Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Lawmakers Seek to Delay Flood Insurance Law

Manchin, McKinley Now Push Against Measure They Voted For

January 19, 2014

WHEELING — For Tom and Norma Dorsch, life on Wheeling Island means looking out the back door to see the downtown lights shimmering on the Ohio River, and knowing a relaxing evening on the water is......

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Jan-19-14 6:13 PM

Delaying it does nothing.....idiots. FIX IT AND NEXT TIME READ THE BILL

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 3:52 PM

jshep, What is the evidence that these displaced home owners would relocate to a different "taxing" area? Would they also be losing a job, family...

ShempH, The NFIP is limited to $250,000 per policy if you want more coverage you have to get a policy on the secondary insurance market (lloyds of London for example). Even the goberment is limiting the exposure.

The problem with the NFIP is the goberment has 2,500 employees that are paid from the premiums even though the private insurance market does ALL the policies and claims for a percentage of the premium. The goberment just "backs" the insurance, surprisingly (not really) that became the tax payer!

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 1:43 PM

Kudos to U.S. Representative Tom Marino for introducing legislation aimed at completely repealing all facets of the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012.

I realize that by saying this I may have already lost more than 75 percent of the readers who began perusing this letter both those who think, "Marino? Who cares?" but especially, "Flood insurance... pppfffttt... that doesn't affect me."

However, I am especially writing to those of you who think Biggert-Waters isn't relevant to you. Granted, some of us are more deeply and personally affected by this legislation than others. However, I would like to present just a few ways that it does impact you, and why you need to contact your elected officials to pledge support for this bipartisan effort.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 1:42 PM

First, the instantaneous loss in property values that so many of us experienced when the government essentially 're-wrote the books' on flood insurance lowers the tax base for virtually every municipality in the region. Since I doubt that local governments will simply absorb the losses of 5, 20 or even 50 percent of their tax base, everyone else's property taxes will increase proportionately in order to maintain local services and programs.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 1:42 PM

Second, the incredible increases that some are experiencing in flood insurance premiums based on how the government now calculates them has the real potential of seeing many properties being foreclosed upon, abandoned or left run-down. This, again, affects every other adjoining property and neighborhood. And, that doesn't even address the human suffering by many in our area as well as the toll that will be experienced by local social service agencies, churches and groups who attempt to assist the most directly affected individuals.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 1:41 PM

Lastly, Biggert-Waters essentially amounted to the legalized seizure by the government of billions and billions of dollars of assets held by private individuals and businesses all across the United States. And, although virtually everyone in Congress voted for it initially, no one seemingly paused to realize the implications. As Rep. Marino recently said, "When Biggert-Waters was enacted, no one anticipated rates would increase so drastically." Virtually no one was informed of the act and how it would impact them, directly or indirectly. Even one of the original authors has gone pubic acknowledging this law was a mistake and had been prematurely enacted.

Get behind this grassroots effort and contact your local state and federal officials to support the repeal of this bill.

Joseph S. Miller

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 1:23 PM

@ dyingov, I know. Fire Ins. for my home is $640 a year. If I was buying Flood Ins it would be $2,800 plus. Last fall I was watching the news and they were interviewing a guy who's home was lost during Sandy. His home was valued at nearly $750,000 an it was insured for only $250,000. He wanted the taxpayers to bail him out, absolutely not. I think most of us insure our homes for the replacement value, I know I do, and those of us still with a mortgage are required to do so.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 12:14 PM

shemph, Do some research on the risk in the flood plain and compare it to the risk of house fire and you will see that a few hundred for flood insurance is not even in the ball park! The problem with flood insurance is only 5 million policies exist and generally in the flood plain.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 10:45 AM

Completely agree Ragnar, how can anyone disagree. Although the insurance rates should be consistent with the valve of the home. Homes with a value in the one hundred thousand dollar range should not have rates much more then a few hundred dollars.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 10:31 AM

California has earthquakes, Florida has hurricanes, .... Wheeling Islands has floods about as often as a Democrat gets elected to high office.


1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 10:15 AM

I have lived in a floood zone all my life from Island to present residence and have never filed a claim. You take furnace and hw tanks out and wash water down as it goes down NEVER wait till its gone down you will have a giant problem then also squegee is you best friend in flood clean up I grew up on the river have been through many but we never filed claim got fema fed help anything and the abuse of such that took place last floods Sept 04 Jan 05 were outrageous and lots of fraud very few got caught you have to be proactive during a flood just ask the people who were named in story

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 1:24 AM

Of course. Isn't it an election yr?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-14 12:23 AM

Your insurance rates should reflect YOUR risk. Period.

No person should be subsidized in ANY area-be it flood, fire, natural disaster, health, auto, etc.

No American should have their insurance rates lowered by raising the rates of another American.

You pay for your risk or you gamble and do without AND you lose the right to demand that taxpayers pay for your damage later on.

The gravy train has left the station. It is high time that American citizens start to pay their own way and stop expecting others to subsidize their life choices.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 13 of 13 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.

I am looking for: