handsome boosts in compensation, according to public records reviewed by The Press-Register of Mobile. The companies defend their pay practices, offering a variety of reasons for the increases, such as strong corporate performance and pay scales at similarly sized firms.

At State Farm, which announced in February it was dropping homeowner coverage for some 2,600 policyholders in Mobile and Baldwin counties, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Edward Rust Jr. collected about $11.7 million in salary and bonus last year - more than double the $5.5 million he received in 2004. Other top executives shared in the wealth. Michael Tipsord, the company's chief financial officer, made almost $5 million last year, compared with $1.1 million in 2004.

At Alfa Insurance Corp., which is dropping wind coverage for 4,600 coastal policyholders in Alabama, President and CEO Jerry Newby's compensation package last year totaled about $1.7 million, up by more than one-quarter since 2004. For chief executives at California-based Fire Insurance Exchange and Texas-based USAA, two other leading writers of homeowner policies in the state, the percentage increases in compensation during the 2004-06 time frame were about 75 and 150 percent, respectively.

The Press-Register obtained the numbers from the Nebraska Department of Insurance, which requires all insurers licensed in the state to report the total compensation of their 10 highest-paid executives each year. Of the leading homeowner-insurance providers in Alabama, the Nebraska agency lacked complete records for only one, the Automobile Insurance Company of Hartford.

At State Farm, which was Alabama's leading property insurer last year with almost 30 percent of the market, compensation "has been very modest compared to companies of our size," spokesman Phil Supple said. While the Illinois-based insurance giant ranked 22nd last year on Fortune magazine's list of the top 500 companies in the United States, Rust's compensation placed 124th, Supple said.

He also saw no connection between State Farm's executive pay scale and its efforts to limit exposure to future hurricane losses.

"That, in a way, is what's called good business," he said on the latter subject. "You need to make sure that you don't overextend your company and harm its financial strength."

Echoing that argument was Dave Rickey, a spokesman for Alfa, whose headquarters are in Montgomery. "We're always looking at the risk ahead, not necessarily what's happened in past years," Rickey said. He did not know all the factors behind the jump in Newby's compensation. About one-third came from salary and bonus increases; the remainder resulted from a boost in "all other compensation," according to Alfa's latest filing with the Nebraska insurance department. That category may include everything from stock options to long-term disability reimbursement, Rickey said.

One industry critic saw the growing pay packages as evidence of an industry awash in cash.

"They're making so much money, they've got to spend it somewhere," said Robert Hunter, director of insurance for the Consumer Federation of America, an advocacy group. "Why not spend it on themselves?"

In a study released early this year, Hunter concluded the property and casualty insurers garnered record profits of about $60 billion last year. At the same time, in a continuation of a trend dating to the late 1980s, claims payouts by the top 10 insurers fell to 52 percent of total premium revenue, the report estimated.

One partial exception to the trend of skyrocketing executive pay was Illinois-based Allstate Insurance Co., which has taken steps to drop between 9,500 and 10,000 homeowner policies in Alabama, according to the state insurance department. Chief Executive Edward Liddy's total compensation fell by almost one-third between 2004 and 2006. Still, his pay package, including stock options, last year amounted to about $20.1 million.

That figure, which comes from the company's filing with the Nebraska insurance department, is almost $4 million lower than Allstate reported in a proxy statement to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission earlier this year. Company spokeswoman Laura Strykowski could not explain the discrepancy. Liddy stepped down as Allstate's CEO at the end of last year, while keeping the chairman's post.

Of the nine other Allstate executives listed in the latest Nebraska report, seven had seen their compensation rise since 2004, sometimes significantly. For Robert Pike, executive vice president and secretary, last year's total added up to $11.1 million, well more than twice what he had earned two years earlier.

Allstate ties executive compensation to performance, Strykowski said. "With a superior year of performance in '06, Allstate's executives were paid superior levels of compensation," she said.

© 2007 Sun Herald. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.sunherald.com


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Hey, Toledo Blade, you first

by Ana Maria

Oh good grief! I just read an editorial in the Toledo Blade praising Bush’s land grab and political punishment project. What I have to say is this.

"You first, Toledo Blade"

Northern Ohio has had quite a few black outs and tornadoes over the years needing all kinds of repairs to phone lines and roads. I’m sure that plenty of business expenses for those utility repairs come straight off the businesses bottom lines thus reducing their tax liabilities.

I’m sure, too, that there are all kinds of government grants associated with the hazards of living in an area that has extreme weather conditions that the area experiences with such regularity that hearing the tornado alarm going off in the background has been rather common when I’ve talked with a great friend of mine who had lived in the area for a number of years.

Stan Zeleski uses a leaf blower to clear the driveway of his Beverly Drive home after yesterday’s snow, but he may need a snowblower to handle the amount forecast for today and tonight.
(THE BLADE/DAVE ZAPOTOSKY)



Since the editorial board feels that the veiled political revenge posing as a government act of fiscal kindness both to the fed’s coffers and to the families who live here, I say, “you first.” Yeah, that’s right. You and yours get the Bush Administration breathing down your neck talking about buying up various parts of your city. Heck, over the years, how much money has been spent plowing the roads, looking for people stuck in the snow, buried under the many feet of that lofty dust of cold stuff.

Let’s see, what was it the paper wrote?

"FOR those who live along U.S. coastlines, the feel of sand between their toes, the year-round ocean view, and falling asleep to the sound of gentle waves are experiences just this side of heaven.

Unfortunately, the ability of the few to live in paradise has been subsidized for decades by the rest of the country in the form of higher insurance premiums, federal insurance subsidies, and disaster-relief payments because many of these same areas are prone to hurricane-related storm damage."
Tow operators prepare to upright a vehicle following a rollover accident on southbound I-75.
( THE BLADE/DAVE ZAPOTOSKY )


So let’s change this up to fit Toledo, shall we?
"FOR those who live near the beauty of Lake Michigan, the feel of the gentle snow, the falling asleep to the winter picture perfect beauty on the roof and covering of the terrain are experiences just this side of heaven.

Unfortunately, the ability of the few to live in paradise has been subsidized for decades by the rest of the country in the form of higher insurance premiums, federal insurance subsidies, and disaster-relief payments because many of these same areas are prone to blizzard and tornado-related storm damage."
There, I feel better. So, Toledo editors, I am not much into the cold weather. I have on my flannels when the temperature outside dips below 70 degrees. For the life of me, I cannot understand the desire for anyone to live in any area where the conditions are like living in a deep freeze. Now that you no longer wish to burden the rest of us with your whining about the hardships of living in that god-forsaken place.

Yes, it’s beautiful with the snow on the ground during the winter holiday season. But you don’t have to actually live there. Geeze, Louise! Look, you’ve known about the treacherousness of the area’s winter months. Here’s a USA Today article from February of this year.

The monster snow and ice storm that hit the Midwest and Northeast blew out to sea, leaving behind huge snow piles, frigid temperatures, highway logjams Thursday. The storm was blamed for at least 15 deaths.
"You can't even shovel it," said Wes Velker, an electrician who had to dig out from a foot of snow so he could go to work fixing busted water pipes and furnaces in Toledo, Ohio. "You have to take it off in layers."
The article provided an example of the foolish behavior of those living there, folks who apparently don’t pay attention to the authorities.

In Toledo, Ohio, Derrick Jones managed to deliver red roses and heart-shaped balloons even though authorities had ordered everyone but emergency workers to stay off the roads.

So, there, now, you should all be happy that the Toledo Blade’s editorial board has piped up and volunteered to be the first in line to beg Bush’s bottom bargain basement bullies to bulldoze your homes to turn it into the winter playground for others.

Here’s a headline from the Toledo Blade itself in February of this year.

The snowy weather also was blamed on a power outage that struck downtown Toledo and much of North Toledo shortly before 7:30 p.m. The outage area of concentration was Lagrange and Huron to Lagrange and Manhattan and everything east to the river, Toledo police said.

** *

Meanwhile, most public and parochial schools closed today in advance of the storm. In addition, classes were canceled at Owens Community College and Bowling Green State.
Police said? Police are paid from the government coffers funded with money from taxpayers. Scrap that, Toledo. From now on, perhaps the Toledo Blade should fund all the information gathering having your reporters figure out all of these things without relying for its information on any government funded organization be it the police or school system.
The heavy snow made driving treacherous, causing fender benders throughout Toledo all day. Sliding cars and jackknifed trucks snarled traffic on I-75. Police departments responded to only injury accidents.
And here was a nice sentence.



See? The Toledo Blade editorial board should not be running a business in the area. It’s dangerous and it relies on government funding for safety in an area that is, well, treacherous. Besides, if the government funded agencies like the police didn't provide accurate and timely information to the Toledo Blade, the paper would not have the information from which to write reliable and authoritative articles for its readers. The paper's ad revenue may see a dip were the readers not able to turn to it for timely, reliable, and authoritative information. A dip in ad revenue may mean layoffs and eventually, the business may no longer be profitable. Since the paper relies on government funded activities--police, public schools, etc.--then the paper is relying on our tax dollars to provide it with a basis for it to be in business. Tss. Tss. Tss.

Perhaps it is irresponsible of the Blade to open its doors and employ folks because isn't that encouraging Americans to live in the area, put their children in schools that require tax funding and that will end up being closed because of the routinely bad winter weather? Doesn't living in a blizzard and tornado-prone area cost taxpayers in the form of higher premiums across the nation and higher taxes as well?

Get my point?

Of course, I don’t really think this way. I have friends and family from Cleveland, Ohio, to Detroit, Michigan. While I personally turn into an ice cube thinking of their kind of cold weather and cannot imagine living daily with their weather conditions, I support their decision to live there and access all the resources—government and otherwise—to live there.

Heck, I couldn’t have imagined myself living with the threat of earthquakes, yet I lived in the greater Bay area of California for five years. Tornadoes, blizzards, earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, dust storms. Pick any area of the country and some form of non-Utopian weather exists. Leveraging the power of our local, state, and federal governments, we come together to protect our families, businesses, communities, schools, houses of worship. We insure our homes and businesses. When we file a legitimate claim, we expect tour insurance company to pay up be it for a blizzard or tornado or hurricane winds. Across the nation, though, that is not happening.

Imagine if all the Toledo area commercial and residential insurance claims were not paid. Really, not a dime. Period. Residents would be up in arms just as we have been down here. How in the living heck are families to live, work, play in the Toledo area if their homes and businesses had to rely solely on their own savings to fund all damages? What would be the point of insurance?!

Moreover, how would those families and business owners feel if after they had experienced some horrible weather conditions, after they had been betrayed by their insurance companies who deliberately failed to pay on their claims, after their leaders in the White House sent in clowns rather than a professionally managed federal emergency agency, after the man living in the White House let his buddies in the insurance industry have its way with the area’s people for the sake of corporate greed? Then after two years of this kind of insanity, Bush’s buffoons sprung a two-year secret plan to buy up the area. The White House propaganda so good that as you are awakening with your morning reading, you read an editorial cheering on Bush’s plan. This from an area that routinely relies on government to work through the disaster and insurance to pay for any damages.

Good grief! You know that the areas residents would feel just as we do down here. Tired, exhausted, betrayed . . . determined to keep their lives, homes, and communities . . . determined to help the rest of our nation see that what is happening could happen to them in the blink of an eye. In other words, the Toledo Blade’s area residents would feel like they were in the same boat as those of us here inside the Katrina-ravaged region.

The Blade's readers would understand that if the insurance companies had done as they were supposed to have done and paid off its claims, no one would be talking about Bush’s BS land grab—which seems to really be about political revenge targeting Congressman Gene Taylor whose vision and backbone of steel has combined to lead the nation in rectifying the severe problems with going after the insurance industry.

Can it be merely coincidental that Bush’s buyout plan is targeting the hometown of the man spearheading the effort to ensure that whenever an American family or business owner purchases insurance for both wind and flood, that they actually get paid on their wind policy for the damages wind causes? In a word, no.

Libby Garcia, one of the few residents to rebuild . . ., wonders why the Corps is singling out the Gulf Coast for buyouts when so many other coastal areas face the same flood risks.

"Why don't they go buy Key West?" she asked.

Think about it. If the insurance companies had simply done as they should have, would we be having these conversations? No, we would not.

That is our point. We’re all in the same boat with insurance companies that betray us and with a White House that betrays us in so many ways many of us quit counting. We’re in the same boat. So before you find yourselves in a sea of insurance insanity, start paddling with us if not because it is the right thing to do then because of strictly selfish reasons. We don’t care about your reasons. Just start paddling so we all go in the direction of protecting the financial security for American families and businesses. Given today’s circumstances, it’s the only insurance we can count on.

© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Taylor: ‘No federal buy-outs’



By Mary G. Seiley
Oct 10, 2007


Area officials are set to huddle with the Corps of Engineers and state Department of Marine Resources Oct. 29., concerning the controversial Mississippi Coastal Improvement Program.

The meeting, arranged by the Hancock County Chamber of Commerce, is planned for elected officials only, although media representatives will be allowed too. Meanwhile, the public is urged to let their city, county, and state officials know of their concerns so they will be represented at the meeting.

Tish Williams, executive director off the Chamber, arranged the meeting for 4 p.m. at a Hollywood Casino meeting space.

Invitees include the mayors and council of Bay St. Louis and Waveland, Hancock County Board of Supervisors and the county administrator, state Reps. J.P. Compretta, Jessica Upshaw and Dirk Dedeaux. State Sen. Scottie Cuevas also is invited, as well as Chris Lagarde of US. Rep. Gene Taylor’s office, Phara Fishburn of Sen. Thad Cochran’s office, and Scot Walker of Sen. Trent Lott’s office.

Williams asked that the general public not be invited, in order to “make this meeting as productive as possible.”

