Congress is set to appropriate almost $8 billion dollars for Hurricane Harvey relief
Hurricane Harvey has had a catastrophic effect on south Texas all the way from Corpus Christi to Victoria, to the Houston-Galveston area and to the Beaumont-Port Arthur area. The area around Lake Charles, Louisiana was hard hit too.
It is estimated that more than 85,000 homes in the Houston-Galveston area were either destroyed or severely damaged. Many of those now uninhabitable homes were not covered by flood insurance. And a lot of the affected homeowners lost everything except the clothing on their backs. Property losses are in the billions and billions of dollars.
Now Congress is set to appropriate almost $8 billion dollars for Harvey flood relief. The problem is that FEMA is about to run out of money. That $$8 billion is just a drop in the bucket for what is really needed. It’s money the Government does not have and Congress will have to raise the national debt limit.
Last June I posted an article on Big Jolly Politics about the proposed Ike Dam. Of course, I am well aware that had we had the Ike Dam, it would not have affected the flooding we have experienced as the result of the rains generated by Hurricane Harvey. But the reason I am mentioning it is because of the comments my BJP article received.
Most of the comments expressed strong opposition to the expenditure of any taxpayer funds to bail out people who are living in storm surge-prone areas since the government would be spending money it does not have. Rather than spending ‘their’ money on the Ike Dike, they suggested the people at risk purchase flood insurance which, by the way is largely subsidized with taxpayer funds. Most indicated that when you buy a home in a flood-prone area that’s a risk you have to assume. One jolly BJP follower even suggested I move to the Woodlands.
Here are two problems to take into account. First, Harvey showed us that all of Houston and the surrounding areas are flood-prone. Second, most of these now displaced homeowners of the 85,000-plus homes that were destroyed or damaged had no idea they were buying homes within a flood-prone area. That is why many of them did not buy flood insurance. Shame, shame on them!
So now we have well over 100,000 people from Corpus Christi to Lake Charles that are left with only the clothing on their backs. Sure, they will be able to pick and choose from piles of used clothing donations and the Red Cross will provide them with some funds for temporary shelter. The Salvation Army, churches and some charities will also help out. But the bottom line is that they need way more assistance and only the government can provide that.
So to all you jolly BJP followers who oppose spending taxpayer funds the government does not have on people who bought homes in flood-prone areas, I ask … do you still feel the same way? If your answer is ‘yes’, then you guys either do not understand the plight of Harvey’s victims or else you just don’t give a rat’s ass.
UPDATE: President Trump threw a curveball at the Republican congressional leadership by reaching an agreement with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer for an appropriation of $15 billion in flood relief and a rise in the national debt limit.
Howie, I’ll confess that I’m having trouble understanding your point here. In June you posted an article arguing for the Government to spend money on a project that would have been absolutely no help during the recent floods. Now you’re saying that it’s the Federal Government that’s gonna save us all from the ravages of Harvey.
(By the way, I hope that if the government does build the Ike Dike it works a lot better than the Addicks and Barker/Cypress flood control measures. . . . . )
Forgive me if I’m a bit skeptical. Most things the Federal Government does, it does really poorly. How many thousand FEMA trailers rotted away unused after Katrina?
And, before you get too eager to total up those costs for the Government, let’s wait to see how much Irma’s gonna cost, not to mention all of the fires out in the West.
But, hey, we’ll all keep counting on (and praying to) the governmental deities in Washington and Austin to save us.
Yep, we’re all big fans of “smaller government” until we need someone to ride in and save our bacon. Then, all we want to know is how fast can Congress cut us a check.
Fat Albert, I don’t know why you’re having trouble understanding me. Yes, last June I did want the government to pay for the Ike Dam and I still do. And I want the government to help all those people who lost everything in the Harvey flooding. With the catastrophic flood losses, only the government has the capacity to do that.
And I’m well aware that the Ike Dam would have been useless in the Harvey catastrophe. But the Ike Dam and the attendant flood gates would protect a lot of homes if Galveston were to be hit by an Irma-like hurricane.
Howie, I agree with your larger point.
