Shelley Capito

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry).

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), a member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to Mr. Gilchrest from Maryland.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Barrett).

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, floods are amongst the most frequent and costly national disasters in terms of human hardship and economic loss. In fact, 75 percent of Federal disaster declarations are related to flooding. Before I discuss the merits of the legislation, I would like to talk briefly about the process that is being considered. We are debating a huge expansion of an already struggling existing Federal program, and yet we have not been able to have our amendments out on the floor to have an open and frank discussion about this. I would like to accept the chairman's offer to continue to work on the amendments that were not allowed to be offered, and I hope that we can see democracy being served by letting everybody's voice be heard. In 1968, Congress established the National Flood Insurance Program, NFIP. The program is a partnership between the Federal Government and participating communities. If a community adopts and enforces a floodplain management ordinance to reduce future flood risk to new construction, the Federal Government will make flood insurance available to that community. Today, NFIP is the largest single-line property insurer in the Nation, serving nearly 20,000 communities and providing flood insurance coverage for 5.4 million consumers. Mr. Chairman, recent events have underscored the need to reform and modernize certain aspects of the program. While the NFIP is designed to be actuarially sound, it does not collect sufficient premiums to build up reserves for unexpected disasters. Due to the claims resulting from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the NFIP was forced to borrow $7.6 billion from the Treasury, an amount it estimates it will never be able to repay. Consequently, NFIP sits on the GAO's High-Risk Programs list, which recommends increased congressional oversight. Additionally, the 2005 storms shed light on the problem of outdated flood maps, resulting in many homeowners in the gulf region being unaware that their homes were located in floodplains. To address these and other concerns in 2006, the House overwhelmingly passed flood insurance reform legislation. Earlier this year, Chairman Frank and Representative Judy Biggert introduced legislation identical to that bipartisan bill. That bill includes many reforms, including the phasing in of actuarial rates, but unfortunately, the flood insurance bill that the majority chose to move out of the Financial Services Committee was amended to incorporate legislation offered by the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) which expands the NFIP to include coverage for wind events. Mr. Chairman, no Member of this House was more personally affected by the 2005 hurricanes than Congressman Taylor. I do not, and no one questions his sincerity or his commitment to assisting those who have lost everything they owned in these storms. While I share his concern over the rising costs and outright unavailability of homeowners' wind coverage in some areas, I have three principal objections to linking wind insurance to the reform of the National Flood Insurance Program. First, expanding the program increases liabilities for taxpayers while decreasing options for customers or consumers. Properties located along the eastern seaboard and gulf coast represent $19 trillion of insured value. Shifting the risk on even a portion of these properties to the troubled NFIP could expose taxpayers to massive losses. The fact is that insurance will choose not to engage a competitor that does not pay taxes, has subsidized borrowing costs, and is not required to build a reserve surplus and is protected from most lawsuits, State regulation and enforcement. Second, adding wind coverage to the NFIP will exacerbate the program's well-documented administrative problems. Both the Department of Homeland Security and GAO have criticized the NFIP for being understaffed, not having adequate flood maps and not collecting sufficient information on wind payments when claims were submitted for flood damage. Expanding the portfolio further before much-needed reforms are in place is premature. Third, no consensus yet exists about the necessity or desirability of creating a Federal wind insurance program. In testimony before our committee, representatives of flood management groups, the insurance industry, environmental organizations, Treasury and FEMA all expressed agreement that a comprehensive study of the proposed wind insurance mandate should first be commissioned to provide Congress with a better understanding of the possible implications this expansion could have for consumers, NFIP and the market. Mr. Chairman, we must not let the desire to meet every perceived problem with a new Government program drive us towards premature actions that yield unwanted consequences. The NFIP's mission should not be expanded, exposing taxpayers to massive new risks, until reforms are in place and adequate study has been conducted. In addition to the above reservations, I have serious concerns with the effect the addition of wind coverage will have on communities that are now relying on NFIP. This program is already financially unstable, yet we are about to add $19 trillion of risk. Despite this fiscal instability, States like West Virginia, that I represent, will still rely on the program to provide assistance in the case of serious flooding. There have not been major problems this year, thankfully, but as recently as 2001, FEMA has declared counties in my State national disasters due to flooding and provided $17 million in assistance. These are serious needs across the Nation for the flood insurance program. We should be modernizing NFIP so it can become financially stable. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. I yield 4 minutes to one of the original authors of the bill that was presented initially to this Congress, the gentlewoman from Illinois, Representative Judy Biggert.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the representative from Illinois (Mr. Roskam), a member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Ginny Brown-Waite).

