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

Out of control

January 5, 2014

The recently passed Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act is just another example of a government out of control....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Jan-05-14 10:41 AM

That’s why I have to keep making it.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 9:52 AM

If we had a free market society, insurance rates would be based upon the risk incurred and competition from other insurance companies. Since we’re moving ever more into a society where people aren’t held accountable for their personal choices and the rest of us are required to pay for the consequences of those choices, this legislation shouldn’t have happened.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 9:48 AM

CMREEDER Please wake up...the days of comments of "those*****Republicans," or "those*****Democrats" are over. IT IS ALLLLLL OF THEM!!!! This was voted for by ALLLLLL of them (or most) Republican and Democrat. I don't care if they Republican, Democrat, Independent, Green, Libertarian, Communist....whatever. I am changing to independent ASAP. I do not want to be associated w/ any party

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 9:31 AM

to fromtheport I am susquehannaretriever's wife......SHAME ON YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!! you are a nasty judgmental person to make such comments. We knew we were in a flood zone when we bought our home. Last year we paid $756 premium. This year we were given one quote at over $10,500!!!!!!!! THIS IS A COST PER YEAR (and less than one month to pay)!!!!! I have no problem paying for a FAIR premium but what the government is doing is much worse than the taxes you pay out of your paycheck you are complaining about. We have had one claim in 24 YEARS of living here (a furnace and hot water heater). The government is STEALING our home. If you can not comprehend this ..... DO SOME RESEARCH SO YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE YOU MAKE SUCH NASTY COMMENTS. YOU WISH WE LOSE OUR HOME!!!?? WHAT KIND OF PERSON ARE YOU?!!! OBVIOUSLY NOT A GOOD HEARTED PERSON. If I were your family I would be ASHAMED of you!!!!! I am not a person who normally writes comments but you..REALLY??????!!!!!

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 9:30 AM

After reading the posts, the government is not the only one out of control. So Rep. Marino admits he voted yes for something he did not read after taking an oath when he was elected that he would read all bills that come his way for a vote. Like all the other Republicans who were elected with him.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 9:17 AM

my last weeks paycheck $1100 came out in taxes and i am sick of it! fromtheport---

I am glad you earn enough so they take that much out in taxes. WOW I don't even earn that much in a month.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 8:52 AM

No everyone there was no study done; FEMA (Federal Enemies of Many AMericans) rushed this into practice. Rep. Marino did state this. Also George Kasimos, a person from NJ who drove in for the meeting yesterday, stated that a large percentage of the premiums go to pay administrative costs, NOT to the actual fund for floods. Something is wrong here, this law was poorly written, not studied, and rushed into practice with no consideration of those being effected. Oh and fromtheport...hope you don't go to church, roof might fall in with your attitudes, LOL.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 8:49 AM

For too long, taxpayers have subsidized living in dangerous areas.

It is time to restore the costs to the risks.

But, to do so overnight, is equally wrong.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 8:17 AM

@Capricorn1 - I found an article on Property Casualty 360 dated 09/18/13 that states "The administrator for the Federal Emergency Management Agency said it will take up to two years for a study on affordability issues related to the National Flood Insurance Program to be completed."

So, the bill was passed but the study wasn't done because it would take 2 years (?)

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 8:14 AM

OK, there is something wrong with that risk assessment map on Floodsmart dot gov. I entered my address, and it says "low to moderate risk". Rates are $129-$460 for building and contents.

One thing, FEMA. I live on a mountain with no waterways around me. To be blunt, if my home gets flooded by the Susquehanna, the entire valley would be gone.

