skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Governments Subsidize Disaster—and the Wealthy
By Chris Edwards of Cato.
"The Wall Street Journal takes a look
at hurricane threats to cities along the seacoasts. It’s an odd article
because the author, Greg Ip, does not discuss the central role that
governments play in encouraging people to live in hurricane-prone areas.
Ip does mention the “levee effect” of misguided development taking
place in low-lying areas because people feel safer behind large sea
walls. In the United States, federal spending by the Army Corps of
Engineers has encouraged people to live in unsafe coastal areas, as I discuss in this essay.
After Hurricane Betsy struck New Orleans in 1965, for example, the
Corps extended levees to additional low-lying areas around the city,
thus encouraging further development and exacerbating damage in
subsequent storms.
Ip does not discuss federal and state flood and wind insurance
subsidies, which also encourage people to live in harm’s way. I discuss
federal flood insurance subsidies in this essay, and a new essay in Cato’s Regulation examines state wind insurance subsidies.
I note,
rather than reducing the nation’s flooding problems, the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) has likely made flood damage
worse by encouraging more development in hazardous areas. Since 1970,
the estimated number of Americans living in coastal areas designated as
Special Flood Hazard Areas by FEMA has increased from 10 million to more
than 16 million. Subsidized flood insurance has backfired by helping to
draw more people and development into flood zones.
And the Regulation article notes, “Insurance, if priced
accurately, provides an important service of signaling to people the
risk cost of living near water. [But] subsidized insurance rates destroy
the information value of full-risk premiums, thus suppressing the true
cost of living in severe weather zones and creating an excessive
incentive to populate attractive but dangerous locations.” The federal
government subsidizes flood insurance, and the article notes that
Florida subsidizes wind insurance. Partly as a result of these
subsidies, the coastal population of Florida has soared in recent
decades.
An interesting fact about flood and wind insurance subsidies is that
they are welfare for the well-to-do. Politicians often talk about
helping the poor, but many of their policies disproportionally benefit
the well-off.
A 2010 study,
for example, looked at flood insurance claims data over a 10-year
period and concluded, “the benefits of the NFIP appear to accrue largely
to wealthy households concentrated in a few highly-exposed states.”
Similarly, the Regulation article examines Florida wind
insurance data and finds that the benefits “accrue disproportionately to
affluent households and the magnitude of this regressive redistribution
is substantial.”"
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.