Last month, the Sea Coast Echo printed details of proposed property buyouts by the Corps of a vast stretch of Bay St. Louis, including most of the territory along the Jourdan River south of Bayou La Croix to Julia Street.

DMR and the Corps called a public hearing immediately after that news broke, and faced hundreds of area residents frightened by and opposed to any buyout plan.

In what appears to be a nearly final scenario for Hancock County, officials have engineering and design underway for seawall restoration at Cowand Point, the Bay St. Louis Seawall and Clermont Harbor. Jackson Marsh, Bayou Caddy and Hancock County beaches are up for environmental restoration, and storm water capacity in Hancock County streams will be restored.

The buyouts -- still in the MSCIP final draft -- are longer-term plans, impacting such areas as Cedar Point and Clermont Harbor.
“Based on the analysis we identified a number of areas that are considered a priority for the nonstructural option of buyout/relocation,” the document states. “These area areas that will continue to sustain damages during future events if no action is taken. In these cases, even if an engineering solution is considered, the areas are either outside the footprint of the engineer solution or the engineered solution either would not reduce damages to these areas of could make the level of damages greater.”

Planners say they’ve dropped the idea of building a 40-foot seawall at Bay St. Louis. But construction of a long linear levee from high ground north of I-10, in the western part of the county south to the area of the railroad corridor and eastward with a surge gate across the mouth of St. Louis Bay “is an option still under consideration“ an updated report from the Corps states.

In lieu of the linear levee, officials are still considering ring levees surrounding populated sites in Bay St. Louis and, possibly, Waveland.
A ring levee system at Pearlington is also under consideration.
The buyout idea remains a volatile issue in Hancock County, although it is a voluntary concept that would first involve properties which haven’t been rebuilt.

Next would come properties that were undeveloped prior to Katrina and remain undeveloped, followed by structures that may have been rebuilt.
Officials say the buyout program would take 10 to 20 years to complete, turning the newly owned government lands into green space, recreation areas and nature preserves.

In a recent interview DMR’s executive director, Dr. Bill Walker, told the Sea Coast Echo that most of the calls he’s received since the huge public hearing have been in favor of voluntary buyouts.

He held a meeting last week with the president of Bay St. Louis City Council, James C. Thriffiley III, and Hancock County Board of Supervisor Jay Cuevas, to rehash the plan.

That session was set up by Sam Moore, president of the Garden Isles Community Association, who calls the plan a “boondoggle…poorly thought out and a knee jerk reaction.”

Walker has essentially left the fate of the buyout part of the plan up to area elected officials to endorse or crush.

While Thriffiley said Monday a buyout program would be “a major disaster which would destroy development and redevelopment,” City Council hasn’t taken an official position on the matter yet.

It was on the agenda for discussion and probable action Tuesday night. The Board of supervisors and Waveland aldermen also are expected to reach official positions on the proposals soon, possibly presenting them to Walker at the Chamber-sponsored gathering on Oct. 29.

U.S. Rep. Gene Taylor yesterday issued a statement that – as far as he is concerned – the buy-out plan won’t happen.

“There will be no mandatory buyouts at the federal level,” Taylor said. “As you may be aware, the State of Mississippi has previously been given federal funding for Katrina-related recovery efforts. What the state chooses to do with funds already given to it is a decision for state officials. However, I assure you that there will be no federal funds for mandatory buyouts.”

MSCIP was funded under a $10 million federal appropriation in December 2005. A final report is due to Congress this December.

© Copyright 2007 Bay St. Louis Newspapers, Inc.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Insurance relief can only come from state




By Daniel Israeli
October 11, 2007


As the wave of big insurance companies dropping thousands of Long Island homeowner's insurance policies continues to gain momentum, legislators in Albany are contemplating ways to calm the storm, which has already left its mark in Long Beach.

On Tuesday the state Senate's standing committee on insurance held a public hearing on Long Island to examine the availability and affordability of homeowner's insurance in New York's coastal communities. The committee, led by state Sen. James Seward (R-Oneonta), gathered at the Western Campus of Suffolk County Community College in Brentwood, for a hearing that included testimony from insurance company representatives and state insurance department superintendent Eric Dinallo.

According to Tom Dunham, a spokesman for Sen. Dean Skelos (R-Rockville Centre), the hearing was focused on assessing the current problem, while also gaining input from the insurance companies, to better understand why so many policy holders on Long Island have received nonrenewal letters.

In the two years since Hurricane Katrina, the big insurance companies, such as Allstate, Liberty Mutual and State Farm, have stopped providing coverage for thousands of residents in Long Island and other coastal communities. As homeowners continue to wonder what their next move is, legislators have been left with a troubling question - whether or not to further regulate the insurance companies.

According to Dunham, while nothing was resolved at the hearing, a lot was taken away by the parties involved. "The hearing was a step in the right direction," he said. "Right now, it's about weighing the pros and cons of each course of action."


At this point, the most talked about course of action appears to be a bill proposed by Eric Dinallo last week, which would require insurance companies to set up a catastrophe reserve fund, to be used in the event of a major storm to help pay off claims. Each company would save a percentage of its premium dollars on an annual basis. It's Dinallo's hope that the funds would reap enough for the companies to feel more secure, and drop fewer policies.

According to Dunham however, the proposal hasn't gone over well with insurance companies, obviously uninterested in saving their own money for a rainy day, at least in New York. "They didn't feel it was an idea that made a lot of sense," he said. "[The insurance companies] did seem to support it on a national level, but didn't feel it was right for risk states to create their own carve-out policies."

The issue dates back to January 2006, when Allstate announced it would not renew a number of homeowner's policies in the region, in an effort to protect its liability after a major storm. Soon after, the other companies followed suit, and the legislators up in Albany took notice.

Assemblyman Robert K. Sweeney (D-Lindenhurst) wrote a bill to address big insurers not renewing people from coastal areas. Insurance companies are allowed to take four percent of their policy holders off their rolls annually under state law. Sweeney's bill would change that, by making it so insurance companies can drop four percent of their policies, but by each individual rating territory (region), not statewide.

This would prevent cherry picking, when insurance companies minimize their liability by targeting coastal areas during the nonrenewal process. According to Sweeney, the efforts of Allstate and other big insurers to flee the coastal market, and in effect decrease their market shares, hasn't always been the case.

"Originally, Allstate used aggressive tactics by undercutting rates," said Sweeney. "They wanted the lion's share of the market." He added that the company still covers 26 percent of homeowners insured on Long Island. "Then, Katrina happened."

The hurricane's impact on the insurance market is evident all along the state's eastern coastline, and the political response has come from all levels of government. Last year, U.S. senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton criticized Allstate's decision to limit its exposure in lower New York. But change can only come from the state Legislature, since insurance companies are licensed through the state.

In Long Beach, the local push to get legislation passed has already begun. The members of Homeowner's Insurance Scam Stoppers, or HISS, are urging legislators to curtail the dropping of Long Island policy holders.

Richard Boodman, a Long Beach resident and founder of HISS, said the issue isn't political. "This is not about party politics," he said. "It's a matter of survival for all of Long Island. We have to take this issue island-wide and demand that the Long Island assembly and senate delegation create legislation that protects us.

The Senate has introduced three bills in the last two years regarding homeowners insurance, including one that would cap deductibles at $1,500 on policies for windstorms. However, that bill and Sweeney's bill, both sponsored in the Senate by Kenneth LaValle, have not reached the governor's desk. Sweeney's bill did pass the Assembly in each of the last two sessions.

According to Dunham, getting legislation passed has been difficult because insurance companies lobbying against bills that would effect their liability. While the lobbying power of big insurance is apparent, Dunham said that it has no correlation with the company's contributions to election campaigns. Both Skelos and Assemblyman Sweeney accepted contributions from Allstate during the 2006 election campaign.

"Senator Skelos has many different contributors," said Dunham. "If you look at his record of passing legislation, he's supported a number of bills that conflict with the interests of insurance companies."

Dunham said that the senator is confident, however, that the insurance committee hearing has shed some light on the issue of homeowner's policies, and has created a better understanding of what needs to be done to help Long Island homeowners.

"It's a situation where people are being unfairly denied a necessity, and the problem needs to be fairly addressed," Dunham said. "This is an issue that will be front and center once the new session begins in January."

Assemblyman Harvey Weisenberg said the practice of cutting coverage regionally is wrong, and said he believes the big companies should be held accountable.

"If you are a licensed insurer by the state of New York, then you have an obligation to provide insurance," he said. "These companies are not living up to their responsibilities, which is to protect people. They are in this business to make money and not serve the needs of people, and that is very offensive to me."

There are people in the market, like local insurance agent Denis Miller, who feel that the top insurance companies hold too strong an influence, which would prevent a major bill from passing. "It is nearly impossible to legislate insurance companies," he said. "They are too big. The licensed companies have paid their money into the state's guaranteed fund, and it's very difficult to legislate a private company."

As for Boodman and the members of H.I.S.S., they are continuing to gather signatures, in hopes that the names of Long Island homeowners can overpower the likes of Allstate and Liberty Mutual.

"Our legislators are supposed to be putting our interests, their constituents, first and not catering to special interest groups like the insurance industry," Boodman said. "If we don't put the fire to their feet now, our homes and our quality of life are going to be worth didley."

Comments about this story? DMiller@liherald.com or (516) 569-4000 ext. 213.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Hypocrisy and Independence in Mississippi’s Insurance Commissioner Race

by Ana Maria

Hypocrisy. What a terrible characteristic in a human being, particularly an elected official with regard to their public statements on their responsibilities and duties for which they are responsible. The current revelation that Republican State Senator Mike Chaney took over $44,000 from the very people in the insurance industry that he says he wants to regulate makes him a big laughing stock here in Mississippi. Wasn’t this the guy who stated, “I don’t know how you can take money from a company and regulate ‘em?”

Yeah, that’s the guy. The Gary Anderson campaign reported that Chaney took in $44,000 in campaign contributions since July 29th of this year. In other words, Chaney has raked in plenty of money into his own campaign treasury from the very industry interests that he proclaimed in public at the Mississippi Municipal League (MML) this past summer. . . now what was it? Oh yeah, “I don’t know how you can take money from a company and regulate ‘em?”

Well, I guess he figures that he would do what his buddy George Dale had done—you DON’T regulate ‘em. See, Chaney likes Dale.
Said so himself in that very same speech where he pronounced the question perplexing him at the time.

Yep, Chaney said,
I like George. I’m just worried that he might not get the nomination.
Republican Nominee Mike Chaney
Miss. Insurance Commissioner
And by George! Gary Anderson won the Democratic nomination beating out the 32-year, in-the-back-pocket-of-Big-Insurance George Dale! Now it is time to beat the George Dale stand in.

Chaney’s political game plan has been pretty typical of the Trojan Horse political strategy--pretend there is no real difference between the candidates when there is a world of difference. Chaney has come out in favor of the multiple peril insurance legislation that won overwhelming and bipartisan support in the U.S. House of Representatives. This legislation is very popular with South Mississippi voters because of our big wave of discontent over how Big Insurance has wronged the families and business after Hurricane Katrina. Gary Anderson has long supported this groundbreaking legislative initiative that South Mississippi's Congressman Gene Taylor sponsored.

However, as we connect the dots, Chaney’s character looks differently.

In front of the MML , Chaney had declared his fondness for George Dale
, the darling of the insurance industry. In front of the political insiders who attend the Neshoba County Fair, Mississippi's annual political, Chaney declared that he intended to win the election in November--weeks before the upset defeat of the then-ever so popular 32-year incumbent in the Democratic primary.
Collectively, his statements comprise a wink, wink, nod, nod in politics. Translation:
"If things don’t work out so well for George Dale in the primary, don’t worry, I have Big Insurance’s back. I’m your guy."
How does a candidate take money from the corporate interests he is to regulate—particularly an industry that is in such disfavor as the insurance industry is with the residential and commercial insurance policyholders in this state—then turn around and regulate them? They do not. The only way to be sure that the insurance industry is regulated as stringently as our laws currently permit them is to elect a candidate who takes positions that protect Mississippi’s residential and commercial policyholders AND remains financially independent of the insurance industry.

There is only one candidate in Mississippi’s election campaign for insurance commissioner that fits that perfectly. That candidate is Democratic nominee Gary Anderson.

In the August primary, Anderson was elected over George Dale because Anderson had shown his independence from the insurance industry, an industry that has shown how ruthless and cruel it can be to its customers. Plenty enough voters supported Anderson’s campaign to elect him as the Democratic nominee.

Yes, this included support that came from a man who has fought successfully in court against the insurance companies that have wrongfully failed to live up to their financial responsibilities to the people of Mississippi. Yes, this included support from a man who had dedicated his life to fighting the giant corporations that sometimes fail to be good neighbors, corporations in whose hands we found ourselves financially strangled. Thank GAWD for trial lawyers who will take up the cause of the little people like you and me so that we can be the David successfully going up against the Goliaths such as Big Insurance.

I find it truly amusing that trial lawyers, rather than corporate lawyer shills, have become the butt of many jokes in our society, in our culture. But as Senator Trent Lott demonstrated, when someone is taking away our home, we will look around and find the best of the best trial attorney to fight our legal battles. For Senator Lott, he needed go no further than his own brother-in-law Dickie Scruggs.

Scruggs is an ardent supporter of those getting the short end of the stick that corporate shill attorneys get paid to poke into the eyes of the little people. I want the Dickie Scruggs of the world out there fighting the good fights to protect American families and businesses. That’s the American way. Our history is filled with countless stories of an injustice being righted solely because someone finally hauled—or threatened to haul—someone’s you-know-what to court. Skilled attorneys on our side is what has given plenty of South Mississippi families money to rebuild their homes, their lives, their businesses.

