Especially unprepared
Homeowners insurance policies typically don’t cover flood damage, and most people living in Ian’s path across Florida didn’t have a separate flood insurance policy. Inland areas that experienced historic rainfall and catastrophic floodwaters were especially unprepared, according to a CNN analysis of FEMA flood insurance data.
Because usually the catastrophic flooding happens on the coasts, not inland.
In Seminole County, northeast of Orlando, more than 5,200 residential buildings have been damaged by the storm, primarily due to flooding, according to a county spokesperson. “We’ve never had anything to this nature,” said Jay Zembower, a Seminole County commissioner, calling the flooding “a 500-plus-year event of quick rainfall in a short window of time.”
But “a 500-plus-year event” doesn’t mean anything now, because The Climate Is Changing.
Congress could also pass additional disaster aid – like lawmakers did in the wake of previous major hurricanes, like Katrina, Sandy and Harvey. But it could take months or longer for the funding to be approved and for affected communities to receive it, Wright said.
Experts like Wright said that the widespread damage from Ian should be a wake-up call that far more homeowners around the US need to purchase flood insurance – even if they don’t own a waterfront property. That’s especially the case as climate change leads to stronger and more frequent storms.
Yes but at the same time, insurance isn’t magic. It’s not an infinite supply of money that will never disappear and will always be there if you just buy it. At some point the disasters are going to outrun the insurance companies and federal insurance.
I’m open to suggestions for how sane people can totally implement the wholesale political-economic restructuring that is necessary for civilization’s survival and to do it in the very narrow window of opportunity we have.
Same.
It makes very little sense to fix this problem with Federal aid, the moral hazard problem is enormous. Florida’s own climate change policy is Neanderthal, and the state’s propensity for paving and building over the wetlands that would normally have absorbed huge amounts of water is a major reason why the flooding is worsening. Hurricanes are a normal annual event. Florida homeowners don’t have flood coverage because it is expensive – it is expensive because actuaries aren’t ideological people, they just price risk.
You may as well offer Wisconsin Federal aid for snow clearing….
In my “I keep on trying to tell you voice” to people who say that making changes to reduce carbon is too expensive: “Umm-hmm, tell me more.”
Yup. Florida is basically doomed, all of it, so…
Inland flooding is not uncommon. When the hurricane slows after hitting the coast, the rainfall gets worse because the storm isn’t moving away. Perhaps Florida needs to start a state income tax so it can take care of itself. I’ve always been disturbed by the fact that People flock to Florida, especially to areas that will be flooded if not decimated in these storms, because there is no income tax, but then expect the rest of the country to bail them out.
All too typical. Taxes are the devil, now bail us out.
We were capable of major changes during WWII, but the concepts of both “wartime” and “emergency” have changed since then. Since Vietnam, the United States has engaged in any number of wars while pretending they weren’t, with little to no impact on the home front. In response to 911, Americans were told that if they didn’t go out shopping, the terrorists would win.
The damnable politicization of climate science has made a “wartime emergency” response impossible in the US and other juridictions heavily invested in fossil fuel production and export. We have brought about a wartime emergency through our ongoing civil war against the planet. Our supposed successes and conquests make our supply lines and safety ever more tenuous. It’s a war on all fronts, and the front lines are now our streets and homes. We have destroyed the village in order to save it while we were still living in it.
When I bought my first house in Oklahoma, it had a small creek in a very deep valley running through the backyard. I was required to obtain flood insurance before I could get any sort of loan. The creek never flooded, even though one time we evacuated because it looked certain it would.
How is it people who are in an area that has regular hurricanes are able to not have flood insurance?
There is one thing the Federal govt can do to move the process of making sane decisions along:
Change Federal Disaster Aid plans so that they do not incentivize rebuilding.
Right now, if your home is wiped out in a storm, you can get a modest payout if you relocate, or a “made whole” payment if you re-build. Most folks can’t take the hit, so they choose to rebuild. So the first step is obvious–if you live in a disaster-prone area, and would qualify for aid, you can get the same payout if you relocate to a lower-risk area as if you were rebuilding. If someone relocates, the original property is turned over to the federal government, and over time can be put to use in environmental restoration projects.
Of course, step two would be then actually making the relocation payouts higher and requiring rebuilding payouts to have insurance through the Fed. This would obviously be more controversial and fought tooth-and-nail, but the first step, at least, could be pushed forward as a ‘freedom of choice’ measure, which language would help it sell to moderates who still balk at outright federal mandates.
Step three, BTW, would be to put an actual cap on disaster aid. Change the law so that if someone takes federal aid this time, and they choose to rebuild, the property is no longer eligible for federal aid in the future.
You mean like they did with welfare? With a five year lifetime limit? But then, welfare goes to the poor. A lot of the disaster aid ends up in the pockets of the wealthy. While neither of them can sleep under the bridges over the Thames (especially not if they live in Florida), one of them can manage to get a full rebuild of their mansion everytime it goes underwater.
And then there’s the masses of people that rent…their house is gone, but someone else gets the money.
What I don’t know is how insurance companies get away with offering you “insurance” that doesn’t cover the risks that properties are inherently subject to. Whether you buy an “all risks” policy that has a million exclusions, or a limited risks policy, which excludes all the same things, what you are buying is woefully short of what you’d naturally think would be covered by insurance. Makes me wonder about what ordinary homeowners get for their insurance money. Everything you’d expect would be covered … isn’t.
They probably get away with it via lobbying. Private enterprise!