However, one thing to remember for future conversation is that any seawall/dike type of protection system isn’t meant to protect against an Irma type of storm. The engineering usually stops at a category high end 3 or a 4 given the rarity of category 5 storms at landfall. Just a FYI so you don’t lose credibility on a finer point with someone who has this type of discussion in the future.
Howie,
Your are spot on. There are many variables to consider. The category of the storm used to be a factor. Now we know a category 2 like Hurricane Ike can be just as damaging as any other category. The Gulf Coast has learned a valuable lesson. If you choose to live on or near the coast you may flood. The Ike Dike would not have prevented the flooding because it was a different type of storm. I am still in favor of building the Ike Dike because anything that can prevent the loss of life or property should be considered.
That being said, I had the unpleasant task of witnessing a FEMA representative tell my 88 year old mother in law that FEMA will not make her whole. They will try to give her enough to make her home livable, but not as it was before. I support that. FEMA is doing a good job this time. I gladly support the U.S. Government spending what it has to spend to put people’s lives back in order. That’s what I pay taxes for.
I’ll wager the property loss totals during Ike would have paid for the Dike. I believe property losses during Harvey will break all records. Our first responders and everyday citizens are a credit to Texas and an example to the rest of the world on how to deal with a disaster.
Right now there is a volunteer group of veterans from El Paso stripping sheetrock from my mother in law’s home. God Bless Them and God Bless Texas!
The Addicks/Barker reservoir systems have worked exactly as designed 70 years ago – and quite well, thank you – until a 1000 year flood came along.
The reservoirs worked as designed in the 1940s. Their operation was the problem and the additional loading was the problem.
No, they worked as designed. They serve only one purpose and is to mitigate flooding of Downtown Houston and nothing else. They are not there to worry about the Memorial Area, The Villages or Katy.
I don’t think the people living the subdivisions along Clay Road, east of Hwy 6 would agree with you that Addicks reservoir worked, those subdivisions flood during Ike, both flood events in April and May of last year and Harvey this year.
It wasn’t the Corps of Engineers who encouraged people to build within three good rock throws of a reservoir pool.
Houston would still be a dirtbag mud hole with a population of 400,000 if it wasn’t for those two reservoirs.
Is the argument the damns or the spending? I bet everything I have (which isnt much) that none of y’all had a problem with the billions spent after 911 and the democracy we brought to the middle east.
I agree with Shannon, Houston is a testament to grand engineering.
Jokes on us…..
Gotta wonder why no matter whos in power we move to the left and spend trillions we dont have….
Party on!
Mr. Katz, most of those who flooded locally have flooded before so it wasn’t just the “1000 year flood” narrative being sold to the rest of us, most of the rest have been close to flooding several times before. If you build in areas surrounding reservoirs and along waterways in places like Houston, it’s only a matter of time before your number comes up. As such, as much as I might feel for those too cheap to afford $400-600 in flood insurance, why do you think allowing them to rebuild on the same lots that are going to keep flooding in the future is worth an endless stream of taxes? Is that really helping them in the long term?
What kind of help do you want those who flooded to get? Clearly, allowing them to keep building in the same locations is foolish and the 80{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} that did not think buying flood insurance was prudent should not be encouraged to gamble with other people’s money. So what’s your answer other than to keep allowing people to do stupid things and expect different results?
I have now lived in Houston for approximately 24 years having moved here from N.E. Texas where I grew up. With that I have built two homes in the greater Houston area and bought one while living here. I never lived in the 100 or 500 year flood plain it was something that my wife and I agreed to that it was enough to make us not buy or build there. For all three of our homes that we have owned in Houston we have also had flood insurance, and the reason why is that most of Houston had to be drained or elevated to allow the growth that we have had.
Historically the home which we built on the North Side made it through Allison and Ike without a issue. It flooded during Harvey from reports of my neighbors who still live up there. My house off of Memorial and Dairy Ashford had been through Allison, Ike, and earlier storms without any water a 4.5″ rainfall where the Corps of Engineers did not close the flood gates and the City of Houston had removed the back wash protectors on Buffalo Bayou forced water up into the streets with enough force to also force it up our French drain system for us and others filling the pool and about 2″ of water flowed through part of the house. Flood insurance paid out and we fixed it told the buyers when we sold what had happened and just finished building in Pearland 2 years ago. The house on the West side flooded with Harvey and this time it had several feet of water in it.