Dickie Scruggs and other attorneys supporting a solid candidate for Mississippi’s insurance commissioner, a candidate dedicated to protecting our state’s policyholders from unscrupulous behavior from Big Insurance, this is simply a natural alliance. Of course, they would support Gary Anderson. If what trial attorneys wanted was more business, they would simply conduct independent expenditure campaigns—create a political action committee, fund it, develop a television ad, etc.—supporting Republican Mike Chaney. After all, with Chaney as the George Dale stand in candidate, we can expect the same kind of pro-industry policies that have given rise to the need to employ engineers and high powered attorneys like the Scruggs Katrina Group, the Merlin Group, and others.

But, the trial lawyers want good things for Mississippi’s mom-and-pop policyholders. So, they are supporting the candidate who they believe, like I believe, will best protect the interests of the little people.

We have a clear choice for Insurance Commissioner this year.

Republican candidate Mike Chaney is obviously taking substantial sums of campaign contributions from Big Insurance while pretending he can be independent in spite of his campaign coffers filled with insurance dollars. Well, we’ve already seen the results of an insurance commissioner whose campaign hand eagerly took the cash from Big Insurance. Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt. At the end of the day, South Mississippian families and businessowners often found themselves with only the shirts on their backs.

That is why I’m supporting and voting for Gary Anderson for Mississippi’s next Insurance Commissioner. I want a candidate who is independent from, who will protect policyholders from, who will stand up to Big Insurance. I hope you do, too. As each of us invests time to assist with the myriad of activities or money to fund those activities, Mississippi can make history through putting into office an Insurance Commissioner who will protect the interest of the state’s families and businesses. The choice is clear.


© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Chaney Pockets Industry Money By Thousands According to Financial Disclosure Report

Jackson, Mississippi – Insurance Commissioner Candidate Mike Chaney has taken over $44,000 in insurance industry money since July 29th according to his October 1oth financial disclosure . Chaney, who first said he would not take insurance money, later changed his mind, saying he would only take money from individual insurance agents. Now his report shows thousands collected from insurance company executives, insurance PACS, agents and insurance companies.

“I have not taken a single dime from insurance companies or insurance special interests. Mr. Chaney cannot protect the pocketbooks of the insurance ratepayers if he is taking money from insurance interests. Taking money from an industry you would be responsible to regulate is a direct conflict. I call on Chaney to return every dime and come clean with the people of Mississippi,” said Anderson.

Mike Chaney has a history of taking insurance company money and then voting against the consumer. As a member of the Senate Insurance Committee, he has been wined and dined by insurance industry lobbyists and then voted against insurance rate rollbacks, for increased auto insurance premiums and for an insurance company tax credit. Chaney Fact Sheet Link

“My independence from insurance is the main difference between my opponent and I. Mike Chaney is beholden to the insurance industry. What we see reflected in this financial disclosure is more of what we can expect from him, just check his record. It is clear Chaney is in the back pocket of big insurance and will rubber stamp big rate increases just like Dale did. Chaney has been bought for a price,” stated Anderson.

A CLOSER LOOK AT MIKE CHANEY'S FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

• Insurance Company Contributions

Chaney has taken over $16,000 from insurance companies like Fulton Insurance, Bills Insurance Agency, Southern Vanguard Insurance, Republic Underwriters Insurance Company, REP Fire & Casualty, Southern Insurance Company, Family Insurance Agency Incorporated, FCCI Services Incorporated, FCCI Insurance Group, Imperial Fire and Casualty, Underwriters Group Incorporated, Starmount Insurance Company, Oxford Insurance Agency, and Fowler Adjustment Company.

• Insurance Company PACS

Insurance Political Action Committees work to coordinate and facilitate legislative and regulatory agendas; they have given Chaney about $2,000. Insurance PACS which have given to Chaney include National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, Independent Insurance Agents PAC and Professional Insurance Agents of Mississippi PAC.

• Insurance Company Executives

Chaney took nearly $7,000 from insurance company executives. These include Ronald Tubertini, CEO of South Group Insurance Services, Donna Halford, CEO of Halford Insurance Agency Incorporated, Thomas Quaka, CEO of Mississippi Insurance Managers and Brierfield Insurance Company.

• Misleading Reporting

Mike Chaney has reported Andrea Bennett's occupation as “individual” when she is currently the President & CEO of Bennett & Co., a consulting practice which specializes in all lines of insurance. Another example of Chaney's failure to openly disclose sources of campaign contributions is Kenneth Shearer, a contributor listed in Chaney's disclosure as “individual” who is the CEO of Brickell Insurance Company. Both Bennett and Shearer gave Chaney $1,000. Thousands of dollars in insurance money are hidden throughout Chaney's report.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Not Buying Bush's Buyout Plan

Man kayaking with dog on Flagler Avenue by the Salvation Army store: Key West, Florida (2005) The flood waters were the result of Hurricane Wilma. Original photo here.

[Photo is part of an] "exhibit contain[ing] selected images from over 5,000 slides and photographs in the Dale M. McDonald Collection which document art exhibits, businesses, boating events, attractions, community events, landscapes, residences, and street scenes in Key West." Firefighter and photographer Dale McDonald was born in Key West, Florida on October 2, 1949.


by Ana Maria

Yesterday’s news carried story after story—many posted here in my blog—of the continuing drumbeat about Bush’s government apparatus stating that federal buyouts of homes along the Mississippi Gulf Coast is the agenda on the table. Some reported that the plan is now extending into Louisiana. All this unnecessary upset for a regional area that has already been through hell and back.

I loved Congressman Gene Taylor’s response,

"Five words: 'It ain't going to happen,' " says Rep. Gene Taylor (D) of Mississippi, who's in the midst of rebuilding his Bay St. Louis home. "There's no money for it, there's no will for it, and there's no public support for it. That's 0 for 3."
Can it be merely coincidental that Bush’s buyout plan is targeting the hometown of the man spearheading the effort to ensure that whenever an American family or business owner purchases insurance for both wind and flood, that they actually get paid on their wind policy for the damages wind causes? In a word, no.
Libby Garcia, one of the few residents to rebuild . . ., wonders why the Corps is singling out the Gulf Coast for buyouts when so many other coastal areas face the same flood risks.

"Why don't they go buy Key West?" she asked.
Good idea. Let Bush attempt his buyout plan in a state with 25 electoral votes in play for the upcoming presidential election. Key West is a great place to start. Like the Mississippi Gulf Coast, Key West was battered in a 2005 hurricane. Her name was Wilma.

Here’s a YouTube video on Wilma's impact on that fabulous city. Only video, no sound.

Here’s another before and after video of Wilma hitting Key West. The first part is humorous. The second, well, it isn’t.

Notice that there were plenty of winds long before the storm surge came ashore. Be sure to read the text that the creator embedded in the video. Six storms through Key West in two years.

Personally, I think the discussion of the buyouts is politically motivated, political revenge because Gulf Coast Congressman Taylor (D-MS)—a man whom the Bush Administration could count on to vote with the White House on its Iraq and social conservative policies—had demonstrated clearly that his moral values included using the government levers of power to help the American people of every political, economic, and religious stripe and size.

You see, once Taylor’s ground breaking multiple peril insurance legislation is signed into law, the Big Insurance Scam days are O-V-E-R. Immediately, REAL competition for REAL insurance enters the market.

At present, Big Insurance pretends to offer folks wind coverage be it for hurricane or tornado winds. But when those winds whip up a shore and cause substantial damages to or destroys homes and businesses, the gig is up and its time to pay AND to shut up. However, after Katrina, Big Insurance companies talked with each other and all of a sudden we had an industry wide response to Katrina’s wind damages: not gonna pay. Any other industry would be in violation of the U.S. anti-trust laws were their companies to be in cahoots, in collusion with each other. That is the other ground breaking legislation that has been introduced in both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives with bi-partisan support—eliminating the accidental, though fiscally lethal, loophole that has permitted the insurance industry’s corporations to collude with one another.

George W. Bush has raked in tons o’ cash from the insurance industry that has been unfairly raking in profits at the expense of paying its policyholders on legitimate wind claims.

insurance industry investments

Vicious political revenge has long been the modus operandi of the Bush Administration. Need proof? Two words: Karl Rove.

I think it is useful to put this buyout propaganda into proper perspective. First, the Democratically-controlled Congress has committed itself time and again to the rebuilding of the Katrina-ravaged area. Last year when she was Majority Leader and then this year as Speaker of the House, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) led a delegation of congressional representatives to the area and held town meetings in Bay St. Louis, Miss., the very town Bush’s Buyout has targeted.

When Bush’s Corps of Engineers first unveiled its proposed buyout plan to the residents of Bay St. Louis, I was in the room and just as ticked off at it as the rest of my townspeople neighbors in the room. If Bush feels that this is such a great idea, he should convince his little brother to sell the buyout plan to Key West. Let’s see how well that goes over. Yeah, right. Like a lead balloon.
"There will be no mandatory buyouts at the federal level," Taylor said in an e-mail. "As you may be aware, the State of Mississippi has previously been given federal funding for Katrina-related recovery efforts. What the state chooses to do with funds already given to it is a decision for state officials. However, I assure you that there will be no federal funds for mandatory buyouts."
I believe Congressman Taylor when I read the news article conveying his statement on this pathetic propaganda veiling that the White House has put out to mess around with Taylor’s home district. Heck, who am I kidding? This is Taylor’s hometown.

So long as the Democrats are in power in Congress, I don’t see this Bush’s BS of a buyout plan going anywhere. But it may not have a thing to do with actually making it happen. It will, however, generate a ton of anxiety, stop development, and pour a ton of unnecessary phone calls into Taylor’s offices. You see, part of the impact of this would be to pull from Taylor and his staff some of the time and energy that they spend on pushing through the Multiple Peril Policy through the U.S. Senate. Part of the impact is to serve as a political warning for others who join the fight for the financial security for America’s families and businesses.

“What political warning?” you ask. How’s this. You mess with our friends—i.e. Bush’s buddies in the insurance industry, and we’ll mess with you . . . at home.

On August 13, 2007, when Speaker Pelosi spoke with the standing room only crowd at Congressman Taylor’s Town Hall Meeting on Insurance Reform that he held at the Our Lady of the Gulf Community Center, she told us that she knew we were a deeply religious people, a deeply patriotic people. Speaker Pelosi is, indeed, accurate in her description of the people in this area—myself included.

Though Bush and his Corps of Engineers are attempting to run over us in a tyrannical-like fashion not experienced by any other community in these United States, we will remain steadfast in our faith that we will prevail, that our congressman will lead the way, and that others will join with us to make life better for us and for the nation. We're not buying Bush's buyout plan. Our county and city officials have come out against it.
"People are just backing off and it's leading to a panic," said [Hancock County Supervisor Jim] Thriffiley. "The buyout situation is worse than a stock market crash for our community."
Bush's cruelty will be remembered. Here in Bay St. Louis specifically, I know us to be a humble group of folks with backbones of steel, hearts of gold, and memories better than any elephant.
“Remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible but in the end, they always fall -- think of it, ALWAYS.”
© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Gov't May Buy Thousands of Miss. Homes

By MICHAEL KUNZELMAN

BAY ST. LOUIS, Miss. (AP) — The federal government is considering buying out as many as 17,000 homes along the Mississippi coast and remaking the land into a vast hurricane-protection zone, raising anxieties that it could destroy the waterfront lives many residents are struggling to rebuild after Katrina.

The Mississippi Coastal Improvement Program could cost $40 billion, including buying the homes, building levees and restoring barrier islands. The land could be converted into wetlands or other public uses, such as golf courses or bike trails, but could not be sold for private development.

For Finley Williford, a 42-year-old boat captain, a buyout offer would have been tempting if it had come shortly after Hurricane Katrina destroyed his Bay St. Louis home on Aug. 29, 2005.

But instead of leaving, he invested countless hours of labor and more than $400,000 in two new houses for his family and his father.

"If they had showed up a day after the storm, I probably would have taken the money. It's kind of after-the-fact now," Williford said.

The buyouts would be voluntary, and the Army Corps plan envisions allowing casinos, hotels and restaurants to continue operating on the coast from Bay St. Louis to Biloxi. But until the proposal becomes more focused, residents are concerned that it could spell the end of their Margaritaville-like communities, where a lifestyle of beaches and boiled shrimp has flourished for decades, and many houses are already built atop stilts.

Williford fears the buyouts could stunt the growth of his nearly deserted neighborhood and harm property values if few other residents return.

"Just the rumor of it is slowing people down," he said, noting a neighbor suspended his rebuilding plan after hearing about the proposal.

Buyouts could be part of a similar plan in Louisiana, but Corps officials could not say how many properties may be involved or where they are.

"Buyouts are a possibility, but it's still just one of several options we're studying for the report," Corps spokeswoman Julie Morgan said.

In Louisiana, the Federal Emergency Management Agency is considering compensating residents who used their own money to elevate their hurricane-damaged homes while $1.1 billion was tied up in a dispute between state and federal agencies.

Otherwise, the tens of thousands of homeowners the state estimates have already begun raising their homes could be left with nothing.

"I do sense there's a commitment on our end to try to recognize those folks, because they did the right thing," FEMA spokesman Butch Kinerney said. "We want to make sure we don't penalize people who did what we recommend every day."

The Corps expects to release a draft of its Mississippi buyout plan in December. In the meantime, project director Susan Rees is fielding questions at meetings with local officials and residents.

Several hundred people attended a forum last month in Bay St. Louis, a city about 45 minutes east of New Orleans, where Katrina destroyed many of the quaint shops and beachfront restaurants that drew tourists and New Orleans-area residents.

Rees said many residents mistakenly worry their land would be seized and turned over to private developers. Involuntary buyouts are "always an option of last resort," but aren't part of this plan, she said.

"I was taken aback by what some of the individuals believed the proposal was," she said. "I wasn't taken aback by the emotional nature of the response."

The Corps has bought flood-prone homes near rivers in the past, but Rees said this would be its first large buyout of coastal homes. The proposal will give Congress a menu of choices, not impose mandates, she added.

