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

Stop FEMA now

January 26, 2014

The passage and implementation of this act is one of the most outrageous and unfair acts that any government representatives have ever passed....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(39)

susquehannaretriever

Jan-31-14 5:46 AM

Concerned about flood insurance? Interested in FACTS NOT conjecture,rumor,etc. Join us on stopfemanow dot com. Concerned homeowners fighting for whats right, against astronomical flood insurance premimums!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-28-14 2:56 PM

You couldn't find anywhere that I said the recession was over, nor where I said benefits shouldn't be extended, so you make up a different argument.

You are trying Liberal tactics 101 in this argument. Keep trying, though. You are looking like a fool.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LauriH

Jan-28-14 1:43 PM

Mr. Kerstetter you stated that benefits should not be extended indefinitely and only during recession correct? I am glad that you did not have someone like you, expressing their distaste with extending the unemployment benefits while you were collecting what was it 56 weeks? Thats is indefinite to some I am sure. The way you talk about all the jobs and your assumption that people can just up and move it gave me the impression that you think things are great for all. No, Mr. Kerstetter I do not have a reading comprehension problem at all thank you, I do however have a problem comprehending your thinking Mr. Kerstetter. You are the kind of person who if situations were reversed (flood ins.,unemployment)you would be complaining the loudest, but because you are not affected you feel the need to spew your wisdom on what other people could and should do.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-28-14 3:17 AM

LauriH-"Mr.Kerstetter, we may be out of the recession as you say but many of us are still trying to recover."

Apparently you have a severe reading comprehension problem. I never said we are out of the recession.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LauriH

Jan-27-14 7:27 PM

Mr.Kerstetter, we may be out of the recession as you say but many of us are still trying to recover.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jan-27-14 8:06 AM

Good letter, Linda! This is not shared cost and should not be. I can't afford the home by the brook, for precisely this reason. Nor can I afford the beach front property located by the ocean. I would love to own that type of property or rent that property, but the insurance is unbelievable and rightly so. You want to live there.....then pay the piper.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-27-14 3:40 AM

LauriH_"You dont want to extend unemployment to people, now your are coming down on people who are literally up against the wall with unaffordable flood insurance premiums."

I never said I was against extending Unemployment Benefits. That is your straw-man argument. Although I do believe they should not be extended indefinitely and only during recessions.

As far as flood insurance, it's a matter of risk and who pays for that risk. Now, you can say I'm not a compassionate person. That's your opinion and you have the right to it. But the fact remains that subsidizing the flood insurance program with federal tax dollars not only takes money out of my pocket, it takes money out of the pockets of lower income homeowners who chose to wait until they found a home outside of a flood zone.

I'm sorry that the Biggart-Waters act shifted the cost of flood insurance away from taxpayers and onto those who took the risk, but at some point subisdies have to end.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-27-14 3:28 AM

Capricorn1-"Mike, so how is my house high risk and my next door neighbor low risk?"

Cap, I can't possibly even take a guess since I have no idea where you live. Have you asked for an elevation certificate?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MECURY2

Jan-26-14 8:08 PM

First you have to stop people like Tom Marino from voting for these types of "acts"so don't blame FEMA, they just do what they're told! I know he has put a "bill" in place to reverse this problem but, when President Obama makes a mistake, here comes the right coming out "swinging"! Let's be fair about this "you got to be perfect to be a president, right"? I knew Tom as a kid growing up but, it's funny how politic can change a person.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LauriH

Jan-26-14 7:18 PM

cont. to them is move. Some can not afford that be real.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LauriH

Jan-26-14 7:17 PM

Mr.Kerstetter I see you visit all the letters and post your idiotic statements. You claim you are not a compassionless person but time and time you prove yourself to be just that. You dont want to extend unemployment to people, now your are coming down on people who are literally up against the wall with unaffordable flood insurance premiums. Your advice

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Jan-26-14 5:00 PM

Mike, so how is my house high risk and my next door neighbor low risk?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-26-14 2:44 PM

Cap, The point you are missing is that it isn't necessarily the fact that a flood occurred there or you had a claim as much as it is the possibility is there. The 973 bridge and several concrete bridges along Hoaglands Branch road near Hillsgrove had been standing there, some for 35 or more years, without ever being affected by a flood, that were taken out in 2011. I'd bet a lot of homes up the 'Sock haven't been touched by flood waters since Agnes in '72, if they were even touched then, were flooded out in 2011. The risk was there, all it took was the right conditions.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

Jan-26-14 2:01 PM

Linda- Remember the phrase is "deeply saddened", a standard term used by politicians when their opponent has an accident or suddenly dies from a heart attack.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Jan-26-14 12:58 PM

I have yet to see one homeowner affected by this propose anything other than continued support by taxpayers. -Erik

Turn it back over to the private sector where they are in a better position to perform individual risk analysis. Technology has changed since this was handled by the private sector and they are much better equipped to evaluate each property fairly going by past flooding history and damage sustained. That way it will be fair for everyone. If you own a property that has had a history of flooding and a lot of damage, then of course you will pay more.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Jan-26-14 12:53 PM

Remember, the Obama FEMA caused this, not the Biggert-Waters law.

