On National Public Radio (I get it on satellite) the other day was an interview with a geologist who proposed a Federal Shoreline Retreat Commission based on the Base Closure and Realignment Commission.
The idea is that the President would appoint a bunch of retired politicos and eggheads to the Commission. They would meet and make a list of shoreline areas so under threat of flooding and damage that the Federal government would no longer offer flood insurance in those areas. Congress would then vote the list up or down, no changed allowed.
So they would say something like “These three zip codes in the Sacramento area are so flood-prone that we will not build or rebuild federal buildings there. We will not spend highway money there. We will not provide insurance there.”
The idea is to take the politics out of it. Is it doable? Is it a Good Idea?
I rather like the idea. One thing for sure: a Congressman will fight tooth and nail to avoid losing Federal dollars coming to his district.
Perhaps as a sop and alleviating factor, we could combine the functions of the various bodies that have jurisdiction over canalized/dredged waterbodies to permit the smaller ocean ships to come inland (Tennessee-Tombigbee, Port of Tulsa, etc.) into a body that would help deal with the displacements from the floodprone areas. And, since it would be helping to minimize the economic loss within Congressional districts, it might make SHREC more palatable to Congress. (And, while it’s a serious suggestion. I can’t resist suggesting the appropriate name for that group: Federal Inland Oceanic Navigation Authority – FIONA.)
Meh, it’s easy to say that we won’t offer flood insurance, but when the news is filled with images of families escaping on life rafts or being helicoptered out of their flooded homes, chances are the gov’t will step in and help bail them out anyway. What’s more, residents know this, so lack of flood insurance doesn’t necessarily make them pack up and leave.
We should just make federal flood insurance honestly reflect the risk of living in vulnerable areas, and make it much harder or impossible for folks in high risk areas to avoid paying it. Those that can’t pay will sell the property, those that can will be paying the gov’t for the potential bailout and so not cost the taxpayers money.
All of Sacramento is flood prone. Due to ridiculous circumstances a hundred and fifty years ago, they built the whole city in a dumb place. However, it is the capitol of California and it’s not going to go away any time soon. Sure, we could say “well screw you”, but we have to remember that Sacramento is a big part of California’s economy and is full of the lower middle-class office workers who make the state work. We can’t screw it without screwing everybody.