"Congress gave us an opportunity to just strip everything away and say, 'What are the options to make this a resilient coast?' It is a rare opportunity, and I hope a lot of good comes from it," she said.

Oliver Houck, a Tulane University law professor who has studied government efforts to control coastal flooding, said voluntary buyouts are a "very reasonable way to approach managing floods."

Moving people away from areas at the greatest risk of flooding makes more sense than spending hundreds of millions of dollars to shield them with levees, he added.

"Any program that attempts to subsidize their continuing to stay in place is simply subsidizing another wipeout," Houck said.

William Walker, director of Mississippi's Department of Marine Resources, is helping Rees craft the plan and introduce it to communities.

"If all we do is rebuild where we were prior to Katrina, we will have failed," he said. "We need to rebuild better, stronger and smarter."

Government subsidies could offset the loss of tax revenue from residential buyouts, but some local officials fear the proposal would have a chilling effect on development plans and turn some parts of the coast into a disjointed checkerboard of homes and wetlands.

U.S. Rep. Gene Taylor, a Democrat whose home in Bay St. Louis was leveled by Katrina, said he doesn't see much support — locally or on Capitol Hill — for funding billions of dollars in home buyouts.

"I can't think of a single person who has come up to me and said, 'I want the government to buy my land,'" he said.

Some of his constituents welcome that option, though.

Arnold Toups, 90, is living in a government-issued trailer outside the gutted shell of the octagon-shaped home he built with his own hands three decades ago. A "For Sale" sign in his front yard has attracted a few offers, but nothing serious. Toups said he would listen to an offer from the Corps.

"If I get my price," he said. "I'm not in a rush to sell."

Libby Garcia, one of the few residents to rebuild in Williford's neighborhood, wonders why the Corps is singling out the Gulf Coast for buyouts when so many other coastal areas face the same flood risks.

"Why don't they go buy Key West?" she asked.

Associated Press writer Becky Bohrer contributed to this report.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Ire in Gulf over buyout plan



US proposal may mean parts of the Gulf Coast won't get rebuilt.

Read More......

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Hancock officials oppose buyout




Posted on Tue, Oct. 09, 2007
By J.R. WELSH
jrwelsh@sunherald.com


BILOXI -- Two elected officials from Hancock County have told the state Department of Marine Resources they will ask their boards to oppose any federal buyout plan of private lands in the county, even if the program is voluntary.

County Supervisor Jay Cuevas and Jim Thriffiley, president of the Bay St. Louis City Council, delivered their message to Bill Walker, DMR's executive director, during a lengthy meeting at DMR headquarters late last week. A buyout is one option being pushed by DMR and the Army Corps of Engineers through a plan called the Mississippi Coastal Improvements Program.

The plan calls for the federal government to buy large tracts of privately owned lands that flood repeatedly and use the property as nature preserves and parks. Both DMR and the corps have emphasized that a buyout would be purely voluntary.


That made little difference to Thriffiley, however. "I'm against any buyouts because I believe it's going to lead to the demise of the neighborhoods," he told Walker.

The elected officials were part of a Hancock County group that met with Walker. The group included Sam Moore and Dennis Bordelon, president and vice president of the Garden Island Community Association, and Chris LaGarde, an environmental aide to U.S. Rep. Gene Taylor. The Sun Herald was also there.

Moore arranged the meeting. LaGarde did not voice opposition from Taylor's office to the buyout plan during the discussion, saying if such a program occurred, it would be many years down the road.

On Sept. 17, the DMR and corps announced an ambitious plan to buy thousands of flood-prone acres in the south county. The Shoreline Park and Cedar Point areas would be included.

The announcement was also accompanied by revelations that the corps is studying other possibilities such as beach and dune restoration and constructing an extensive levee system as tall as 30 feet, a seawall around Bay St. Louis, and flood gates at the mouth of the bay. However, one corps presentation has classified the seawall option as unlikely.

Other buyout trial balloons are being floated for parts of Harrison and Jackson counties.

But alarm over the plan has been especially pronounced in Hancock County.

The local officials said that since Walker made the announcement at a public meeting in Bay St. Louis, economic fears have infected the county and thrown shadows over prospects for new development and hurricane recovery.

"People are just backing off and it's leading to a panic," said Thriffiley. "The buyout situation is worse than a stock market crash for our community."

Cuevas told Walker that construction was on the upswing in the county before the buyout announcement. But since then, he said, growth has slowed and, "My phone hasn't stopped ringing" with calls from citizens frightened of the plan. He said he has received no calls from business people or property owners who favored a buyout.

Walker told the group that a buyout plan "might take up to 10 years." But he said that if all governmental entities in Hancock County oppose it, "DMR will not recommend" the program. He said his agency has been acting in an advisory capacity to the corps.

"This is not something the DMR or the corps is trying to force on anybody," Walker said. But, he added, "In order to protect the Coast from future storms, there needs to be a buyout of repetitively damaged property."

Positions stated by Cuevas and Thriffiley differed from a formal resolution passed by the Hancock County Chamber of Commerce, which has asked the corps and DMR to work through local businesses and governments in developing the coastal improvements program. The chamber resolution made no mention of a buyout plan, voluntary or otherwise.

Thriffiley also told Walker he does not oppose other parts of the corps plan aside from the buyout. "We don't want to shut down this plan except for the buyout," he said. "That's the only part we want to negate."

The Bay St. Louis City Council is scheduled to meet tonight. County supervisors do not have another regularly scheduled meeting until next week.

"I don't see our board voting for the buyout," Cuevas said after the meeting. "But until we get it on the minutes, nothing's official."

Web poll

What do you think about the Corps of Engineers' buyout of coastal property? To vote, go to sunherald.com.


© 2007 Sun Herald. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.sunherald.com


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Taylor says no federal funding for coastal buyouts




Posted on Tue, Oct. 09, 2007

Rep. Gene Taylor today issued a statement today that the federal government would not be buying out property, responding to the hubbub surrounding a proposed Army Corps of Engineers program.

"There will be no mandatory buyouts at the federal level," Taylor said in an e-mail. "As you may be aware, the State of Mississippi has previously been given federal funding for Katrina-related recovery efforts. What the state chooses to do with funds already given to it is a decision for state officials. However, I assure you that there will be no federal funds for mandatory buyouts."

The Sun Herald continues covering this story online and in print editions.



Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Our position: The federal government should add wind coverage to its flood policies



October 8, 2007

A major reform of the way homeowners get reimbursed after destructive storms is making its way through Congress, and guess what?

The insurance industry opposes it.

Anyone believing in fair play and a measure of justice should support it.

Enough members of the House did last month. They passed Rep. Gene Taylor's "Multiple Peril Insurance Act," which allows folks who get flood insurance through the federal government to also purchase wind policies from Washington.

What's so special about that? Ask Gulf state residents who'd held federal flood-insurance policies and private wind policies when Hurricane Katrina came ashore. The feds cut billions of dollars in checks. Insurance companies cut excuses.

Time and again they said flooding, not wind, damaged the homes -- and despite evidence to the contrary.

Mr. Taylor's roof, for example, blew 450 feet from his Mississippi home. But his insurance adjuster claimed no wind damage, blaming Mr. Taylor's losses on flooding. Interesting. Katrina's winds preceded the storm surge by five hours.

The result of the insurers' chicanery? Policyholders ended up paying billions of dollars over the years in premiums to insurers who, instead of paying claims, passed the buck to the feds.

Now the insurance industry -- and this might be laughable if it weren't so lamentable -- is warning the public that adding wind insurance to the federal flood program will cause huge deficits. And that by offering the insurance more readily, it could land more people and property "in the path of devastating storms." Such caring. Such heart. From the very industry that has caused government to pay out so much after catastrophic storms because it won't honor the policies it writes.

The serve-insurers-first-last-and-always system won't blow over, though, unless the Senate joins the House in its reform. It needs to draft and pass a companion bill.

Sens. Bill Nelson and Mel Martinez, break out your pens! Florida's got more than 40 percent of the nation's flood-insurance policyholders -- more constituents with more at stake on this than any other state.

Each senator, in fact, supports letting homeowners buy federal flood and wind policies. But that won't happen unless they kick up a storm and get their peers to stand down the powerful insurance lobby.

Mr. Martinez, in the minority, sits on the committee reviewing the policy. Mr. Nelson, whose party runs Congress, doesn't sit on the committee but last week urged its chair to give it legs.

Few in the Senate expect that to happen. But few in the House a short time ago thought Mr. Taylor's bill would pass. Floridians and victims everywhere of property insurers' abuses need the senators' best efforts.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Inconvenience and Truth

by Ana Maria

Lately, I haven’t felt much like writing. My Creative Muses who usually inspire my writing have been silent. The utter inconvenience of living in the Katrina-ravaged area gets to and exhausts me—and I’m among the lucky ones. Though my mother’s house was substantially destroyed, the frame of the house remained. With tremendous thanks to my brothers, the inside was rebuilt, and we’re at least 90% back to pre-Katrina.

My mother never lived in a FEMA trailer. Truth be told, my mother’s name was put on the FEMA list and months later when we still hadn’t heard from Bush’s agency and one of my family members checked on it, FEMA couldn’t find her name. I imagine this was not a one-time FEMA flub. Thankfully, she lived with my brother in Georgia until the house got good enough for her to move in regardless of the inconveniences of living here.

To many of us online, the idea of our Internet provider being down about 90% of the time is a ridiculous notion, yet over the last month, that is what I experienced. Yesterday, I had BellSouth come in and switch me to its service. And service is what I got. REAL service—and I’m not just talking about access to the Internet.

I called BellSouth last week, maybe Wednesday or Thursday. They called me twice to confirm Monday morning’s appointment. Then, the guy showed up, on time, and with a smile on his face, nice as he could be. In no time flat, I had my Internet service switched, AND he ensured that I could get on before he left the house. What a breath of fresh air!

This isn’t just about being connected . . . to the Internet. Rather, it is about being connected to a lifestyle many of us expect because, well, we live in the United States of America. You know, things like calling up a company for a service, making an appointment to come to the house within a few days, and voila! The deed is done without blinking an eye or thinking two seconds about it.

For some reading this entry, this may seem like a big, “Uh, yeah. So what?” And that is my point.
It should be a big so what, but even two years after the worst natural disaster hit the area, it isn’t. And the ordeal is wearing thin on my nerves. I can only fathom how it is impacting others who’ve been here from the beginning. I just want the money to flow to the area. I just want Big Insurance to pay Big Time through signing into law the Multiple Peril Legislation that Congressman Gene Taylor championed a few weeks ago in the House of Representatives and in making Big Insurance subject to the same anti-trust legislation to which other industries are subjected. Both will take time to enact into law, and I look forward to those laws becoming reality.

I’ve been here six months. The newness has worn off, and the conditions of daily living are wearing thin. And I’ve only been here six months. My recent memories of going out to eat at any number of fabulous restaurants in San Jose or San Francisco, Calif., from which I had moved, remind me of life that should already have returned here.

Last night, I attended Congressman Gene Taylor’s Town Hall meeting in Long Beach, Miss. He talked a great amount of the time on the insurance reform bill he championed in the House of Representatives and the hope of it going through the Senate. Question after question pored from the audience, the overwhelming topic being residential and commercial insurance.

One woman told of how 25% ($20,000) of her family’s income is spent on family insurance coverage and the increase in homeowners and wind coverage. My goodness! 25% on insurance?! Here in South Mississippi. Well, yeah. Paying out that much of one’s income is no simple matter. On top of that, life’s simplicities—be it dependable Internet service or going to the movies or choosing from a wide variety of restaurants to eat out occasionally—are neither convenient nor so simple.

Simple like going to the movies. A new George Clooney movie is out. Like many a women, I’m a big fan. Great actor, terrific roles, and he’s very easy on the eyes plus that voice of his, not to mention that I like his politics, I grew up with his aunt’s singing, his father ran as the Democratic nominee for a congressional seat a few years ago . . . the list goes on. I want to see the movie.

But, geeze, where in the heck would I go to see it when it begins playing in “theaters everywhere”? Everywhere? Not around here. I don’t know of a theater within 30 miles. Is George Clooney worth driving several hours round trip? Hmmmmm. Not a trick question, but one that I’ll have to ponder a moment or two.

Of course, that isn’t the point specifically. The point is the utter intolerability of simple things being not so simple, of convenience we expect all over the country not being all that convenient, of the truth of these simple inconveniences wearing on everyone’s nerves—those living with it and perhaps those reading and hearing about it.

I was ever so happy to go see Inconvenient Truth the first night it played in San Jose, Calif. Now I live in an area of the country where inconvenience is the truth of our lives.


© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Saturday, October 06, 2007

The Best of A.M. in the Morning! Oct. 1 - 6, 2007

by Ana Maria

Blog Entries
The Madness of Little Things Inside Katrina Land October 1, 2007
The Insurance Apologists: Loving America, not Americans October 3, 2007
Bush’s Veto Threat Threatens More Than Multiple Peril Legislation October 2, 2007
Revving Up Insurance Reform Momentum! October 1, 2007

News Items
Insurance candidate criticizes opponent October 5, 2007
Sound Off from the Biloxi, Miss., Sun Herald Sun Herald October 5, 2007

ANDERSON PUSHES FOR LOWER INSURANCE RATES October 4, 2007
If a New Yorker gets it, why can't an Alabamian? Sun Herald, October 4, 2007

Schumer Backs Wind-Damage Coverage in Flood Insurance Overhaul Congressional Quarterly October 3, 2007
Cochran, Lott voice support for flood bill Sun Herald October 3, 2007

Presidential Veto Would Break Faith with South Mississippi Sun Herald October 2, 2007

NYT Editorial: More Housing Woes in Mississippi New York Times October 1, 2007
Bush vows veto The Mississippi Press October 1, 2007
Opinion/Editorial: Surviving the Shards of Wars and Hurricanes October 1, 2007


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Friday, October 05, 2007

Sound Off from the Biloxi, Miss., Sun Herald




. . . the daily newspaper covering the Mississippi Gulf Coast's three counties

Here's an idea

Why can't the multiple-peril insurance program be funded by a 2 or 3 percent federal gas tax applied to every gallon of gas sold within 50 miles of all U.S. coastlines? This tax would be paid for by the natives who would benefit from the insurance as well as the visitors and tourists who enjoy amenities the coasts provide.