We went through Harvey in a brand new house and with a lot of upgrades to get us through a Hurricane that we didn’t have with the other ones including a flood map, the subdivision raised several feet, and four flood water detention lakes not ponds. That said it was all predicated on a Hurricane not the biblical floods that we got and those preventions proved good enough to keep us dry, our generator only ran 25 minutes, and I didn’t put the hurricane fabric up on the windows.
Yes I still have flood insurance and yes I will continue to buy it even though Harvey didn’t flood me and it was a 1,000 year flood and no I am not really happy that the people who choose not to buy it think my taxes need to be raised to help them. We live in Houston, most of this city at one time or another had a lot of water on it or around it enough rain or storm surge and you will flood. No city government is going to build to take on Harvey it would bankrupt them, same thing with building enough to handle a Cat 4 – 5 Hurricane which the Ike Dike will not handle building against those events are outside the ability of most governments, you wouldn’t vote for the bond issues and most businesses would move out to avoid the taxes.
If you want to live here please be responsible to the rest of us and buy flood insurance it isn’t if but probably when you may need it. Because the past is a really bad indicator if you will flood in the future as more development happens and if you don’t buy the insurance you are telling us you think the rest of us should bail you out when it does happen to you, and yes that does offend me. That said I donated to the Red Cross, I took food and provisions to two different drives, and I worked on friends houses and fed others. I was also on standby as a volunteer for the City of Pearland if they needed me and my fellow citizens during the storm so don’t say I don’t care worth a rodent’s posterior I do, I just wish others would open their eyes and take precautions as well.
Me. Walker, thank you for giving us a good lesson on responsibility. And I’m sure your donations and volunteer work are truly appreciated.
But blaming the victims does not alleviate their present plight. They need more than your thoughtful advice and personal assistance.
That’s correct! And, to alleviate their plight, you propose to take money, by force if need be, from other people to give to victims.
You bet. Not only for the victims of Harvey, but also for the victims of Hurricane Irma. When all the billions in federal aid ends for those two storms, it will have cost you personally anywhere from a dime to possibly two bits of your hard earned money.
So, essentially, you’re OK with being a thief.
Fat, if you don’t have flood insurance, the assistance from FEMA is minimal, just enough to make your house barely habitable by covering removal of the sheetrock, wet furniture and fixtures, etc. It’s more of a public health thing than anything else, plus it keeps the victims out of the shelters, which also saves money.
Ross:I know that. I’m not an insensitive putz (although It may seem that way at times). I’ve donated time, money and chattels to victims of the current flooding, and will continue to do so. And given where we are as a nation I suppose that government help is unavoidable.
But, I get tired of so called “conservatives” who, faced with the any kind of problem” immediately start screaming for government assistance. The fact of the matter is that FEMA, and other governmental agencies are absolutely TERRIBLE at giving assistance. They are overloaded with bureaucracy, inefficient as hell, slow to respond, insensitive to individual needs and way more concerned with paperwork and protocol than actually helping people. Frankly a lot of the huge NGO’s are the same way – The Current spate of stories about the Red Cross comes to mind.
The best help is always local, person to person and voluntary. But sadly we continue to look, with idolatrous eyes, to the government to be our savior.
Howie’s right – Harvey assistance will cost each taxpayer a pittance. But then there’s Irma assistance, and (probably) Jose assistance, and assistance for the folks on the West Coast dealing with wildfires. And we’ve gotta help the people down in Mexico dealing with the earthquake. And people who are out of jobs, and single parents, low income families, students who can’t pay their school bills. . . the list goes on and on.
And, please don’t ever forget, we aren’t using our money to do this, we’re borrowing money the our grandchildren will be paying back – or paying for.
So, forgive my seeming insensitivity. But tell me, is there some point where we get to say “enough”? Total government spending in 2017 (Federal, state and local) will be right at 7 Trillion dollars. That’s 36{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of our total GDP. That’s insane. Enough is enough.