Washington Worsened Hurricane Helene's Destruction
How the National Flood Insurance Program subsidizes living in high-risk flood zones.

At least 119 people have died as a result of Hurricane Helene as of Monday, reports CNN. While the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is busy helping survivors in flood-stricken regions, its National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) perversely incentivizes Americans to reside in these high-risk areas.
People choose to remain in flood-prone areas for many reasons, including proximity to family, work, and school. Uprooting oneself and one's family can be a painful thing to do, and choosing to take on risk to stay where you've established your home is understandable. But choosing to stay in these areas genuinely does involve considerable risk. According to FEMA, the average flood insurance claim in 2018 was $40,000, and that risk should be borne by the risk-taker.
The Biden-Harris administration approved an additional $715 million for FEMA's Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMAP) in advance of Hurricane Helene on September 23. FMAP, which falls under NFIP, makes up 15.5 percent of FEMA's budget and provides homeowners with subsidized flood insurance.
FEMA itself recognizes the folly of providing homeowners insurance at below-market rates. Established by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 (BW-12) was passed to reduce debt incurred by the NFIP from Hurricanes Rita, Wilma, and Katrina in 2005.
BW-12 removed discounts for some NFIP policyholders so that their insurance rates would "more accurately reflec[t] their expected flood losses," according to FEMA's 2018 affordability framework. These reforms were as actuarially sound as they were unpopular and were overturned two years later.
The Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014 (HFIAA) restored pre-BW-12 rates, repealed certain rate increases, and capped annual premium increases at 18 and 25 percent for primary homes and secondary residences, respectively. Congress instituted these effective price ceilings to encourage participation, but FEMA's affordability framework recognizes the market price of insurance as "one of the best signals of risk that a consumer receives."
The 2018 framework candidly admits that flood insurance affordability programs create perverse incentives, including "encouraging lower-income households eligible for assistance to purchase properties in very risky areas." And that's just what the NFIP has done: approximately 13 million homeowners live in Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs), where there is at least a 1 percent annual risk of flooding.
NFIP deems 12 percent of these homeowners to have Principal, Insurance, Taxes, Insurance (PITI) to household income ratios in excess of the maximum affordable standard. Even with mandatory enrollment in SFHAs, which reduces insurance rates by forcibly expanding the base of the insurance program, the average policyholder cost for a single-family home is $1,098—more than twice the cost of policies outside the SFHAs.
Without NFIP-subsidized insurance, rates would increase, becoming unaffordable for some homeowners. Unaffordability is a feature of insurance markets, not a bug. High insurance rates discourage risky behavior that is likely to be even more painful than having to pull up roots.
More than 2 million homes and businesses lacked power as of Monday morning, reports The Weather Channel, and about 3,000 people were housed in shelters across five states, according to The New York Times. Artificially lowering insurance rates deprives homeowners of the very information that indicates the risk of such devastation and displacement.
FEMA's affordability framework argues good public policy consists of balancing "increased flood insurance take-up with increased program costs due to…policyholders paying less than full-risk rates." This balancing act is simple: The federal government must stop subsidizing NFIP and allow its more than 50 partnered insurance companies to set rates that fully reflect the risk of extreme weather events like Hurricane Helene.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Don’t build in an area prone to flooding.
Yes indeed.
I note that Reason is generally opposed to zoning - presumably where ordinances prevent home-building owing to high flood risk, the Reason position would be, let 'em build, but don't subsidise their insurance. That's a consistent position but I think that in some cases there is a predictable and likely external cost - emergency services, utilities, etc. that is not borne by homeowners in high-risk areas so zoning regs may in practice be preferable.
It isn’t a zoning thing, it is a common sense thing.
No, socialist, you don't need Nanny Government using zoning to tell people where it's safe to build. They don't know more than the people doing the building or the insurance companies paying for losses.
Get the government out of it, leave insurance companies to charge what they will, and people won't rebuild in flood-prone areas. It's called reality, common sense, free markets.
Your handle would have been more accurate if you'd just retained the first word.
1. Considering externalities is not socialist.
2. Your argument does not consider externalities and hence may be ignored. The stupider forms of axiomatic libertarian seem unwilling to recognise the existence of externalities. Are you amongst that company?
Great, you learned a new word, externalities.
It has nothing to do with you thinking government bureaucrats are wiser, more informed, and more interested in other people's welfare than the people with skin in the game.
You are a statist through and through.
External costs of emergency services, utilities, etc.?
Usually they have homes evacuated for hurricanes, fires, and sometimes flooding before the homes are at risk. I see minimal or no external costs, as those property owners paid taxes for police and fire. And the government doesn't pay for your utilities.
