GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Dems seeking retroactive coverage for hurricane victims

• 13849
  

  Will we first require those that would receive the benefits from an insurance policy to pay the premiums from the beginning of the Federal Flood Insurance program, or from when the house was built, whichever came last? Gee, if I can buy my insurance retroactively after I find that I need it, the whole concept of insurance is void.

  GovExec.com reader Posted December 12, 2005 1:52 PM
• 13837
  

  I am so tired of the government wanting to take everyone's losses at my expense that it is time to stop the insanity.

  If the people did not have the sense to get flood insurance when they lived below a levee they should lose their financial assets, not be given mine or my grandchildren's. Get rid of government guarantees on most things and we would see much better decision-making by the people. Just look at the cry of the elderly about having so many choices in Medicare for drugs. They do not want choices and they want the cost to go to others.

  Get rid of SBA, student loans, agricultural subsidies, crop insurance, mortgage insurance, pension insurance, deposit insurance, the Commerce Department, the Energy Department, the Education Department, and on and on.

  America is strong because the citizens had the power to take risks to develop great returns. Government has changed that so that people can take stupid risks (like living under the levee without flood insurance and lenders would not require it so they got more loans with greater fees). The stupid risks divert money from potential actions that would provide value added to the country. Now the USA is subsidizing everyone and no one is developing value added goods and services that will maintain this country in the future.

  Expect the USA to fall in economic power to the likes of China, India, and other developing countries.

  Taxpayer Posted December 12, 2005 8:15 AM
• 13763
  

  When I owned a home in the near west suburbs of Chicago, in a little village named Westchester, I was required by my mortgage lender to buy flood insurance because my home was in a flood plain, according to the flood insurance map. Flood insurance, even in the minimum amounts available, is very expensive, costing in my case four times my annual homeowners' premium for far less coverage. I appealed and even had my own engineering study done, but to no avail. I had to purchase the stupid flood insurance despite there being a near zero probability of ever collecting a cent.

  So, I find it hard to believe that a city under sea level is not in a flood plain and thus homeowners are not required to buy flood insurance. Go figure.

  EPA Contracting Officer Posted December 6, 2005 4:53 PM
• 13651
  

  $200,000 isn't enough? We are talking about buying out people's mortgages and enough for them to avoid bankruptcy. People from New Orleans have a chance to build new lives elsewhere in the country. For those foolish enough to return to New Orleans, they should be left on their own. Just like the idiots who live along the southeastern U.S. coasts. No insurance unless they can afford it. I'm shocked the Democrats would consider this bill. Honestly, can't anyone see people are lining up lawyers to sue the federal government because the canals weren't tall or strong enough.

  Phil Posted November 30, 2005 8:48 PM
• 13642
  

  So, the only reason these people didn't have flood insurance is because the federal government told them they didn't need flood insurance, because they weren't in a flood-prone area. Then it turned out they were in a flood-prone area. Oooops. Obviously their fault for not buying insurance they were told they didn't need.

  I tried to add flood insurance to my rental policy, and the insurance company wouldn't let me! Said I wasn't in a flood plain. But of course if there's a flood, it's gonna end up my responsibility!

  GovExec.com reader Posted November 30, 2005 4:15 PM
• 13634
  

  This is yet another attempt by the Foggy Bottom Pork Specialists to set themselves up for the 2006 elections. When will they realize that the American taxpayer is carrying enough of a load? If people live in a city below sea level, or in an area that's prone to natural disasters and doesn't have insurance, it's their loss! We need more chlorine in the gene pool. Mac in Florida (I have adequate insurance!)

  GovExec.com reader Posted November 30, 2005 8:30 AM
• 13633
  

  I truly feel sympathy for those people that lost loved ones in all four 9/11 attacks. But why do I owe those same people more than 25 times my annual salary just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time? Those in the towers chose to work in New York, they chose to work in a building that had already been the target of at least one attack. In reality this is the same end result if they had run off the road in a single car accident and died as a result. What is the real difference?

  Same for New Orleans, I did not tell the citizens to live in a bowl. And now I'm expected to bail them out financially when the bowl did exactly what bowls are intended to do -- it filled up. New Orleans should be filled in and made into a barrier island. Make it a park with no fixed structures, then when it floods, no big loss and no loss of life or livelihood.

  GovExec.com reader Posted November 30, 2005 7:52 AM
• 13615
  

  Sure, give away some more of my money, while trying to take away my pension.

  Frustrated Fed Posted November 29, 2005 1:10 PM
• 13605
  

  Someone figured it would be cheaper to just give each (former) resident of N.O. $200,000 each, rather than rebuild the city.

  Brings to mind 9/11 - from CBS story in 2004:

  The government opened offices Friday for a new aid program that would give families of victims of the terrorist attacks an average of $1.65 million, a plan that some families say doesn't go far enough.

  "I think it's a disgrace," said Bill Doyle, whose 25-year-old son Joseph worked at Cantor Fitzgerald in the World Trade Center. He called the average compensation figure "incredibly low."

  Mac Posted November 29, 2005 9:42 AM