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remaining time to close to someone who has lived and breathed this issue for many, many years, an expert in the area, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker).

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the chairman for working with the manager's amendment with Members of our side. I appreciate his efforts as always. I yield 2 minutes in particular to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).

Mrs. CAPITO. I yield my remaining time to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam).

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In listening to the debate over this amendment, my question becomes, if we move forward and make wind part of one of the insurable events under this program, and then we study, through the gentlelady's amendment, the effect this has on State insurance, and we find out, after it's already been put into effect, that it's too costly or it's damaging the insurability at the State level and other issues, what are we going to do then? This is where it goes to my argument in the beginning that we're really entering into this prematurely, because we have so many unanswered questions. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).

Mrs. CAPITO. Well, my question would be, if that's available to FEMA now to be able to more accurately predict the ebb and flow of water across the United States and the coastal regions, why isn't that being used by FEMA right now, if that's available? Is it statutorial?

Mrs. CAPITO. Then going further from what you're saying, is what you're really saying changing the entire FEMA modeling perspective, or putting this on top of what is already existing at FEMA?

Mrs. CAPITO. Thank you. I have a lot of questions about the answer to the question I just asked; but at this point, I will yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I take heed to the gentleman's words from Michigan, and I tried to sort of recorrect my initial assumption that they would oppose the amendment. So I apologize for that. Mr. Chairman, I would like to place in the Record letters from folks who do oppose the bill in general because of the wind addition. That would be: Friends of the Earth, National Wildlife Federation, U.S. Public Interest Group, America Insurance Association, Property Casualty Insurers, Financial Services Roundtable, Consumer Federation of America, Reinsurance Association of America. September 26, 2007. Re: Support For the Blumenauer-Gilchrest Global Warming Amendment to H.R. 3121 and opposition to provisions expanding the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to include wind coverage Dear Representative: We write to express our support for the Blumenauer-Gilchrest Global Warming Amendment to the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act, H.R. 3121. This amendment would require that the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, consider the impacts of global warming on flood risks as it administers the National Flood Insurance Program, NFIP, Map Modernization Program. To adjust to the reality of global warming, Congress must require that the NFIP floodplain maps incorporate the best available climate science. Accurate floodplain maps will ensure that citizens are aware of the flood risks in their community and help prevent the loss of human life, property, and important wildlife habitat as we face more global warming-powered weather events. Section 22 of H.R. 3121 provides much needed guidelines and ongoing mapping support for FEMA's map modernization effort. Flood insurance maps are the basic planning documents for the NFIP and provide a foundation for planning in developing communities. According to the Congressional Research Service, however, over 75 percent of the nation's 100,000 flood maps are at least 10 years old. Currently, H.R. 3121 fails to require FEMA to consider modern climate science when mapping floodplains. Under current methodologies, many of FEMA' s maps are already out of date and inaccurate when they are certified because they fail to take into account both critical new information beyond past flooding history, including the impacts of global warming. These outdated maps have resulted in more instances of storms with significantly greater flooding than predicted and give citizens a false sense of security that they will not be subject to flooding. This false sense of security is especially troubling as global warming's impacts become evident. Global warming will result in more flooding of coastal and riverine communities through intense hurricanes, reduced snow pack, and sea level rise. The Blumenauer-Gilchrest Amendment would ensure that the FEMA Director consider impacts of global warming on our nation's flood risks and the potential future impact of global warming on the intensity of storms, storm surge modeling, sea level rise, and increased hurricane activity. Considerable experience exists in these areas, and the Blumenauer Amendment would ensure that FEMA incorporates the best available climate science into its mapping effort. We strongly support this amendment. We urge Congress to oppose the multiperil, wind and flooding, insurance program in H.R. 3121, because it could overwhelm the NFIP, cost the taxpayers' billions, increase incentives to develop in hazard-prone and ecologically- sensitive coastal areas and floodplains, and place more lives, properties, and wildlife habitat at risk. We applaud Representative Taylor and other Members for raising the nation's awareness of the increasing risks associated with global warming-powered coastal storms. We are also sympathetic to citizens' desires to remove wind damage and flooding damage distinctions in homeowner's insurance policies in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma. Yet, we oppose adding a wind peril dimension to the NFIP because it would substantially undermine the program's already precarious financial position, would add greater risk and uncertainty especially for the taxpayers and the public, and would distract from the critical missions of the NFIP. Essentially, we must fix the NFIP before we expand it. Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma have already driven the NFIP into the most dire financial condition in its history, now with a virtually insurmountable U.S. Treasury debt of approximately $18 billion. H.R. 3121 would mandate that FEMA begin the sale of a new federal wind insurance (multiple peril including wind and flood) beginning on June 30, 2008, right before the 2008 Hurricane Season and almost immediately increasing the exposure of the U.S. taxpayers to potentially billions of dollars in new claims. The chances of exposure of a catastrophic storm could swamp the national flood insurance program and leave it crippled forever. The rates of coverage are also significantly greater than those provided by current flood insurance alone: $650,000 for residential structures and contents and $1.75 million for commercial properties and contents. These coverage caps expose the taxpayers to considerable liability. In fact, recent insurance industry estimates show that costs of storms like Hurricane Katrina that were in the $15 to $20 billion range for the NFIP currently, could be three to five times or more, if wind perils were also included. Such costs could potentially overwhelm the program and the costs to taxpayers could balloon to staggering levels. For these reasons, again, we support the Blumenauer- Gilchrest Global Warming Amendment, which will ensure that FEMA address the realities of global warming in its map modernization effort. We oppose the provisions within H.R. 3121 that expand the NFIP to include wind. These provisions threaten to overwhelm an already failing National Flood Insurance Program that needs substantial reforms to turn the corner on expanding flood risk and to accomplish its other purposes. Although many of the reforms contained within H.R. 3121 represent steps in the right direction, the proposed legislation will not go far enough in fixing the essentially bankrupt NFIP. Congress will have missed an historic opportunity to strengthen the NFIP if it passes this bill in its current form. Please see the attached overview of our additional concerns with the bill. Thank you for you attention to this matter. Sincerely, Erich Pica, Director of Domestic Programs, Friends of the Earth. Adam Kolton, Senior Director, Congressional & Federal Affairs, National Wildlife Federation. David Jenkins, Government Affairs Director, Republicans for Environmental Protection. Emily Figdor, Federal Global Warming Program Director, U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG).

