This page was last updated on January 12, 2013.
Pennsylvania not proud; Dan Cogley; Beaver County Times; January 10, 2013.
Previous Cogley letters I critiqued were “Poor people do create jobs,” “Government should not invade private lives,” “Why vote Republican,” “We need more Democrats,” “Try trickle-up effect,” “Elderly will be hit under GOP policies,” “Let politicians try unemployment,” and “Cuban missile déjà vu.” My personal favorite was “Why vote Republican.” Cogley letters I didn’t critique include “Question in need of an answer” (4/7/11) and “Suggested cuts they won’t make” (3/14/11).
Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.
“Proud is the last thing we should feel as Pennsylvanians. We put the likes of Rothfus in to represent us in the U.S. House of Representatives. Voting against our fellow Americans in their worst hour?”
“Those of you who actually voted for him, I have no words for you, but I will pray for you and the people of New Jersey and New York, suffering with no heat or electric.
“When you lay down to sleep tonight in your warm bed, say not just a prayer for the people in N.J. or N.Y., say it for those who voted for Rothfus and the people in the House who voted as he did. Lord knows they need it.”
[RWC] U.S. Rep. Keith Rothfus (R-12) voted against raising the debt limit of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The way the letter is written, it appears readers are supposed to believe Mr. Rothfus voted against disaster relief for hurricane victims. Here’s a better description.
The bill to which Mr. Cogley referred [H.R. 41 (113th Congress)] increased the NFIP’s borrowing limit by $9.7 billion, an increase of 47%. In other words, H.R. 41 increased our national debt (already in excess of $16.4 trillion) by another $9.7 billion. H.R. 41 was not a general disaster-relief bill; it was a bill to help pay the claims of NFIP policyholders who paid artificially-low flood-insurance premiums.
Here’s the issue Mr. Cogley chooses to ignore. NFIP is supposed to be self-funded by policyholder premiums, not by taxpayers. Therefore, there should be no need to authorize more borrowing at the expense of taxpayers. Unfortunately, as with other “self-funded” government programs, NFIP routinely comes up short. As a result, taxpayers regularly bailout NFIP so it can pay policyholder claims. Before Hurricane Sandy hit, the NFIP was already nearly $20 billion in debt, just short of its borrowing limit. Therefore, even a relatively “small” disaster would have driven the NFIP into trouble again. Name a private insurance company that could stay in business if its payouts exceeded the premiums collected. Heck, even The New York Times and some Democrats recognize NFIP is a mess.
The mere existence of the NFIP encourages people to live in flood-risk areas. According to the NYT article, “One Biloxi, Miss., property valued at $183,000 flooded 15 times over a decade, costing the program $1.47 million, according to federal data provided by the agency to a member of Congress. Another in Humble, Tex., has resulted in over $2 million in flood payouts even though it was worth just $116,000.” FYI, I lived in the Humble area for over 18 years and you would not believe where people keep rebuilding houses damaged or wiped out by floods.
All of this is what Mr. Rothfus was referring to when he said, “It’s ‘irresponsible to raise an insolvent program’s debt ceiling without making reforms’” and “I agree that we need to do something to help people in disasters, but we also need reform to make sure that programs are adequately funded.” According to the NYT article, some changes were made during the summer of 2012 “allowing large increases in premiums paid by vacation home owners and those repeatedly hit by floods.”
By the way, I “actually voted for” Mr. Rothfus and so far I’m sleeping OK. If people are going to pray for someone, Mr. Cogley needs prayers more than I.
© 2004-2013 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.