Sound Off is a daily column featuring anonymous comments on virtually any topic. Limit e-mail to 70 words.

The Sun Herald published this comment on October 5, 2007.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Insurance candidate criticizes opponent

Friday, October 05, 2007

By CHERIE WARD

BILOXI -- Gary Anderson, the Democrat candidate for state insurance commissioner, said Thursday he's not going to be in the back pocket of big insurance companies and accused his opponent of taking money from the insurance industry for nearly 10 years.

Anderson defeated Insurance Commissioner George Dale in the Democrat primary. The August race ended Dale's 32-year tenure as the state's top insurance regulator and the longest serving state insurance commissioner in the nation.

The 51-year-old former state fiscal chief now faces Republican state Sen. Mike Chaney of Vicksburg in the Nov. 6 general election. Chaney won the GOP nomination for the four-year post by defeating Ronnie English of Vancleave.

Anderson, of Jackson, held a press conference at Mary Mahoney's restaurant in Biloxi Thursday, surrounded by about 10 supporters.

He didn't delay his criticism of Chaney.

"My independence from insurance industry is one of the main differences be-tween my opponent and me," Anderson said. "Right now, Mississippi pays the third highest insurance rates in the nation. It takes the right kind of experience and the independence to do the job."

Anderson repeatedly chastised Chaney for ac-cepting contributions from insurance companies and others associated with the industry. He also accused Chaney of being in "the back pocket" of the industry both candidates are vying to govern.

"Since 1999, Mr. Chaney has taken thousands of dollars from insurance interest. In 2007, while running for insurance commissioner, he said, it's wrong to take money from industries you regulate.' Despite this statement, Mr. Chaney has continued to take money from insurance agents and companies," Anderson said.

Anderson said Chaney "flip-flopped" on his promise to the American Association of Retired Persons.

"He told the AARP he would support the grocery-tax/cigarette-tax swap and then did not," Anderson said. "If he'll do that to the elderly, what will he do to the people of the entire state?"

In an interview with The Mississippi Press published Sept. 29, Chaney offered no criticism of Anderson.

During the press conference, Anderson said he would lower the insurance rates in the state.

"For too long the insurance companies have had a free rein to do as they please in our state," Anderson said. "We need to change that. My plan is simple. Work everyday as an advocate for the insurance rate payers for our state and remain independent of insurance special interest. I haven't taken a single dime from insurance companies because it's just plan wrong to take money from the insurance companies that you're responsible to regulate."

Anderson said he wants to reduce fraud and waste in the insurance system. He said he wants to remove confusing language from insurance policies so the holders can better understand them.

Asked how he would regulate nationwide insurance providers refusing to write homeowner policies in Mississippi, Anderson said, "let them go."

"I plan to make Mississippi more attractive to the insurance industry," Anderson said. "That way, if State Farm or someone wants to go, they can. There will be five other companies wanting to take their place."

He said he will use his 25 years of experience in the public and private sectors to encourage competition in the insurance marketplace.

Anderson offered no opinion on the multi-peril legislation the U.S. House of Representatives approved on Sept. 27 that would allow property owners to purchase wind and flood coverage in a single policy.

The legislation is sponsored by Congressman Gene Taylor, D-Miss., and will now be presented to the U.S. Senate. If approved, the issue will be considered by President George W. Bush, who has vowed to veto the bill.

Reporter Cherie Ward can be reached at cward @themississippipress.com or (228) 934-1442.

The Mississippi Press published the original article on October 5, 2007.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Thursday, October 04, 2007

ANDERSON PUSHES FOR LOWER INSURANCE RATES





OPPONENT REJECTS "NO INSURANCE MONEY PLEDGE," POCKETS INDUSTRY MONEY BY THOUSANDS


Biloxi, Mississippi - Insurance Commissioner Candidate Gary Anderson held a press conference at historic Mary Mahoney's in Biloxi to address Mississippi's insurance crisis. He reaffirmed his pledge to NOT take money from big insurance or their executives and his plans to lower insurance costs in our state.

"I want to reduce fraud and waste in the system and aggressively investigate and punish those who commit insurance fraud, including insurance companies themselves," said Anderson at the press conference. "I will fight for plain English policies. Let's remove confusing language from insurance policies so Mississippians can understand their insurance coverage," Anderson continued.

Gary Anderson reaffirmed his pledge to remain independent of big insurance. Anderson said, "Back in June, I promised the people of Mississippi that I would not accept contributions from insurance companies. I haven't taken a single dime from big insurance because it's just plain wrong to take money from an industry you are responsible to regulate. You can't protect the pocketbooks of the ratepayer if you are in the back pocket of big insurance."

Anderson said his independence from the insurance industry is one of the main differences between himself and Mike Chaney. Chaney flip-flopped on his promise not to take money from the industry he would be charged with regulating as insurance commissioner. According to Chaney's own financial disclosure, he has taken thousands from insurance since he entered the race for insurance commissioner.

Anderson also pointed out that Mike Chaney wanted to make the Insurance Commissioner position appointed not elected, saying Chaney wanted to take away the right of the voter to elect or remove the state's sole insurance rate setting authority.

Anderson said he would use his over 25 years of experience working in the public and private sectors to encourage competition in the insurance marketplace. He announced he would use his economic and community development experience to help speed up recovery along the Gulf Coast. Anderson has served as the state's Chief Fiscal Officer as well as the Director of Community Development.

Gary was born and raised on his family's farm in Byhalia, Mississippi where his mother, a retired schoolteacher and his father, a farmer and retired fireman still call home. Gary and his wife of 25 years, Debra Miller of Vicksburg, live in Jackson.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

The Madness of Little Things Inside Katrina Land

by Ana Maria

Isn’t it maddening when you’ve worked hard on a document pushing up against a deadline and you go to print the thing and the printer is on the blink? Or you get to the last few pages and run out of paper—as in there is no more to be had and you have to run out to the store? Or you are trying to upload it into a email to send to your boss from your home office and the Internet goes on the blink? The madness of the little things that go haywire—however temporary it may be—is enough to have any of us go batty.

Thankfully, it often is very temporary, and we resolve the matter in short order. Yeah, I remember those days which for me were but seven months ago. Yep, those were the days before I stepped foot inside Katrina Land where the madness of the little things are neither temporary nor do they remain little after but a short while.

Almost a month ago, I got new Internet service installed. Most of the time it has been down. That aggravates me to no end. The company’s customer service isn’t a high priority here. Over the last decade alone, when I lived in Nashville, Tenn., or Northern Virginia outside of DC, or San Jose, Calif., being without service was as rare as snow—which never occurred.

Add to this trying to learn a new software program that has all kinds of fantastic video tutorials . . . if only I could get online to view them. So, I decided to print out the 407 page manual and read through it to figure out a few things. Hmmm. I don’t have 3-hold punched paper, and I’m not really feeling like printing out 407 pages and punching the holes myself. The holes don’t come out the same, and the paper doesn’t sit evenly in the binder if I were to do that many pieces. It drives me crazy and aggravates me so I decided I’d just run out to the store and pick up a pack of paper with the holes already pre-punched.

Oh, Geeze, Louise! I hate shopping at Wal-Mart, and I’ll be you-know-what if I’m going to waste my time and gas going there to look for something that it doesn’t have. So, I called and was put on hold. I got put on hold and would probably still be holding the phone at this minute if I hadn’t finally just hung up, because it seemed apparent that customer service wasn’t exactly their strong suit last night. I knew that I would be going to Gulfport this afternoon for a fundraiser for our Democratic nominee for Insurance Commissioner Gary Anderson. Before going to this fabulous event that I'm excited about attending, I could pop into Office Depot to get the paper I need.

By the time all is said and done, I will have waited over 24 hours and traveled a good 25 to 30 minutes extra (one way) to get the paper I could have gotten in a heart beat were I still living in San Jose, California. Granted, that city is the 10th largest in the country with a population of a million and my hometown has not even one percent of that. I’ve lived in communities with far less population: Nashville, Tenn., and Annandale, Virginia. Access to office supplies in each of those places is as common as bell pepper in a grocery store.

And throughout the 24 hours, access to my Internet service will be sporadic, at best. The madness of little things like copy paper and Internet service inside Katrina Land is, well, maddening!

Since I’m not able to do anything much with my new software for a bit, I turn to read a few newspaper articles I had downloaded in the mad rush to take advantage of the moments that my Internet service is up and running.

I see that Alabama’s U.S. Senator Shelby isn’t jumping on board to praise the ever visionary multiple peril insurance legislation that Congressman Gene Taylor (D-MS) championed in the House of Representatives. Today’s editorial in the Sun Herald asks the right question.

If a New Yorker gets it, why can't an Alabamian?
The editorial is referring to the fact that New York Senator Charles Schumer is definitely on board with passing in the Senate the Taylor multiple peril insurance reform legisation. Way to go, Charlie!

I’m sure that my neighbors in Alabama who’ve been dealing with all of the big and little aggravations since Katrina are too overwhelmed to lobby their senator. With all the destruction and devastation geeze, Louise, they should not have to have the political wherewithal to do so. After all, they didn’t lobby Senator Schumer of New York, and he definitely gets it. Perhaps we can do it for them and put in a few calls and emails to ask Senator Shelby this poignantly stated question. If a New Yorker gets it, why can't an Alabamian?

Being without the conveniences of everyday American life—you know, a home to live in, clothes for the kids, jobs for mom and dad, running water in the elementary schools, are more than a little maddening. All the more because it is so apparent that turning our lives upside down and inside out has been for the sheer greed and gluttony of corporate goons. This is madness, and it is wrong. With the changes that the multiple peril legislation provides, this madness need not ever again happen in the USA.

But it did happen throughout South Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. U.S. Senators Trent Lott and Thad Cochran, Republicans representing Mississippi, get it. New York Senator Charles Schumer gets it. After over two years of his people suffering in South Alabama, Senator Shelby doesn’t. How maddening! And that’s no little thing.

I think the Sun Herald has the question down pat. If a New Yorker gets it, why can't an Alabamian?



© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

If a New Yorker gets it, why can't an Alabamian?

Editorial
October 4, 2007


As expected, Trent Lott and Thad Cochran, Mississippi's two Republican senators, voiced support this week for Coast Congressman Gene Taylor's effort to expand the National Flood Insurance Program to include damage done by wind as well as water.

Taylor's proposed legislation passed the House of Representatives last week and is now drawing the attention of the Senate.

As hoped, a senator from another coastal state applauded the House plan to expand the federal insurance program. "I believe we should do the same in the Senate, and will work toward that," said Democrat Charles Schumer of New York, a senior member of the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, which has jurisdiction over the issue.

But not all the news is positive.

The Bush administration is still trumpeting the possibility of a presidential veto of a multiperil plan.

And next door in Alabama, Sen. Richard Shelby has declared himself a foe of the proposal. As a fellow Republican who also represents a regular route for hurricanes, perhaps Shelby can be persuaded by Cochran and Lott.

We hope so. And sooner rather than later.

As Schumer appreciates, the private sector is abandoning property owners in coastal areas while objecting to the public sector filling the gap.

"You can't have it both ways," Schumer says.

So he is trying to help homeowners on Long Island in New York and in Long Beach in Mississippi.

He deserves a lot more support.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

The Insurance Apologists: Loving America, not Americans

by Ana Maria

Sticking his foot down his mouth, George Dale—the soon-to-be former Mississippi Insurance Commissioner proclaimed as D.O.A. in the U.S. Senate the multiple peril insurance policy that Gulf Coast Congressman Gene Taylor (D-MS) successfully led to being overwhelming passed last week with bi-partisan support in the House of Representatives. Since losing the primary election in August to Democratic candidate Gary Anderson, guess George Dale hasn’t gotten any better at telling which way the political winds are blowing.

On the heels of this obviously premature proclamation, U.S. Senators Lott (R-MS) and Cochran (R-MS)came out in favor of addressing the issue. Moreover, Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) expressed his support for Taylor’s multiple peril legislation specifically. Yes, ma’am, and yes, sir. We have a live one! Congressional Quarterly reported

At least one influential Senate Democrat wants to see the federal flood insurance program expanded to include wind-damage coverage, setting up a potential clash with Republicans.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., praised the flood insurance overhaul bill (HR 3121) passed last week by the House, noting that it would allow individuals and businesses to purchase wind-damage coverage through the National Flood Insurance Program.

“I believe we should do the same in the Senate, and will work toward that,” Schumer told a Banking committee hearing Tuesday.
For some people, having egg on their faces—as in the case of George Dale—seems to be a regular fashion accessory, kind of goes with the shoe hanging from their mouths. Dale never understood what could be the big deal with families and businesses being financial wiped out by the insurance companies that he and he alone permitted to write worthless policies while these same families and businesses paid good money for the policies Dale authorized to be sold in this state. Fortunately, others do get it.

Senator Schumer
said property and casualty insurers have stopped writing wind-damage policies in many coastal areas, including Long Island.

At the same time, he observed, private insurers largely oppose the House bill for its inclusion of wind in the federal program.

“Gentlemen, ladies — you can’t have it both ways,” Schumer said.
Way to go, Charlie!

With Schumer’s leadership joined with Lott and Cochran, other Senators will join in to provide what Americans—and therefore America—needs for financial security’s sake.