It's immoral to demand that others subsidize your lifestyle, and the subsidy should be phased out. It will make many homes worth less. But they will still be of value until a disaster makes them not worth fixing.
External costs of emergency services, utilities, etc.?
Yup. Even after evacuations there are public/social costs. Duh.
Sheesh, some of you are so wedded to an anti-government narrative (in such cases) that you become unable to think practically
Explain why insurance companies can't cover it. Don't just shout "GOVERNMENT" and "EXTERNALITIES". Try to actually educate your audience.
so zoning regs may in practice be preferable.
Ay, caramba! What's with all the statist missionaries here in the comments. Just because libertarians don't think there should be laws forbidding weed, foodtrucks and ass sex, doesn't mean they will sign up for the rest of your package.
But anyway, it never occurred to you that they were there because it was zoned for housing and they assumed and trusted it would be safe?
Maybe if there wasn't any zoning they may have researched the area that they were building or buying in and realized it was a floodplain.
Maybe if there wasn’t any zoning they may have researched the area that they were building or buying in and realized it was a floodplain.
Houston, dumbfuck.
Bans against stilt houses in flood zones probably don’t help.
Please do not post comments that make sense.
It offends all the leftist snowflakes that troll this site.
Thank you.
I am on the left but no snowflake. I can take a lot of heat. And I think the National Flood Insurance program ought to be terminated. It is welfare for the rich. I remember when Al D’Amato, conservative Republican, used to get lots of campaign funds from rich folks on Long Island who benefitted from NFIP.
But Republicans will never allow NFIP to die. Suffolk County is a red county in a blue state. It is barely above sea level. The famous 1938 hurricane caused massive damage and killed dozens in the then sparsely populated county.
I am on the left but no snowflake.
Cite?
"But Republicans will never allow NFIP to die."
Why? Especially when the old money you invoke are all progressive Democrats nowadays.
1938 hurricane causing massive damage? That was well before fossil fuels starting causing global warming, so it's probably mis-information!
LOL…
The Biden-Harris administration approved an additional $715 million.
Its all Republicans FAULT!!! /s
The leftards here are soooooooooo predictable.
People built towns in places prone to flooding because the rivers were the best form of transportation at the time, and because the river bottoms were the flattest and most fertile ground when all you had was a boat or a horse drawn wagon or plow. Even the railroads ran in the river valleys because the ground was generally so level.
I live in a valley but not in a place that is going to be inundated by the brook rising during a major storm.
I also live in a valley across the road from a river. But it's easily 250 feet downhill. The river comes out of it's banks every year but I never notice unless I'm crossing it to get somewhere else.
Asheville is 400 miles from the ocean, genius.
Flooding happens in places more than just adjacent to the ocean.
Okay. Then what percentage of the affected properties participated in national flood insurance?
Towns were historically built on rivers because rivers were a primary means of moving goods from one town to the next.
I was unaware of just how many areas on the east coast were vulnerable to flash flooding. I'm guessing the people living there were/are just as clueless. It isn't everyday that they deal with a big storm that brings in this much water.
I think some are conflating ocean and near water properties with flash flood areas because “hurricane”. Coastal and near water areas have a natural impetus to expect flooding… that’s what a flood zone is - increased risk of flooding. But not every place that flooded due to this hurricane was at “high risk of flooding”. Freak floods are part of the damage here.
While allowing insurance to deal with it might be a good idea, I think other issues that increase rebuilding costs might also need to be targeted for reform. Building regulations raise the cost of rebuilding just as much as insurance rates do.
BROWNIE, YOU'RE DOING A HECK OF A JOB!
(Is that lacist if said to a Veep of Colour?)
Shhhh.....
Republicans are trying to make voters forget Dubya.
There is an election close. And a different Dubya for the GOP is running.
All the dubya allies are for your candidate dumdum.
Dick’s mouthpiece, Cheney endorsed Kamala as did many of the other bushpigs.
Republicans are trying to make voters forget Dubya.
Why would they do that? Particularly since Team Kamala is the Bush Whitehouse.
