Southeast Regulators United in Call for National Disaster Plan

November 6, 2006

  • November 6, 2006 at 2:49 am
    Superjuster says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I, for one, do not believe that people in other states should have to subsidize the insurance for other people who want to live on the coast. Move inland, away from the coast, and the premiums would be like they are in other places. You play, you pay/

  • November 6, 2006 at 3:31 am
    Nor Easter says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Here is a concept. Instead of \”National Plan\” start with a regional one. This way you could see if the most vulnerable of states would support this. I am sure that people in FL love the idea, but when you start asking people in El Paso for Hurricane funds, you would start to see if \”the people\” wanted this type of plan. My guess is no. Less government, more personal responsibility.

  • November 6, 2006 at 3:41 am
    East KY says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I understand the need to find a better way to help fellow Americans. Federal disasters can happen almost anywhere. Yes, certain areas are prone to earthquakes, hurricanes, tornados, fires, volcanoes, etc. What everyone forgets is our tax dollars pay no matter what. Would seem to me a more organized plan for helping out those in need would be less costly. Better to be pro-active than always re-active. I thought this country was about one Nation – sounds like some only think so if they don\’t have to participate. Everone that lives in an area with potential issues are not PLAYING. They do pay. Check out their cost for protection. You might be surprised.

  • November 6, 2006 at 4:46 am
    bubba says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It\’s the magic question. The insurance consumer and regulator from these Southeast states is asking Congress for a subsidy. Who pays? The fact of the matter is that nobody has found a more rationale answer to that question than the existing insurance system with its risk-based premium mechanisms. Instead of a back-door subsidy (aka the \”national Plan\”), the SE regulators should be intellectually honest and ask for a straightforward subsidy — an insurance voucher issued by the Federal Govt. to consumers who need help paying their homeowners premium. That would be an intellectually honest approach, but the regulators know that Congress won\’t buy it, so they need to \’package\’ the subsidy — i.e., disguise it in a more feel-good approach — which won\’t become such an obvious problem until after the storm, just like the NFIP.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*