Conveniently enough and as if on cue, Big Insurance and their political apologists like George Dale in the U.S. Senate will be seen waving Old Glory while speaking with patriotic language about God and country as the national anthem plays softly in the background . . . while Big Insurance continues to pick our pockets thereby legally stealing the financial security from our families and businesses.

What is it with politicians and corporations who claim to love America but obviously can’t stand Americans?! Yes, that’s a take off of a line from a character played by Annette Benning slamming Richard Dreyfuss’ conservative senatorial character in one of my all time favorite movies, The American President. The line resonates with such poignancy, doesn’t it?

When it comes to loving America and hating Americans, Senator Schumer himself said it best, “Gentlemen, ladies — you can’t have it both ways.”


© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Schumer Backs Wind-Damage Coverage in Flood Insurance Overhaul

At least one influential Senate Democrat wants to expand the federal flood insurance program to allow property owners to purchase coverage for wind damage as well, setting up a potential clash with Republicans.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., praised the flood insurance overhaul bill (HR 3121) passed last week by the House, noting it would allow individuals and businesses to purchase wind-damage coverage through the National Flood Insurance Program.

“I believe we should do the same in the Senate, and will work toward that,” said Schumer, a senior member of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, which has jurisdiction over the issue.

The proposed coverage expansion is an outgrowth of insurance disputes that arose after Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast in 2005.

The wind damage provision in the House bill was pushed by Mississippi Democrat Gene Taylor, one of hundreds of thousands of Gulf Coast residents whose homes were destroyed by Katrina, and who then saw their insurance claims denied when they sought to collect. The industry asserted that homes and businesses were destroyed by flooding, covered by the federal program, and not by wind damage, which private policies cover.

Taylor argued that homeowners should be able to purchase coverage for both types of damage through the federal program. But the administration opposes such a move, arguing it would crowd out private insurers and expose the federal program to added financial risks. The White House has threatened to veto a bill that includes such a provision.

The Senate has not yet begun work on its version of a flood insurance overhaul.
Source: CQ Today Midday Update
Political Clippings compiled from BNN Frontrunner and CQ Politics.com.
© 2007 Congressional Quarterly Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Cochran, Lott voice support for flood bill

Posted on Wed, Oct. 03, 2007

By MARIA RECIO
SUN HERALD WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON -- Mississippi's GOP senators for the first time Tuesday publicly supported a wind provision crafted by Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Bay St. Louis, which is part of a flood insurance reform program approved by the House last week.

Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott and Sen. Thad Cochran kept open the possibility of pursuing another legislative approach, but said they wanted the Senate to move a bill that helped the Gulf Coast.

They spoke separately to the Sun Herald in the Capitol on the day the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs held its first hearing on the embattled flood insurance program.

"We have got to come up with a way to have people get an opportunity to have access to coverage," said Lott. "The flood insurance program has problems of its own. It's not actuarially sound; it needs to be reformed.

"But my point to the House and to Gene is, at least he's got a proposal here and the Senate should seriously consider what the House has passed and unless we can come up with something better, I think we need to look at doing this."

"I'm going to be working with the committee to get this whole area addressed," he said.

Lott and Cochran are not banking committee members but Lott, because of his past and present leadership position, has considerable influence with GOP members.

Lott and Taylor lost their homes in Hurricane Katrina and ended up settling lawsuits with their insurer.

Cochran, for his part, said, "I'm not a member of the committee, so I'm not involved in writing of the bill or markup session.

"Gene Taylor is trying to do what he can to help protect the interests of people in hurricane-prone areas. Our state was so terribly damaged, a lot of people who had insurance found it wasn't sufficient to help them rebuild. It's been a big hardship," said Cochran.

"I support whatever he and Sen. Lott think will be helpful to improving growth and rebuilding opportunities in Gulf Coast areas."

The Taylor provision is designed to prevent legal battles between policyholders and insurance companies over which caused hurricane damage - wind, covered by insurance firms, or water, covered by the federal government.

The White House has threatened to veto the House-passed bill because of the wind provision, which it says increases the taxpayers' financial exposure.

At the Senate hearing, most panel members did not address wind coverage, focusing on concerns about the program's $17.5 billion debt to the U.S. Treasury. David Maurstad, assistant administrator and federal insurance administrator for FEMA, said the agency paid $20 billion in Katrina claims.

Ranking member Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., is opposed to adding wind coverage and said he is concerned about the viability of the program.

"The National Flood Insurance Program is now at a crossroads," said Shelby, whose state was also hit by Katrina.

But there was one surprise, vocal supporter of the wind provision - Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who is incensed that private insurers have abandoned coastal Long Island and still object to the federal government assuming coverage. "Gentlemen, ladies - you can't have it both ways," said Schumer.

Referring to the House wind provision, he said, "I believe we should do the same in the Senate, and will work toward that."

What they said

Mississippi senators on wind coverage championed by Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Bay St. Louis, in the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007, H.R. 3121, approved by the House Thursday:

"We have got to come up with a way to have people get an opportunity to have access to coverage. The flood insurance program has problems of its own. It's not actuarially sound; it needs to be reformed.

"But my point to the House and to Gene is, at least he's got a proposal here and the Senate should seriously consider what the House has passed and unless we can come up with something better, I think we need to look at doing this."

- Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss.

"Gene Taylor is trying to do what he can to help protect the interests of people in hurricane-prone areas. Our state was so terribly damaged, a lot of people who had insurance found it wasn't sufficient to help them rebuild. It's been a big hardship.

I support whatever he and Sen. Lott think will be helpful to improving growth and rebuilding opportunities in Gulf Coast areas."

- Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss.




© 2007 Sun Herald. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.sunherald.com

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Tuesday, October 02, 2007

Schumer Backs Wind-Damage Coverage in Flood Insurance Overhaul

By Victoria McGrane, CQ Staff

At least one influential Senate Democrat wants to see the federal flood insurance program expanded to include wind-damage coverage, setting up a potential clash with Republicans.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., praised the flood insurance overhaul bill (HR 3121) passed last week by the House, noting that it would allow individuals and businesses to purchase wind-damage coverage through the National Flood Insurance Program.

“I believe we should do the same in the Senate, and will work toward that,” Schumer told a Banking committee hearing Tuesday. He said property and casualty insurers have stopped writing wind-damage policies in many coastal areas, including Long Island.

At the same time, he observed, private insurers largely oppose the House bill for its inclusion of wind in the federal program.

“Gentlemen, ladies — you can’t have it both ways,” Schumer said.

While the House passed an overhaul of the flood insurance program, a Senate version has not yet been introduced in the 110th Congress. Democratic and GOP panel members however, praised the legislation the Senate Banking panel approved unanimously in the 109th Congress — which then stalled in the Senate — indicating that could be a starting point for a bill panel Chairman Christopher J. Dodd is drafting.

Yet the issue of wind coverage is a new element of the debate. The proposed coverage expansion is an outgrowth of insurance disputes that arose after Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast in 2005.

The inclusion of wind damage in the House bill was spearheaded by Mississippi Democrat Gene Taylor, one of hundreds of thousands of Gulf Coast residents whose homes were destroyed by Katrina, who then had their insurance claims denied when they sought to collect. The industry asserted that homes and businesses were destroyed by flooding, covered by the federal program, and not by wind damage, which private policies cover.

The administration strongly opposes the expansion of the program to include wind damage coverage and the White House said it would veto the House bill if such language was included.

None of the Republicans on the Senate Banking panel weighed in on the wind program during opening remarks Tuesday, though Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida asked witnesses to testify on its ramifications. Aside from some Gulf Coast Republicans, House GOP members opposed the wind-damage coverage in the House bill.

Private insurers are lobbying the Senate to exclude the wind provision.

The flood bill approved by the Senate panel in the 109th Congress sought to move the program toward actuarial soundness by mandating more accurate flood maps and ensuring premiums reflected the risk of catastrophic years such as 2005.

Louisiana’s senators, Democrat Mary L. Landrieu and Republican David Vitter, blocked floor action on that bill, however, saying the legislation would make living in coastal areas too costly.

The devastating 2005 Gulf Coast storms left the program, established in 1968, with about $17.5 billion in debt owed to the federal Treasury.

David I. Maurstad, assistant administrator and federal insurance administrator for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which oversees the flood program, told lawmakers that the agency expects total 2005 costs, including interest payments to the Treasury, to approach $20 billion.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Bush’s Veto Threat Threatens More Than Multiple Peril Legislation

by Ana Maria
Last week, when George W. Bush threatened to veto the much needed and fiscally sound multiple peril insurance legislation that Congressman Gene Taylor championed, Bush threw oil on the fire of the emotional and mental stress of plenty of folks. See, here in South Mississippi, Bush has plenty of folks who still believe in him. While Bush’s approval rating continues to sink to the bottom of the history books, plenty of South Mississippians still believe in him. Not me, mind you. Personally, I’ve been in the other camp all along from that fateful day in December of 2000 when his daddy’s Supreme Court buddies voted him into the Oval Office.

But here, for reasons even this native woman—yours truly, that is—can’t quite understand, Bush has been believed. His actions toward these people who have had placed their faith in God and country into a man who would look them in the proverbial eye and again say one thing while his action prove his words hollow. A pattern that has been so very familiar for plenty of us. For me, today, though, this is deeply personal. These people are my family, neighbors, friends, and my regional community.

Here in my own hometown at the Our Lady of the Gulf Community Center—the Catholic Church which I attended throughout my formative years and whose schools provided a strong foundation for my life, Bush said

"The folks here had special, extra problems to deal with. And I heard you loud and clear, and I thank you for sharing that with me," Bush said. Emphasis added.


He also said
"People are worried about insurance here. They're worried about bureaucracy. It's one of the reasons Laura and I have come back, to remind people that we haven't forgotten and won't." Emphasis added.
Then last week, his office announced it would veto the legislation. So that’s where Bush stands today. Guess the man forgot.

Throughout the Katrina-ravaged region—from Louisiana through South Mississippi and Alabama, life is so tremendously difficult that depression and suicidal tendencies have skyrocketed. Just yesterday, I read that domestic abuse has climbed upwards as well—and the shelters that once assisted and protected women and their children are fewer than pre-Katrina.

Good Morning, America’s Robin Roberts—a native of Pass Christian which was blown away with Katrina’s winds—publicized the fact that one of the elementary schools had no running water for its 600 kids. Bush’s FEMA had turned down the request for money for a well. Roberts’ publicity placed pressure on FEMA to reverse its morally repulsive decision. A much-loved national television anchor made this happen, not George W. Bush or his cronies in office.

Yesterday’s Sun Herald ran an editorial titled Presidential Veto Would Break Faith With South Mississippi.
On his most recent visit here, on the second anniversary of the great storm, he sat in a room in Bay St. Louis with our political leadership, including Sen. Trent Lott, Congressman Gene Taylor and local mayors and county supervisors, and they told him that the thing we need most now, the one thing that is necessary for our rebuilding and recovery efforts, is multiple-peril insurance.

So it was with disappointment, sadness, and perhaps bewilderment, that we learned Wednesday that the president was being advised to veto this most important piece of legislation on the very eve of debate in the House of Representatives. It is inconceivable that a president who has seen firsthand this flattened region, and has been thoroughly briefed on the roadblocks to rebuilding posed by the insurance industry's intransigence, would yield to such a suggestion.
Yet, in spite of that threat, the overwhelming majority of the House of Representatives passed this much needed legislation and did so with strong bi-partisan support. Through the courageous leadership of South Mississippi’s Congressman Gene Taylor, this legislation soared through. Because of Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s real commitment to the people throughout the Katrina-ravaged region, she put her leadership into action and made this legislation get through the subcommittee and committee hearings and finally through the House of Representatives. Real words with action that correspond to those words.

What to do given the fact that Bush has threatened the veto and to date the legislation has not found a legislative sponsor in the U.S. Senate? The answer to this is two-fold.

The Mississippi Press Register is a daily paper that covers U.S. Senator Trent Lott’s hometown of Pascagoula, Miss.. In its editorial this past Sunday, the paper wrote
Bush, Lott and Thad Cochran, Mississippi's other senior statesman in the Senate, need to seriously weigh the consequences of this bill. Not just the added burden to the federal government, but also the added burden to millions of homeowners who are increasingly being priced out of the insurance market because of the probability of a hurricane.
Here in Mississippi, we have two very powerful Republican Senators who are keenly devoted to this humble state. One the ranking minority member of the Senate Appropriations Committee (Thad Cochran) and the other the Senate Minority Leader (Trent Lott). The two become natural allies with their neighboring U. S. Senators in protecting the people of South Mississippi from further ravages from the insurance industry hell bent on making our lives a living hell as they transfer the claims money into the ever growing salaries and bonuses of the corporations’ upper most management.

Senator Lott himself lost his home in Katrina. [See the photo.]

Another natural on this legislation, of course, is Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu, a Democrat from New Orleans. The Democratic Leadership in the Senate will be on board with this. They already sponsored the bill to close the loophole that has permitted the insurance industry to escape the nation’s anti-trust laws prohibiting price fixing, collusion, and the like. Senator Lott joined Landrieu and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in co-sponsoring this important legislation. Adding the important political clout of Mississippi Senator Thad Cochran to this powerful team will create a potent dream team.

In talking about the anti-trust legislation that he co-sponsored, Senator Lott himself said "You think if the majority leader calls its up, it's not going to happen?" The same can be said of the multiple peril legislation.

This is the first part of the two-fold answer to the question above. For the second part, I draw on my extensive experience in the kitchen, especially at Thanksgiving. I love food analogies. So here’s this one which applies well to the situation. See if you agree.