FEMA is not doing what the law mandates.

Blame President Obama for continued lawlessness.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-26-14 11:40 AM

ScottyDogg-"We will either pay more in overall insurance cost or even greater property taxes when that part of the tax base is assessed fairly or removed entirely."

As I said below, great choice, isn't it? Pay their insurance premiums or pay their share of taxes.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ScottyDogg

Jan-26-14 11:08 AM

The sad thing is that those throwing stones at those who live where they do have no clue that some of those impacted where moved to the flood zone by updated FEMA mapping. Also, they simply do not realize that unless this issue gets addressed, it will have a big impact on those of us who do not live in such zones.

We will either pay more in overall insurance cost or even greater property taxes when that part of the tax base is assessed fairly or removed entirely.

Seeing some of the same people making their heartless comments here who make comments on other "political" type letters helps me understand why some of the liberal posters call those on the right heartless and uncaring.

I do not live anywhere near a flood zone and I understand that this is big government gone bad and those who oppose big government should be joining the chorus of "Stop FEMA Now" instead of making stupid comments like have been displayed here and on other letters on the subject.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-26-14 10:54 AM

Jeff's Wife, if you believe you are not in a high risk area (I fully believe you are, but...) isn't there a process whereby you can ask for a risk assessment?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-26-14 10:50 AM

Mim, you're going to have to direct me to it. I searched youtube for mim logue and nothing comes up.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-26-14 10:45 AM

Jeff, tell me how Paul Gerringer hall had water inside in 2011 but your house a few hundred feet away (on a level street) wasn't surrounded by water. The hall is built up a few feet from street level. You may not have had water in your house, but you know as well as I do, you are at high risk for flooding. You've known it for 25 years, and still live there. I knew I was on the fringe of the 500 year flood plain and I moved. You can throw insults around all you want, but the fact is you chose to live there, you chose to continue to live there, and now you want us to feel bad for you because you made a bad choice and the Flood Insurance administrators are knocking on your door looking to charge what they probably should have been charging all along for the risk involved.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

susquehannaretriever

Jan-26-14 10:29 AM

Mike; I am susquehannaretriever's wife. I usually do not post but I want to make something VERY CLEAR to you and others who DO NOT UNDERSTAND what "Stop FEMA NOW" is trying to do. We want FAIR AND AFFORDABLE premiums for our properties that are NOT.....NOT severe repetitive loss properties. It is not the fact that we live in a flood zone! It is the fact that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT is shooting these insurance premium from $1,000 to over $10,000 per year, payable in 1 month IN FULL or homeowners face FORECLOSURE! FEMA lied -- Congress did not do their due diligence, they DID NOT DO THEIR JOB! The point is - the new premiums were implemented WITHOUT the studies to back it up and without notice to homeowners. How does a home worth $80,000 end up with a YEARLY premium of $10,500 when there was only surface water in the basement?! One last point--I was told the subsidies (we were NOT told about) pd 2/3 of our annual premium--$756 (1/3) + $1512 (2/3) = $2268 annually -- NOT $10,

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Jan-26-14 9:50 AM

I have yet to see one homeowner affected by this propose anything other than continued support by taxpayers.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Jan-26-14 9:39 AM

A water related question from a different angle since I am so far away......is the river frozen over yet? Is there lots of ice on it?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

susquehannaretriever

Jan-26-14 9:32 AM

mike again shooting your mouth off before knowing facts. Water did NOT "sorround" my house.Please know what you are talking about before you spread lies.And if we are talking risk, we should look at claims paid out, hence my factual statement that I have had 1 claim in the past 25 years, 25 Mike, not 20 as you ignorantly quoted. So to all you people that are throwing your neighbors to the side, I sincerely hope that if this stands, and your taxes go thru the roof, hence making your homes unsustainable and you're not able to sell them, you do not whine; you asked for it. As far as blackmailing anyone, we are not in a position to blackmail anyone.We are telling it like it is.Have a nice day.....

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 39 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web