Bush Administration endorsements for Harris 2024:
Bush Administration VP Dick Cheney
Bush Administration United States Attorney General Alberto González (Yay, waterboarding)
Bush Administration Homeland Security Advisor Steve Abbot
Bush Administration Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Kenneth Adelman
Bush Administration Secretary of the DHS Richard C. Barth
Bush Administration Director of the National Security Council Christopher Barton
Bush Administration National Security Council Legal Adviser John Bellinger
Bush Administration Special Assistant to the President Kenneth Bernard
Bush Administration Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense Mark E. Bitterman
Bush Administration Deputy National Security Advisor Robert D. Blackwill
Bush Administration Assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force William Bodie
Bush Administration DND Deputy General Counsel Christian M.L. Bonat
Bush Administration Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher
Former FBI Assistant Director Greg Brower
Bush Administration Chief Presidential Speechwriter Christopher Buckley
Bush Administration Deputy Secretary of State Jack C. Chow
Bush Administration Assistant to the President & Deputy to the Chief of Staff James W. Cicconi
Bush Administration Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Peggy Cifrino
Bush Administration Counselor of the Dept. of State Eliot A. Cohen
Bush Administration General Counsel, Dept. of the Army Benedict S. Cohen
Clinton Administration Former Secretary of Defense William Cohen
Bush Administration Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Joseph J. Collins
Bush Administration Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Cindy Courville
Bush Administration National Security Council Legal Advisor Stephen W. DeVine
Bush Administration Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley
Bush Administration Acting Under Secretary of the Army Raymond F. DuBois
Bush Administration Senior Executive Service Dept. of Defense Martha E. Duncan
Bush Administration Under Secretary of Defense Eric S. Edelman
Bush Administration Former Deputy Assistant to the President Richard A. Falkenrath
Bush Administration Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs
Jendayi E. Frazer
Bush Administration Deputy Assistant to the Vice President Aaron L. Friedberg
Bush Administration NSA Director of Counterterrorism William Gaches
Bush Administration Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Janice Gardner
Bush Administration Acting Attorney General of the United States Stuart M. Gerson
Bush Administration Under Secretary of State James K. Glassman
Bush Administration Deputy National Security Advisor to the Vice President Jon D. Glassman
Bush Administration Director of State Dept, Policy Planning David Gordon
Bush Administration Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency Michael V. Hayden
Bush Administration Counsel, President’s Intelligence Oversight Board Seth Hurwitz
Bush Administration Acting Attorney General of the United States Peter Keisler
Bush Administration Assistant Secretary of State James A. Kelly
Bush Administration Under Secretary of Defense Kenneth J. Krieg
Bush Administration Deputy Administrator United States Agency for International Development James R. Kunder
Bush Administration Commander, United States Personnel Information Systems Command George Landis
Bush Administration Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the State Dept. Steven R. Mann
Bush Administration Deputy Under Secretary of the Army John W. McDonald
Bush Administration General Counsel, U.S. Information Agency Alberto Mora
Bush Administration Associate Deputy Attorney General Kenneth Mortensen
Bush Administration Director of National Intelligence and Former Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte
Bush Administration Secretary of the Navy Sean O’Keefe
CIA Chief of Station William R Piekney
Bush Administration National Security Advisor Daniel M. Price
Bush Administration White House Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board Vice Chairman Alan Charles Raul
Bush Administration Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Director Victor Reis
Bush Administration Deputy Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Paul Rosenzweig
HW Bush Administration Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Charles O. Rossotti
Bush Administration State Dept. Deputy Director of Policy Planning Kori Schake
Bush Administration Deputy Under Secretary of Defense Wayne Schroeder
Bush Administration Senior Director, National Security Council Staff and Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency Gregory L. Schulte
Bush Administration Senior Director, National Security Council Staff John Simon
Bush Administration Senior Director, National Security Council Staff Stephen Slick
Bush Administration Deputy Secretary of Defense and Ambassador to NATO William H. Taft
Chief of Staff, Dept. of Homeland Security Miles Taylor
Bush Administration Deputy Attorney General Larry D. Thompson
Bush Administration Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Homeland Security Jack Thomas Tomarchio
Bush Administration Assistant Secretary of Defense John K. Veroneau
Director of Threats, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization Thomas G. Ward, Jr.
Bush Administration Principal Deputy Director, State Dept Policy Planning Matthew C. Waxman
Bush Administration Counselor of the Dept. of State Philip Zelikow
Bush Administration Deputy Secretary of State Robert B. Zoellick
[doffs hat, bows deeply]
I can't fathom what more evidence you would need to see and know that Harris is the Deep State, TPD candidate.
Shhhh... Kamala Harris is currently the vice* president. She's the George Bush in this equation. She war partying in Hollywood while Americans drowned.
Shhhh..... The crumbling infrastructure that went bust during Katrina owes to decades of democrat rule.
Shhhh..... just don't say anything. You're a left wing hack, and your strained effort to be appear anti Biden fools no one.
I love how it is, amazingly, Trump's fault not a single member of the Biden-Harris admin is there and they have already said they have spent all they will on NC.
Not nearly as tight with money with countries that paid the President and his son handsomely for years...
https://babylonbee.com/news/north-carolina-agrees-to-purchase-several-hunter-biden-paintings-in-return-for-us-aid
Asking help from the feds during a disaster is like throwing an anchor to a drowning man.