Every household that has a big Thanksgiving turkey dinner faces the same problem after the meal: the yucky, baked on, can’t-take-a jackhammer-to-it, turkey pan. Shoot, any of us could expend plenty of energy trying to chisel away at it. Experienced cooks, however, put hot sudsy water in the pan, move the pan to the side, and then go on about their business. By the time every morsel of dinner and dessert has been savored, the table cleared, the rest of the dishes stacked in the dishwasher or washed by hand, the hot sudsy water will have worked its way through the previously seemingly entrenched “nothing’s-gonna-get-that--clean-again” turkey pan and voila! Almost like magic, everything rinses away with great ease. And so it can be in politics.

The very next step is obtaining an appropriate sponsor requires us to again rev up the pressure, the big political momentum. Then we move to getting the legislation on a subcommittee calendar and passed out of the subcommittee, getting the legislation on the committee calendar and passed out of committee, then getting the legislation on the calendar for the Senate floor and passed out of the U.S. Senate. We’ll get the legislation through the U.S. Senate with strong bi-partisan support just as we did in the House of Representatives. Today, we need to start with getting the sponsors lined up. Let’s focus our attention on and contact three U.S. Senators: Trent Lott (R-MS), Thad Cochran (R-MS), and Mary Landrieu (D-LA). A simple email or phone call to each will help them understand that we respectfully request their leadership on this critical legislation.

As we ratchet up the political pressure to pass this out of the U.S. Senate, our political hot sudsy water action will continue to work its way through the White House entrenchment—or not.

One of two things will happen. Either Bush will sign the legislation into law, or he will hand the Democratic Party a strong bread and butter, kitchen table economic issue on which to run their 2008 presidential campaign. Either way, the people inside the Katrina-ravaged region win.

Of course, were Bush to have an epiphany—perhaps with the help of a great deal of internal Republican pressure that we ourselves assist in creating, we in the Katrina region will win sooner. For me, I just want this legislation to go through the Senate and for Bush to go ahead and sign it. We need this legislative action to be speedy to jump start our long overdue economic recovery. We don’t need presidential politics.

Bush’s veto threat threatens more than just the legislation that will do plenty of good here and throughout all of America’s coastal communities from sea to shining sea. Bush’s veto threatens the mental health of a region, challenges that have been discussed here in this blog and in many different newspapers in the nation. We need hope to ward off the stress, the depression, the suicidal thoughts that come from a sense of hopelessness. Folks here need to see that their government is responsive, that the wrongs that have besieged them are being righted in the courts and in the legislative halls of Congress and the White House.

If Bush resists the political heat that you and I along with others create—then fine. Bush could be handing the Democratic presidential nominee a key legislative jewel in the party’s arsenal to rest the White House from Bush’s party. Bush threatening to veto the multiple peril legislation may threaten his party’s control of the White House . . . and more.

© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Presidential Veto Would Break Faith with South Mississippi

President George Bush comforts Kim Bassier, left, and Bronwynne Bassier as he toured Howard Avenue in Biloxi on September 2, 2005, the first of fifteen visits the President has made to the Mississippi Gulf Coast since Hurricane Katrina. The President has threatened to veto multiple-peril insurance legislation.

SUN HERALD EDITORIAL

President Bush has visited South Mississippi 15 times since Aug. 29, 2005.

He has hugged our people, wiped their tears and heard the voice of a region that has spoken clearly and carefully as to the specific needs that will allow it to recover and survive.

On his most recent visit here, on the second anniversary of the great storm, he sat in a room in Bay St. Louis with our political leadership, including Sen. Trent Lott, Congressman Gene Taylor and local mayors and county supervisors, and they told him that the thing we need most now, the one thing that is necessary for our rebuilding and recovery efforts, is multiple-peril insurance.

So it was with disappointment, sadness, and perhaps bewilderment, that we learned Wednesday that the president was being advised to veto this most important piece of legislation on the very eve of debate in the House of Representatives. It is inconceivable that a president who has seen firsthand this flattened region, and has been thoroughly briefed on the roadblocks to rebuilding posed by the insurance industry's intransigence, would yield to such a suggestion.

We have gone back and reviewed the sweet words and promises that the president has uttered on each of his visits. And while we have appreciated each visit, and the support, including billions in aid that he has supported and that the Congress and the American people have provided us following the worst natural disaster in American history, we must regard his administration's threat of a veto as breaking faith with our people, tens of thousands of whom are still struggling to survive in the devastation zone.

Not that this legislation is designed solely to meet the needs of the Gulf Coast. It would help shield communities on both the East and West coasts that are in harm's way. Must a more politically potent community be devastated before the White House appreciates the necessity of a federal, multiple-peril insurance program?

Political leaders sometimes are forced to choose between competing interests, but surely President Bush will not choose to support the interests of big insurance companies over the people of South Mississippi whose hopes for the future are invested in this legislation.

Mr. President, your heart and head must have spoken to the clear need for this legislation. Far more important, we believe, than the suggestions of policy bureaucrats are the firsthand knowledge and judgment that you must have gained from all of those trips, and the sweat and tears of a people who are pleading for the opportunity to stay and rebuild their shattered homes and lives.

Mr. President, we know that you heard us in those hours and days after the storm. Please, hear us now.

This editorial reflects the views of the Sun Herald editorial board: President-Publisher Ricky R. Mathews, Vice President and Executive Editor Stan Tiner, Chief Financial Officer Flora Point, Opinion Page Editor Marie Harris, Associate Editor Tony Biffle.



Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Monday, October 01, 2007

Revving Up Insurance Reform Momentum!

by Ana Maria

Last week posted two major victories for property owners in the United States. The first came Thursday with a strong bi-partisan majority vote (263 – 146) for the multiple peril legislation that Congressman Gene Taylor (D-MS) had successfully incorporated into the bill (H.R. 3121) that reauthorized the National Flood Insurance Program. Once this bill goes through the legislative gauntlet and becomes law, American property owners will again have the option of purchasing one insurance policy that covers both flood and wind damage. That is not something we’ve seen since the 60’s when the private insurance industry quit covering flood damage to residential and commercial properties.

The second came immediately on the heels of the passage of this magnificent multiple peril legislation.

A federal jury in south Mississippi sided Friday with a couple who sued their insurance company after Hurricane Katrina for refusing to cover more than $1.7 million in damage to their beachfront home and property.

The eight-member jury wasn't asked to specify how much money USAA Casualty Insurance Co. owes Kevin and Sherrye Webster for damage to their home in Bay St. Louis.

But jurors concluded that all of the damage to the couple's house was caused by Katrina's wind, wind-blown debris or wind-driven rain—perils that are covered by the San Antonio-based insurer's policies.
Glory be, and halleluiah! The precedent has been set. So powerful a precedent that the insurer apparently immediately made an out of court settlement offer. John Cocke, one of the Webster’s attorneys said “USAA will owe the Websters at least $800,000.”
The Websters' policy had limits of $811,000 for the house, $81,000 for a barn on their property, $162,200 for living expenses and $760,480 for the home's contents. USAA paid them $10,944 for wind damage to the house and $42,929 for the barn.
Apparently the punitive damages part of the lawsuit continues. Good. Many insurance companies have ripped off property owners here in Katrina Land and across the country.

Two major victories for American property owners and both had their beginning right here in my hometown of Bay St. Louis, Miss.,—one of the coastal beach towns comprising Katrina’s ground zero.

Next is convincing U.S. Senator Trent Lott (R-MS), who also holds the distinguished position of Senate Minority Leader, to introduce companion legislation in the Senate. Lott also lost his Gulf Coast home in the Katrina winds. The irony of ironies had Lott hire the ever tough lawyer Dickie Scruggs, of the Scruggs Katrina Group and Lott’s own brother-in-law, to sue State Farm to obtain the insurance money that the company should have sent him in a matter of weeks, if not days of filing the claim.

In a classic example of “it all depends on whose ox is being gored ,” Lott availed himself of the very American legal system of which he had been so critical, a system that is in place to protect against corporate greed, avarice, and other wrong doing such as has been lain bare for all to see with the insurance companies failure to live up to their good hands, good neighbor marketing.

A lifelong apologist for corporate behavior and a darling of the insurance industry from way back, Lott has changed his tune. Losing everything you have—including faith in a corporate system that has had their way with him, ways that he could never have ever imagined could have befallen his family
often has us looking at things through a very different lens.

Today, we need his baritone voice to lead us through the U.S.
Link Senate. His leadership is important and he has begun to indicate his willingness to lead the country in a new tune. Some of his more notable quotes came in a May Bloomberg article.

"It's long overdue for this industry to be held accountable''
"I'm prepared to continue to kick their fanny until the last day I'm alive on this Earth because they have mistreated too many people.''
"These are venal people,'' he says. "I'm embarrassed for them.''

We have so much work to do down here. Our housing situation is pathetic both for homeowners and renters. Not much construction going on because insurance is either sky high or impossible to get and because many insurance companies have padded their profit margin with the money it had owed its policyholders. Mississippi’s Republican Governor Haley Barbour—former head of the Republican National Committee—is trying to swipe $600 million of federal money to “from disaster relief accounts to help double the size of the Port of Gulfport” which is a city in the middle of the state’s coastline. That $600 million was intended for the Home Owners Grant Program.

Just the other day I spoke with a woman whose family is still awaiting news for a grant to fund elevating their home. The grant worker told her that the fact that there has been no work on her home is a positive in terms of getting that particular grant.

Oh yeah? It’s been over TWO years since the hurricane. There should be NO money left to administer. This project should be in the shut down and being audited to account for the funding phase. The only reason the lady, her husband, and their six children remain in the two FEMA trailers . . . is because they don’t have money to rebuild their home.

In the meantime, we have bureaucratic red tape that should be the shame of every administrator associated with the program. Efficient and effective delivery of the money apparently doesn’t mean . . . efficient and effective delivery of the money to those for whom it was intended.

Heck, it was only a few months ago that a dear friend of my family, a 78 year-old woman, received her original grant. Goodness gracious! This is beyond ridiculous.

So, we have Governor Barbour trying to swipe the money from our homeowners grant program. We have no construction boom which means that families remain living in the formaldehyde-filled FEMA trailers or living with friends and family. We have homeowners waiting for the insurance companies to live up to their financial obligations to pay on the wind damage policies. And the economic impact of all of this is . . . stagnation, a stand still.

Like oxygen, insurance isn’t sexy or exciting . . . until you don’t have a good supply of it when you need it.

Absolutely, last week’s triumphs were a major breath of much needed fresh air. A big boost in the engine of hope that we can effect a vibrant recovery. A wonderful win for the human spirit centered on persistence, perseverance, and political action.

To keep things moving in this direction so that we can continue to end the madness that is eating away at the financial security for our nation’s families and business, let’s dedicate today’s political hell raising to asking Senator Trent Lott to use his baritone voice to lead the Senate in a perfect harmony with his Congressional and Democratic counterpart some 40 miles west of his Pascagoula, Miss., home—Congressman Gene Taylor. Let’s contact Senator Lott and ask him to be the primary sponsor of the Multiple Peril Legislation in the Senate.

We’ll ask him to make good on his words about it being “long overdue for this industry to be held accountable'' and being “prepared to continue to kick their fanny . . . because they have mistreated too many people.''

With those words, Senator Lott is singing a tune in perfect harmony with many of us throughout the nation. Together, imagine how we can really rev up the engine for insurance reform.

© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

NYT Editorial: More Housing Woes in Mississippi



September 27, 2007

As the poorest state in the country, Mississippi should have no trouble finding low- and moderate-income homeowners to share in the more than $5 billion in emergency federal aid funneled into the state after Hurricane Katrina.

But a startling new analysis by a coalition of state and national housing advocates accuses Mississippi of using loopholes in the law to spend far too much on middle- and upper-income households and far too little on those most in need of help.


The Department of Housing and Urban Development, which oversees the program, needs to take a close look at how Mississippi is spending that money.

The aid was channeled through the Community Development Block Grant program, which was set up by Congress in the 1970s to improve housing for the poor and provide a better quality of life and more economic opportunities. The law requires states and localities to spend 70 percent of the money they receive on projects that will clearly benefit low- and moderate-income people.

After Katrina, Congress lowered that requirement to 50 percent for the Gulf Coast states, partly because people at all income levels had lost their homes. That seemed reasonable, given the nature of the emergency.

Low-income housing advocates were rightly uneasy about a second provision that allowed the Gulf Coast states to waive the income test altogether for some projects. They feared that the states would use waivers to reward cronies and boost pet projects. Indeed, Mississippi’s critics now claim that only about 20 percent of the money spent so far has gone to help low- and moderate-income families.

Now Mississippi has floated a proposal that would divert $600 million from the housing recovery effort to a plan to rebuild the port at Gulfport. State boosters want to redevelop the area as a hub for casinos and cruise ships.

The state sees this as economic development. Housing advocates see it as an attempt to hijack money that should rightly be going to build and repair housing for displaced, low-income Mississippians. They also charge that the state has written the rules for its housing aid program in a way that denies help to large numbers of low-income homeowners, who would clearly be eligible under the same post-Katrina program in neighboring Louisiana.

Congress must revisit the waiver process to make sure that states aren’t using it to evade the income restrictions clearly laid out in federal law. And HUD needs to take a hard look at all aspects of the Mississippi program, and make sure that the remainder of the emergency aid money gets to the low-income families who are legally entitled to it and desperately need the help.

The New York Times published this editorial on September 27, 2007.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Bush vows veto

Friday, September 28, 2007
By AMBER CRAIG


GAUTIER -- A bill designed to alleviate some of the insurance woes coastal residents have faced since Hurricane Katrina passed the House Thursday, but the representative who authored the windstorm provision does not understand why the White House has threatened a veto.

A provision authored by Democratic Rep. Gene Taylor was included in H.R. 3121, the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act, as a provision to allow homeowners to purchase wind and flood insurance in a single plan.

Since the storm, policyholders have seen their rates increase by hundreds of dollars, have been dropped or have been denied coverage of wind damage in places where flood damage also contributed to structural damage.