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Maria Lorenson, Laura Smith, and Barbara Pichot who are being honored by the Girl Scouts Shawnee Division as the 2007 Women of Distinction. These three ladies are being honored for their career accomplishments and leadership that have made them role models for young women in their communities. The Girl Scouts Shawnee Council honors three women annually from the Eastern Panhandle. The first honoree, Maria Lorenson, is being recognized for her role as editor-in-chief with the Martinsburg Journal. She has received various awards and honors in her 11 years with the Martinsburg Journal from the West Virginia Press Association. Maria is credited for balancing her career with her role as a wife, mother, and community leader. Laura Smith of Morgan County is being honored for her many leadership roles in her community. She is currently the president of the Morgan County Board of Education. She has worked to promote the beauty of Morgan County through her work with Travel Berkeley Springs and as board member of George Washington Heritage Trail. She is also an active member of her church, St. Marks Episcopal Church. The final recipient of the 2007 Women of Distinction award is Barbara Pichot. At a time when many women were not entering the field of business, Barbara was a trailblazer and eventually became a partner in the accounting firm Cox, Nichols and Hollida until her retirement. She now dedicates herself to volunteer endeavors including Rotary, United Way, and is responsible for the development of Hospice of the Panhandle. It is an honor to represent these three outstanding women who serve as strong leaders and excellent role models for young women in their communities. Congratulations to Maria Lorenson, Laura Smith, and Barbara Pichot as the 2007 Women of Distinction.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the induction of Harry ``Moo'' Moore into the West Virginia University Athletic Hall of Fame. A standout on the men's basketball team, Moore joins a distinguished collection of student-athletes continuing West Virginia University's rich athletic tradition. Moore perfected his soft shooting touch by practicing in the dark on a basket outside his family's home. During his three seasons, Moore averaged seven points per game, leading the Mountaineers to a 60-20 record and a Southern Conference Championship in 1951. Impressively, his 84 percent free throw percentage still remains second on the all- time Mountaineer record books. After college Moore was drafted by the Syracuse Nationals of the National Basketball Association but opted to serve as a lieutenant in the Army infantry. Nonetheless, Moore continued to excel on the basketball court. In 1954 he was selected to play in the Armed Forces Pan Am Games in Mexico and the International Games in Germany. Although his playing days are long over, Moore's legacy on the court continues to grow. The State of West Virginia congratulates ``Moo'' and the rest of the 2007 Hall of Fame inductees.