Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

senate Bill S. 1182

Should the National Flood Insurance Program be Reauthorized Through November?

Argument in favor

There is broad consensus that the NFIP is poorly run, and Congress’s constant short-term reauthorizations of the program without addressing its managerial woes is unsustainable. This amendment puts pressure on the current Congress to address the NFIP’s issues this year.

Jugbo's Opinion
···
07/24/2018
Only if reconstruction of Puerto Rico is guaranteed.
Like (122)
Follow
Share
Michael 's Opinion
···
07/24/2018
Revise the program to exclude homes of new owners that intentionally move to flood zones. Revise the amount of claims a homeowner can make to 1. After payout, they must move. Wind down the program and integrate into FEMA as an emergency program for non flood zones only. If you move to a flood zone intentionally, you should buy private insurance.
Like (54)
Follow
Share
···
07/31/2018
The effects of climate change are only going to worsen over time, and floods are likely to increase in many areas of our country. The federal flood insurance program developed a resource for recovery from flood damage that is kind of an early form of public-private partnership between the federal government as the insurer, working through private insurers who wrote and manage the policies. The insurance industry benefits by not suffering losses to its profits, the property owners in flood plain areas benefit by having their properties adequately covered, and the federal government (our tax money) foots the bill. Human behavior being what it is, gaming a system like this is one of the federal government’s constant plagues. The details are better understood by reading this short but informative Wikipedia article — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Flood_Insurance_Program. Because of the increasing demands on the program, legislators have been working to find ways to better control costs and to refocus its program to eliminate abuse by corporate and rental property owners rebuilding in the the same sites after floods. The short-term renewals of the program are intended to allow for reshaping homeowner, rental owner and state and local government behaviors to avoid rebuilding in areas that will likely flood again, and hopefully decrease the demand on and misuse of the program. I would recommend renewing this program for the next term if the renewal application sufficiently specifies that there has been adequate progress toward such changes. IMHO, this program and the handling of it are a good example of appropriate oversight and management. Not perfect, by any means, but overall effective.
Like (11)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

The Senate’s reauthorization of NFIP until January 2019 allows lawmakers more time to develop sound proposals for fixing the NFIP. A short-term extension to November 30 of this year is a political ploy to give the current Congress control over the NFIP’s future.

Christine's Opinion
···
07/24/2018
The only thing this congress needs to reform is itself.
Like (83)
Follow
Share
Rachel's Opinion
···
07/25/2018
I don’t trust this Congress, would rather wait until the next Congress after the 2018 election. But it already passed, so let’s follow this and make sure it’s reformed properly enough to protect homeowners while not rewarding irresponsible developers who build in flood plains. Climate change risk must also be considered.
Like (35)
Follow
Share
Dicr's Opinion
···
07/24/2018
Anytime politicians “bundle” bills they are hiding things. If a bill can’t stand on its own merits it probably wasn’t any good in the first place. To say you have to capitulate your view to get others to vote in favor of something is wrong. Ignoring climate change did nothing to help flooding. Insurance companies could do so much more to cover consumers, lobbying alone diverts millions from actually doing just that.
Like (9)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • EnactedJuly 31st, 2018
    The President signed this bill into law
  • The house Passed July 25th, 2018
    Roll Call Vote 366 Yea / 52 Nay
  • The senate Passed August 3rd, 2017
    Passed by Voice Vote
      senate Committees
      Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
    IntroducedMay 18th, 2017

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!

Bill Activity

  • action
    Introduced in Senate
  • referral
    Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  • action
    Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent.
  • action
    Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent.
  • vote
    Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
  • action
    Message on Senate action sent to the House.
  • action
    Received in the House.
  • action
    Held at the desk.
  • action
    Mr. Hensarling moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
  • action
    Considered under suspension of the rules.
  • action
    DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 1182.
  • action
    At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
  • action
    Considered as unfinished business.
  • vote
    On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 366 - 52 (Roll no. 373).
  • action
    Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
  • action
    The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
  • action
    Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendments to Senate bill.
  • action
    Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent.
  • action
    Motion by Senator McConnell to concur in the House amendments to S. 1182 made in Senate.
  • action
    Cloture motion on the motion to concur in the House amendments to S. 1182 presented in Senate.
  • action
    Motion by Senator McConnell to concur in the House amendment to the text of S. 1182 with an amendment (SA 3628) made in Senate.
  • action
    Motion by Senator McConnell to refer to Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs the House message to accompany S. 1182 with instructions to report back forthwith with the following amendment (SA 3630) made in Senate.
  • action
    Considered by Senate (Message from the House considered).
  • action
    Cloture motion on the motion to concur in the House amendments to S.1182 withdrawn by unanimous consent in Senate.
  • action
    Motion by Senator McConnell to refer to Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs the House message to accompany S. 1182 with instructions to report back forthwith with the following amendment (SA 3630) withdrawn in Senate.
  • action
    Motion by Senator McConnell to concur in the House amendment to the text of S. 1182 with an amendment (SA 3628) withdrawn in Senate.
  • vote
    Senate agreed to the House amendments to S. 1182 by Yea-Nay Vote. 86 - 12. Record Vote Number: 173.
  • action
    Message on Senate action sent to the House.
  • topresident
    Presented to President.
  • signed
    Signed by President.
  • enacted
    Became Public Law No: 115-225.