As JabbaTheHutt said, there better be an ark involved because we'd all need it.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 7:25 AM

susquehannaretriever, did Marino state why the affordability study wasn't done BEFORE passing this Act instead of being directed to do one as part of the Act? All of this could have been avoided if they did the study first, which btw still hasn't been done.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 7:12 AM

Spike not disagreeing with you, but at this point anyone that is willing to get this repealed, or delayed to give some people some breathing room, is ok w/ us. I brought this up to Tom Marino at the JSH meeting, i.e. why the bill wasn't read and he became angry. I think he did read it but was not aware or did not think it would raise these rates like this. However he is behind appealing this or at the very lease delaying the rate increases, whether it's because of all the outraged, scared and angry constituents or because it's wrong. SO no I am not giving him or any others a pass. But people need help now and if we continue to just scream at each other and not attempt to fix this congressional mess, they are not going to get help.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 7:01 AM

There is an index to all proposed legislation. Sorry, the folks who voted don't get a pass. I'll say it again. There are a boatload of Congressmen and a bigger boatload of aides. 500+ pages is not an insurmountable task. If you don't like to read and don't trust anyone to read for you, don't "apply" for a job in Congress. I guess re-election work, photo-ops, parties and working 1/2 days is difficult. Ever heard of sitting down with a book? Stop buying excuses. If we made these errors we would be or would have been unemployed.

9 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 7:00 AM

shhhhhh MIIIIKE **** just having some fun w/ the #*@hole :)

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 6:19 AM

susquehannaretriever-"I agree w/ the writer"

????? What?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 5:53 AM

I tried the FEMA risk assessment thing and ran some address from over here in the Borough of SW, even put in one from way up the hill on 8th Ave. All the addresses I tried from up here on the hill came back as moderate to low. I'm thinking dude, if we flood way up here, then you'd better hope there's an ark.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 3:16 AM

@z39 we dont have to trade just hire on with the oil industry and work there for a couple years. @capicorn Your the exact type of person that will cry and ask for a handout when your place gets flooded. The whole time you will cry when you have to pay the true cost of living there I dont care if it has never been flooded. Listen there are plenty of places in kansas that Never had a tornado, that doesnt mean you at low risk because it never happened.

0 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 2:49 AM

Fromtheport, before calling everyone that lives on high risk properties stupid, you may want to do some research into the FEMA mapping process and the major errors that have been found nationwide as a result of FEMA spending millions of dollars to digitize these maps using information that was decades old. I recently found out that I live on a high risk property that has been here over 100 years and has NEVER had any type of flooding since my grandparents built the home. I live in the northern end of the city above Grampian on a hill and if that is considered high risk, then every property south of me must be high risk, which is most of the city. So do you also feel I am stupid and should lose my home?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 2:42 AM

fromtheport, how about we trade jobs if you don't want that much taken out of your paycheck? I wouldn't mind having $1100 come out of my paycheck.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 2:06 AM

@susqhuehannariver I do not enjoy others misery, infact I hope others do good a wish nothing but the best, I just got tired of seeing my tax dollars going to other people's stupidity and costing me money, my last weeks paycheck $1100 came out in taxes and i am sick of it! That was for 1 WEEK! Now you cant tell me that a little bit of that money isnt going to these losers to cover their loss. Im sick of it so i hope all these people lose their houses they get knocked down or bought up by people who can afford it and stop taking money from me.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 1:41 AM

yes z3932z that may be true. Why is that? I agree w/ the writer that this is probably so FEMA (Federal Enemies of Many Americans) can sell more policies to make up for their incompetent, inept handling of the BILLIONS (yes w/ a B) of dollars they have wasted. It's the same old government mantra- "give me more money so that I can wastefully spend it." Typical!

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 1:32 AM

"Every property we put in was listed as high risk or moderate to low risk. At no time was there a property listed lower than moderate to low risk. " That's because there is no rating lower than 'moderate to low'.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 1:25 AM

All I can say to that fromtheport is that if that happens, I hope they tax the*****out of your property to make up for Mr. Smead's lost taxes. Sound's like you are the type that enjoys other's misery

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-05-14 1:08 AM

Mr. Smead if you are in a flood zone I can only hope you lose your home as it is the only fair way to not make taxpayers responsible for your mistakes.

1 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 24 of 24 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web