Insurance companies have claimed that flooding, not winds, were responsible for hurricane-related damages, which would make the federal government liable for payment.

Taylor said Thursday he couldn't believe that the White House issued a statement against his provision of the bill.

According to the Associated Press, the White House released a statement saying the provision would shift too much liability to the federal government and would encourage people to take inappropriate housing risks.

The statement said the president would be advised to veto the bill if it passes the Senate with the windstorm provision.

Taylor said when President Bush visited Bay St. Louis on the second anniversary of Katrina, he seemed open to helping the area recover. Taylor said he hopes the statement is a result of a lack of communication with the president.

Taylor recalled a meeting with Bush, Gov. Haley Barbour, local mayors and other economic leaders.

"He (Bush) sat forward in his chair and said, What do we need to do?' Everyone at that table said, We need all-perils flood insurance,'" Taylor said.

The bill has not been voted on in the Senate yet, but Republican Sen. Trent Lott has already said he will consider adding wind damage. Lott has said he does have some reservations about putting more responsibility on the federal government.

Taylor said he does not know when the bill will be taken up in the Senate, but he expects that some "will try to make this as everything but what it is."

But what it's really about, Taylor said, is about fixing a problem that should not have ever existed, even before Katrina.

"If something horrible happens to you, like what happened in Mississippi, your policy's going to get paid," Taylor said.

Taylor, who lost his Bay St. Louis home in the storm, said he doesn't understand why insurance companies are coming out against the plan, because they have told coastal residents that they do not want their business. Taylor said State Farm told him that they would not pay for wind damage, even though his roof was found several hundred feet from his house.

This plan could end up offering a higher quality of coverage for less money, Taylor said, and that probably scares the industry.

"They don't want this business," Taylor said. "They have said that over and over again, by pulling out, by raising their rates."

Reporter Amber Craig can be reached at acraig@themississippipress.com or (228) 934-1428.

Copyright 2007 gulflive.com. All Rights Reserved.

The Mississippi Press published the original article on September 28, 2008.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Opinion/Editorial: Surviving the Shards of Wars and Hurricanes

By Raymond M. Scurfield

GULFPORT, Miss. -- Besides the Vietnam War, I am a Hurricane Katrina survivor -- the Mississippi Gulf Coast and The University of Southern Mississippi Gulf Park campus were devastated. So many Americans continue to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, stressed not only by exposure to combat but also perhaps by having their families at home facing the threat of new tropical storms, hurricanes and floods. While deployed, military personnel always feel helpless and inadequate, if not guilty and angry, when any serious problems confront their families back home. In turn, family members can be extremely upset at their deployed partner, who is absent, or at the military or the government.

The issues are compounded for the National Guard; its historic mission includes being available stateside in times of emergencies — and yet many Guard units and their equipment are overseas. I have heard active duty personnel and their families express their angst time and again at the protracted and repeated deployment policies and the resulting absences following the destruction of Hurricane Katrina, the inept response of too many federal programs that were overwhelmed by the demands, and how providing adequate federal funds for post-Katrina relief and recovery has been pitted against funding the massive war costs. These are yet more unacknowledged costs of the war.

Like many veterans on the Gulf Coast, from Florida through Texas, both the Iraq War and another hurricane season have propelled me back to poignant memories related to the war I survived. This is what can happen when current media coverage of the Iraq War or the threat of hurricanes might trigger memories of past combat or of past hurricanes like Georges or Andrew. Now, over 1.5 million American troops are having their own traumatic war experiences brought home — perhaps exacerbated by having family in harm’s way here from natural disasters or family crises while they have been or are deployed, or while facing yet another deployment.

I am propelled back to 1968, sitting on an airplane between Pittsburgh and Philadelphia en route to Vietnam. The plane is full -- except for the aisle seat next to me. Then, entering last, is a Vietnam veteran – a patch over his eye and using two forearm crutches. I watch, mesmerized, noticing the prostheses where his legs used to be, as he shuffles slowly down the aisle. Suddenly I realize, “Oh, no, he is going to sit next to me.” And he does. I awkwardly say hello and find myself preoccupied with self-centered thoughts about sitting next to this severely injured veteran while I am en route to Vietnam.

Eventually, he begins talking -- a conversation I will remember forever. “You know, it was really hard the last time I went home on convalescent leave from the hospital. A couple of my high school friends told me it was a shame that I lost my legs and eye for nothing . . .” Today I fear the same for many returning troops faced with the growing specter of no honorable way out of Iraq and the increasing divisiveness of the war. Will many troops be told by others, or tell themselves now or later, that their sacrifices had been for nothing? That would be very hard to live with.

Conversely, I derive solace still from that wounded soldier’s last words to me. “You know, sir. I was the lucky one. No one else in our foxhole survived.” I was amazed at his glass-half-full celebration of living. I find myself praying that decades later he still feels the same, rather than dwelling on what was irreparably damaged and lost -- and that thousands of severely injured and mental health casualties from Iraq and their families will feel similarly decades from now.

However, many of us know all too well that war is unforgettable and that the memories and the impact -- both the good and the bad -- are lifelong. An unlearned lesson is that time does not heal all wounds. Furthermore, salt is being poured into veterans’ wounds from revelations uncovered by the exposé at Walter Reed Army Hospital and investigations of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Will anything really change ultimately? One hopeful sign is the wave of concern and advocacy from veterans of prior wars and civilian activists determined not to let this current generation of warriors be forgotten like Korean War veterans, or mistreated and forgotten like many Vietnam vets were.

And a silver lining even exists related to the massive destruction and continuing hardships post-Katrina. A palpable spirit of caring and resolve persists that we will not let our nation’s worst natural disaster keep us down. I find people here are more sensitive and reach out to others more than before Katrina (and this always has been a friendly place). Tens of thousands of volunteers continue to offer assistance and caring, many with faith-based organizations, uniquely filling a desperate need that exceeds the inability of cumbersome federal programs to provide.

Should not this powerful post-Katrina spirit of appreciation and responsiveness to the inter-connectedness among us all, further illustrated by the massive national response to the mass murders at Virginia Tech, be channeled similarly into paying proper homage, respect and attention, not just now but for decades to come, to our nation’s finest who are suffering the price of having served in harm’s way, many with lifelong disabilities and hurt?

And yet, soon after the end of this ever-lengthening war, the metallic ribbons and bumper stickers will be gone, the war casualties increasingly distant from the front pages. Similarly, Katrina (other than New Orleans-related news) is seldom mentioned now, Rita is a non-existent afterthought and to most of the country Georges, Andrew and Camille are simply three people’s names. Are we moving along, inexorably, to have collective amnesia again about yet another era of veterans and their families, abandoning them to struggle with their personal demons resulting from having served in harm’s way? This is similar to how too often we forget about or dismiss the hurt and challenges that continue to face many survivors of devastating hurricanes like Katrina, Rita, and Andrew -- or from a new hurricane yet to be named.

___________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Raymond Scurfield, recognized internationally for his expertise in war-related trauma, has written a trilogy of books about war’s impact. The most recent is “War Trauma. Lessons Unlearned From Vietnam to Iraq.” He also has several writings about the impact of Hurricane Katrina. He is an associate professor and director of the Katrina Research Center at The University of Southern Mississippi Gulf Coast and can be contacted at raymond.scurfield@usm.edu . More information about Scurfield is found online at http://www.usm.edu/gc/gchealth/scurfield/index.html.

This press release can be found here.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Plan to give funds to port ‘unconscionable’



By Dwayne Bremer
Sep 28, 2007


A plan by the Mississippi Development Authority to use $600 million from disaster relief accounts to help double the size of the Port of Gulfport has drawn the ire of several local, state, and civic leaders this week.

The Development Authority--a state run department-- is in charge of the $3.3 billion Mississippi Home Owners Grant Program.

The plan to redirect $600 million from the Home Owners Grant Program to the Port of Gulfport came to light at budget hearings in Jackson earlier this week.

The house and senate will not vote on the budget until January; however, this week was the end of the public comment period. Lawmakers including State Rep. Dianne Peranich of DeLisle have asked for an extension of the public comment period. The deadline was Monday, but, MDA Executive Director Gary Swoope said he would consider the request for the extension.

"I totally disagree with the redirection of the money until we have more time to look at it," Peranich said earlier this week. "I would think the homeowners money, should be for homeowners. They (MDA) have CDBG money for other projects."

The plan calls for the MDA to move $600 million from the Homeowners Grant Program to fuel a port expansion project that could potentially create thousands of jobs and create an economic boom along the Gulf Coast.

Officials at Gov. Haley Barbour's office said Thursday the diversion of funds is part of the "master plan" of the CDBG grants the state lobbied for after Hurricane Katrina, and it will not affect the individual assistance the program was designed for.

"There is plenty of money there for what it (home owners grant program) was intended for," Pete Smith of the governor's office said Thursday.

Officials at MDA said Friday money has been earmarked for the port ever since Nov. 2005.

"We are not taking money out of the hands of homeowners who received flood surge damage," Donna Sanford, director of MDA's disater recovery division said. "This is nothing new."

She said the program still has enough money to provide 30,000 eligible applicants an average grant of $70,000 each.

Stanford said the total amount of CBDG funds the state has received is about $5.5 billion. Of that $3.3 billion was designated for the housing program. Originally, the state used FEMA numbers to estimate that about 35,000 households would be eligible for grants. Once the applicants began coming in, she said, it became apparent that the number of applicants would be much lower. MDA was able to modify eligibility requirements as well as give additional money to applicants, she said.

"Local leaders questioned why the project is being presented now and what exactly is in the "master plan."

Some legislators said they have been frustrated with not being in the loop about the state's spending.

When the funding was secured in early 2006, the state house of representatives passed an oversight bill which would have allowed for legislative oversight of the CDBG funds. The state senate later killed the bill when it voted on it and thus the state has not shared information with the house and senate about the spending of the CDBG funds, officials said.

The "master plan" which Barbour and the state delegation presented to Congress has not been made public either, which has caused some concern.

"This is the first I have heard about it," state Rep. J. P. Compretta said Thursday. "I thought the money was intended for individuals. This may be contrary to Congress' intent."

Peranich, who serves on the budget committee, said she only heard of it a couple days before budget talks began. She said she wants to know what the port plans to do with the money and what is in the master plan.

"We don't know what is going on," she said. "We are not saying we're against the Port of Gulfport, but what are they going to do with the money? It may be 2012 before they create any jobs."

A request to the governor's office for a copy of the "master plan" was not provided by press time Friday.

Don Allee, the Executive Director of the Port of Gulfport said Friday that the port expansion plan has been in place since 2003, and the growth necessary to accommodate today's needs as well as future needs has increased since Hurricane Katrina. He said if the port gets the funding it will have a tremendous impact on the region.

"It's all about the people," Allee said. "With the type of infrastructure and jobs, it's a priority."

Allee said within 10 years the port expansion plan could generate as many as 2,000 more well paying jobs. Currently, the average salary for some of the port's lowest paid employees is between $40,000 and $50,000 per year.

Compretta said spending what is left over from the program on economic development might not be a bad thing in the long run, but the focus now should be on getting current applicants their money.

Compretta said his office receives about five calls a day from residents who still have not received their grant checks. He said in some cases, properties are being foreclosed on because of the slow process.

"Once the needs of the citizens are satisfied, then we can look at what is left over, not now," he said. "They are putting the cart before the horse."

Board of Supervisors President Rocky Pullman said Thursday the county has been lobbying the state for assistance for months.

"We have lobbied as hard as we can for help with the jail, EOC, and infrastructure improvements," he said.

Smith said most public assistance generally goes through federal programs and the Stafford Act.

Unfortunately for Hancock County and the cities of Bay St. Louis and Waveland, the Stafford Act has been one of the biggest hindrances in rebuilding local infrastructure. Many public projects have either not been approved or not fully-funded because of FEMA's duty to comply with the often critized Stafford Act.

In the case of the jail, FEMA will not fund the county for rebuilding a new jail because of disagreements about damage. The Bay-Waveland School Board has also had a nightmare with historical and elevation challenges in rebuilding its devastated schools.

Pullman said a little more help from the state would go a long way.

Compretta agreed.

"The needs of the county and cities should be looked at," he said.

A letter from the Steps Coalition--which represents more than 25 Gulf Coast Clergymen--urged MDA to use some of the money for low income housing.

"Given the housing crisis on the Gulf Coast, the diversion of funding from housing our community members in greatest need, including many elderly and disabled residents, to expanding the Port of Gulfport is unconscionable," the letter said.

"The Port of Gulfport is fortunately well on the road to recovery, and by its own data had by 2006 received 66 percent of the cargo it handled in 2005. In contrast, our 17,000 displaced Mississippi households in FEMA trailers are not yet 1percent of the way towards a permanent recovery. The Port of Gulfport sustained $50 million in damages; therefore we do not understand why the MDA is planning to provide twelve times the funding the Port of Gulfport originally requested when so many Mississippians are without housing. It is with this understanding that we have come together to ask that the Governor's Office desist in its plans to shift $600 million dollars from money earlier promised for housing reconstruction to a new project to expand the Port of Gulfport. We believe the diversion of funds from housing is a great injustice that will cause serious hardship for many of our brothers and sisters, including the poorest members of our community, who are still struggling to rebuild their homes and lives shattered in the storm.

Sanford said MDA is only trying to fulfill the original plan. She said local governments are receiving tremendous consideration and she pointed to nearly $300 million in CDBG funds which have been allocated for infrastructure.

She said the comment period was intended so that people and organizations could suggest ways of using the remainder of the funds. She said 99 percent of the request have to do with providing housing and assistance for renters. She said her office has received about 1,200 comments as well as a petition signed by 750 people.
"Everyone has ideas and they are good ideas she said."

© Copyright 2007 Bay St. Louis Newspapers, Inc.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......