bill Progress


  • EnactedJuly 31st, 2018
    The President signed this bill into law
  • The house Passed July 25th, 2018
    Roll Call Vote 366 Yea / 52 Nay
  • The senate Passed August 3rd, 2017
    Passed by Voice Vote
      senate Committees
      Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
    IntroducedMay 18th, 2017

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!
    Only if reconstruction of Puerto Rico is guaranteed.
    Like (122)
    Follow
    Share
    The only thing this congress needs to reform is itself.
    Like (83)
    Follow
    Share
    Revise the program to exclude homes of new owners that intentionally move to flood zones. Revise the amount of claims a homeowner can make to 1. After payout, they must move. Wind down the program and integrate into FEMA as an emergency program for non flood zones only. If you move to a flood zone intentionally, you should buy private insurance.
    Like (54)
    Follow
    Share
    I don’t trust this Congress, would rather wait until the next Congress after the 2018 election. But it already passed, so let’s follow this and make sure it’s reformed properly enough to protect homeowners while not rewarding irresponsible developers who build in flood plains. Climate change risk must also be considered.
    Like (35)
    Follow
    Share
    This Program needs to be stopped. Our National Government is not an insurance program. If you want to live in a floodplain, fine with me, but shouldn't have to rebuild your new home.
    Like (21)
    Follow
    Share
    The effects of climate change are only going to worsen over time, and floods are likely to increase in many areas of our country. The federal flood insurance program developed a resource for recovery from flood damage that is kind of an early form of public-private partnership between the federal government as the insurer, working through private insurers who wrote and manage the policies. The insurance industry benefits by not suffering losses to its profits, the property owners in flood plain areas benefit by having their properties adequately covered, and the federal government (our tax money) foots the bill. Human behavior being what it is, gaming a system like this is one of the federal government’s constant plagues. The details are better understood by reading this short but informative Wikipedia article — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Flood_Insurance_Program. Because of the increasing demands on the program, legislators have been working to find ways to better control costs and to refocus its program to eliminate abuse by corporate and rental property owners rebuilding in the the same sites after floods. The short-term renewals of the program are intended to allow for reshaping homeowner, rental owner and state and local government behaviors to avoid rebuilding in areas that will likely flood again, and hopefully decrease the demand on and misuse of the program. I would recommend renewing this program for the next term if the renewal application sufficiently specifies that there has been adequate progress toward such changes. IMHO, this program and the handling of it are a good example of appropriate oversight and management. Not perfect, by any means, but overall effective.
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    Anytime politicians “bundle” bills they are hiding things. If a bill can’t stand on its own merits it probably wasn’t any good in the first place. To say you have to capitulate your view to get others to vote in favor of something is wrong. Ignoring climate change did nothing to help flooding. Insurance companies could do so much more to cover consumers, lobbying alone diverts millions from actually doing just that.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    There is broad consensus that the NFIP is poorly run, and Congress’s constant short-term reauthorizations of the program without addressing its managerial woes is unsustainable. This amendment puts pressure on the current Congress to address the NFIP’s issues this year.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    No government funding for flood insurance. Get the government out of the flood insurance business. You choose to live in a flood zone, fine. You made a stupid choice. Don’t ask me to pay for you to rebuild. The government shouldn’t be encouraging development on floodplains. This country is huge. Find somewhere else.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    This program incentives developers to build Realestate in high risk areas because they know tax payers will be sent the bill if something goes wrong
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    No, get the government out of the insurance business.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    National flood insurance is a great program to protect our citizens.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Republicans prove yet again that they are not worthy of the office they hold. They are more concerned with politics than providing a service that protects American Citizens. With regard to this legislation, they are concerned that if they approve the extension now, they will not have an opportunity to mess with it next year and unethically and immorally remove all the Citizen protections and dismantle the legislation to provide more to Corporations and the 1%. In essence, Republicans are certain they will not control the house or the senate after the 2018 election, and therefore, they want to manipulate every thing they can before they lose big and all power. Republicans are not for The People, They are for only 1% and Corporations. Make America Great Again. Vote out Republicans in 2018. Save America.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    👍🏻FLOOD INSURANCE EXTENSION 👍🏻 I support the passage of legislation that has been amended from its original form to extend the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which is currently set to expire on July 31, 2018, through November 30, 2018. It wouldn’t reform the program — it's only a short-term extension. The November 30 extension is shorter than the extension through January 2019 that the Senate approved on June 28, 2018 in its version of the Farm Bill. By offering a shorter extension period for the NFIP, this amendment gives the current Congress time to enact changes to the NFIP to make it more efficient. If the NFIP were to be extended through January 2019 as the Senate has approved, the NFIP’s long-term fate would be left to the 116th Congress. There is broad consensus that the NFIP is poorly run, and Congress’s constant short-term reauthorizations of the program without addressing its managerial woes is unsustainable. This amendment puts pressure on the current Congress to address the NFIP’s issues this year. 7*24*18 ..........
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    I’m in support of reauthorizing it.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Congress needs to quit tearing sh*t down. They’ve not even properly addressed PR from last year & its storm season again.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Official title: a bill to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint commemorative coins for what? WTF????
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Wait for new Congress.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Yup! Hopefully a REAL Congress can fix it!!
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    It is a poorly written document that Grant's insurance company's huge loopholes. The sooner dead the better.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE