Two competing bills have been introduced into the House and Senate that have lawmakers and citizens alike arguing over the differences. The following is an exerpt from the article:
The common elements in both bills would improve the fiscal solvency of the flood insurance program by allowing an annual premium increase of as much as 15 percent -- up from 10 percent currently. The two plans also would raise penalties for lenders that fail to ensure that borrowers get flood insurance in designated flood zones.
Both bills also would phase out premium subsidies for businesses, vacation homes and second homes, saving taxpayers about $335 million annually in subsidies to about 450,000 policyholders. Eliminating subsidies for second homes is a judicious move. As for businesses, there may be a need to continue subsidies to some degree -- for mom-and-pop operations, for example.
The article goes on to talk about many important aspects of the two bills and shows strong support of the House bill over the Senate bill. The article shows justifiable concern about rushing to pass a bill without thoroughly taking everything into consideration.
Take a look at the article and let us know what your viewpoints are and what you agree and disagree with.