From what I gather though, most of the problems from Helene are because its in areas that aren’t used to flooding, because it almost never happens.
I mean, Asheville, one of the main victims, is way, way to the west in North Carolina.
When you get 2 feet of rain (or more), a lot of places are going to flood.
They are used to regular flooding - on geological timescales. The problem is that we humans think that a generation (25-30 years) constitutes a trend and that whatever life was like when we were growing up is what the world is supposed to be like forever.
If you look at the actual data, the areas flooded by Helene have all flooded just as badly multiple times over the past thousand years.
"The problem is that we humans think that a generation (25-30 years) constitutes a trend and that whatever life was like when we were growing up is what the world is supposed to be like forever."
That's why those of us who grew up in the pre industrial age are terrified of global warming...er climate change.
1000 years! Oh my! Low risk doesn’t mean no risk. Insurance plans will always struggle with freak disasters. That’s to be expected in something whose risk is measured in 1000 years. But that’s the ENTIRE POINT OF INSURANCE - to deal with the freak accident that is not a regular maintenance condition of the area.
The OP doesn’t seem to see a distinction, but putting any risk of flooding at the level of high risk means FEWER places to build. And isn’t that one of Reason’s pet issues?
As Asheville famously did in 1916.
The poster child for Appalachian hurricane flooding is very oddly the surface of a dammed lake so awash in flood debris that it looks like dry land.
Cause of apparent catastrophe: the dam held.
Every 100 years or so ain't bad.
Yeah it's all good times until you can't buy an iphone.
https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/modern-economy-rests-single-road-north-carolina-where-hurricane-collapsed-bridges
That's frightening.
"the average policyholder cost for a single-family home is $1,098".
Wait What!??? I'm paying 1700 and I'm nowhere near even a hundred year flood zone. Fuck it. I'm shopping for waterfront property in the keys. See ya later suckas. If I blow out a flip flop I'll send FEMA the bill.
The keys does not have a 1% annual chance of flooding. The keys are a high risk flood zone, not a special risk flood zone.
What the heck are you talking about? Hurricane Helene? Floods? FEMA? Dead, stranded, and/or livelihoods destroyed?
*turns on CNN*
*flips to MSNBC*
*flips to ABC*
*flips to CBS*
I have no idea what you’re talking about, Jack.
*turns on NPR*
What the heck are you talking about Jack!? Did something happen?
*opens up NYT*
*opens up WaPo*
*opens up MSN*
*opens up HuffPo*
*opens up Politico*
*opens up Mother Jones*
I have no record anywhere of a hurricane happening. All I know is that Democracy is doomed in five weeks, literal Hitlersatan von Doom McVader Kruger nee Gacy is rampaging across the globe, and that only joy and holistic solutions can save us by unburdening us from what has been from a middle class family.
Where’s this flood-insurance company enumerated power in the US Constitution?
Where the F did the USA go?
Notably absent here is any actual evidence that the Appalachian Southeast was one of the areas where federal flood insurance is actually a significant component of the market. Which makes sense - when sane people think "flood insurance", the mountains of NC, TN VA etc. hardly come to mind. Getting rid of the program might be a perfectly laudable goal. Victim blaming the residents of a disaster area for a program you don't provide any evidence they participate in just makes you look like a douche.
There’s a county situated on the gulf coast in the neighborhood of Tallahassee that was completely unscathed. But my favorite mountain destination of NC is in turmoil?
It’s unreal.
This rag has hit peak stupid
I feel like they have these flood insurance articles pre-written and cued up for whenever there's a hurricane-related disaster, regardless of whether flood insurance distorted the housing market in the affected area.
While the over all point might be true, it is not topical, despite attempts to appear so.
Reason had basically the exact same article, just change the storm name...
https://reason.com/2023/08/30/subsidized-flood-insurance-makes-storm-damage-worse/
The policies themselves don't make financial sense. NFIP policy holders are not limited in how many claims they can file or how much money they can receive. As a result, more than 150,000 properties nationwide have flooded multiple times and received NFIP reimbursement each time. According to statistics compiled by Pew, these so-called "repetitive loss properties" account for just 1 percent of NFIP policies but 25-30 percent of payouts. By 2009, about 10 percent of repetitive loss policies had received payouts worth more than the properties themselves.
An insurance company's refusal to provide coverage in a high-risk area provides a disincentive to anyone who chooses to live there: When the inevitable happens, you'll be responsible for the damage yourself.
But when the government assumes the risk on an insurer's behalf and makes insurance cheaper than the market would dictate, it creates incentives for people to live in dangerous areas more likely to be battered by extreme weather events.