David Cay Johnston: GOP Favors Public Option for Property, Not People

[Louisiana1976]

<snip>

Unlike people without health insurance, homeowners have access to public option flood insurance.

Even those who fail to take personal responsibility to buy insurance to protect their property can get benefits, thanks in good part to politicians who are leading opponents of public option healthcare.

Consider the example of Trent Lott of Mississippi, who was that state's senior senator when Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005, flooding his home looking out on the Gulf. Lott had not exercised personal responsibility by taking out flood insurance even though it was available from the federal government at low cost. He did have private insurance, but his insurer refused to pay much of the claim, saying it was not wind damage (which was covered by the policy), but water damage (which was excluded).

Weeks later Lott introduced Senate Bill 1936, which would have authorized retroactive flood insurance. The idea came from Representative Gene Taylor, a Democrat who represented the Mississippi Gulf Coast, which should remind us that when there is voter demand for reform, and campaign contributions are not the driving force, the parties have worked together.

Lott's bill would have let flood victims pay 10 years of flood insurance premiums after-the-fact plus a 5 percent late payment penalty. Since this storm was rated a once in 500 years occurrence, even 10 years of premiums would not come close to covering the real costs, meaning a taxpayer subsidy was built into the Lott bill.

<snip>


Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-cay-johnston/gop-favors-public-option_b_296703.html

[Richardo]

1. Great piece

:thumbsup:

Hope your thread gets more readers than mine :)

[appal_jack]

2. Excellent Framing. k&r. n/t

[sohndrsmith]

3. I was just researching a similar concept today, which just makes me more stupefied as to

Why there is such a degree of powerful protest against the idea of health reform that makes sense. Our health is purely and solely dependent on money, profit and fiscal issues. Period. People lose homes, life savings, health - even die solely because of financial issues.

What kind of country are we?

I think that any Governor, Mayor or official who can request federal disaster funds (and wants public option/single payer) should flood the Administration with such requests because we ARE in a federal, emergency disaster situation regarding our health situation. People ARE losing property because of this crisis. What's the difference between an unnatural wildfire disaster (of man-made creation: arson) and this health care crisis, which is also a man-made, and far more deadly, disaster?


An interesting article from Mother Jones, May 2009, by Johnathan Stein (excerpt - emphasis with underlining is mine):

"Today, I have some raw numbers, courtesy of FEMA's public affairs office in Denton, Texas. During Perry's tenure -- 2001 to the present -- FEMA alone has sent $3.45 billion to Texas. $3,449,142,397 to be exact. That figure does not include funding from any other federal agencies (of which there is plenty), nor does it include funding for Hurricane Ike recovery, which is still ongoing.

"To get a sense of how much federal money goes to Texas every time a disaster strikes, consider the numbers in this FEMA press release from earlier this month: since Ike made landfall in September 2008, Texas has received over $2 billion in disaster relief funding from various federal agencies. That includes just $96 million from FEMA (to pay hotel bills for displaced citizens). The rest comes from the Small Business Administration and other agencies.

"I want to be clear. I'm not saying Texas and its hurricane-weary citizens don't deserve this money. They do."

Full article at: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/05/billions-texas-federal-disaster-aid-during-perry-tenure