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......

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......

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. 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......