LOUISIANA — Coastal state Republicans are bucking members of their own party and teaming up with Democrats as lawmakers struggle to salvage an agreement to keep the National Flood Insurance Program alive.

Dozens of Republicans from New York to Mississippi have fought proposals by the House Financial Services Committee that they say would make flood insurance unaffordable. A member of the House leadership, Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, is among those uneasy with the panel’s plans. And in the Senate, Republicans are joining with Democrats to find a deal before the program lapses at the end of next month.


In contrast to the party-line approaches surrounding health care and tax reform, geographic boundaries are trumping partisan divisions in the flood insurance debate.

“Floodwater has a way of making it pretty clear what the priorities are," Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.) said.

At issue is the future of a government backstop that protects millions of Americans from the financial risks of flooding, but at a steep cost: The program has racked up almost $25 billion in debt. Its survival is a concern that is being grimly highlighted this weekend as the remnants of Hurricane Harvey inundate Texas.

Factions of lawmakers are at odds over how to boost the insurance program’s bottom line. A key source of tension is to what extent homeowners should pay higher rates to put the service on stronger financial footing.

The political tug-of-war is spilling into the open as lawmakers spend time at home during the congressional recess. In Louisiana, where policyholders have received more than $19 billion in payments from the program since 1978, members of the state's delegation are conveying the message that they're unified and fighting to rescue it.

“America, the American economy, Louisiana and the Louisiana economy cannot operate without the National Flood Insurance Program," Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) told a roomful of local reporters last week at an event marking the anniversary of dramatic flooding in the Baton Rouge area. "Write that down. Take it home to mama. It's the truth."

Sign up here for POLITICO Huddle A daily play-by-play of congressional news in your inbox. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Kennedy has drafted his own bill, S. 1368, with a senior Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee.

The rhetoric is a preview of what's to come when Congress returns in September. Lawmakers will have precious little time to address issues with the insurance program, in addition to funding the government, raising the nation's debt limit and reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration.

Neither the House nor the Senate has passed a flood bill, and a short-term extension without significant reforms is becoming more likely.

“The NFIP must be reauthorized in a meaningful way that addresses the fundamental business model of the program," said Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator Brock Long, who oversees the program. "A lapse ... would have a major impact on Americans across the country."

Like the other big issues before Congress, flood insurance is stoking an intense debate inside the GOP.

When Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.) spoke to a local industrial association at a lunch in Houma, Lousiana, last week, flood insurance was high up in a speech in which he warned against rubber-stamping any party or president's agenda in Washington.

In south Louisiana, he said, "We're different."

To illustrate, Graves took aim at a proposal coming out of the Republican-led Financial Services Committee. The panel has drafted a package of bills that would reauthorize the flood insurance program for five years, shrink its footprint, ramp up what policyholders pay and make it easier for private companies to compete.

One proposal included in the legislation and pitched as a way to protect affordability would cap annual premiums at $10,000 per year.

"How many of you can afford that?" Graves asked the group. "It's outrageous."

Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) is an outspoken fiscal conservative who has said he would prefer to phase out the program but understands its importance to homeowners. Some of the committee's ideas to overhaul the program have broad, bipartisan support. Others have attracted opposition from Democrats, Republicans and industry groups.

In July, 26 Republicans from states including New York, Texas, Mississippi and Florida told House leadership that one iteration of the committee's package would make flood insurance unaffordable for their constituents.

“Despite the fact that the NFIP was created decades ago to protect homeowners, many believe everyone’s rates should go up just to make sure it can fund outlier events like Hurricane Katrina," Rep. Steven Palazzo, who signed the letter, later wrote in Mississippi's Sun Herald newspaper. "I will not let this happen."

Hensarling later agreed to walk back a set of controversial provisions that would have phased out coverage for new construction in areas at high risk of flooding and opened the door to escalating rates for some properties. Committee spokesman Jeff Emerson said the concession won over homebuilders and Realtors and "solidified support from a number of members."

But he's still facing resistance, which has cast doubt on the bill's prospects for House passage next month.

Flooding from Harvey, and any potential payouts from the flood insurance program, could give fresh talking points to both sides of the debate.

Rep. Pete Olson, a Republican who represents the Houston area, said his constituents "are at the mercy of both nature and the NFIP."

"I have immense respect for Chairman Hensarling and the tightrope he has to walk on this issue," he said. "However, the end package must ensure that we uphold the promise we’ve made to homeowners.”

A lingering problem for coastal lawmakers is the extent to which the bill would restrict "grandfathering," where some homeowners are able to pay lower premiums when flood maps change. The provision in the committee's bill is aimed at properties that experience multiple losses from flooding.

Emerson said the intent behind the section was to protect "the nine out of 10 NFIP policyholders who have never flooded, not even once, by forcing FEMA to get serious about how it deals with multiple loss properties."

"It just does not make a lot of sense that all NFIP policyholders should continue to pay higher rates to subsidize a few properties that file repeated claims after repeated floods," he said.

The prospect that the proposal would raise costs for homeowners is a concern for Scalise, the No. 3 House Republican, and his staff, people familiar with the matter said. Scalise has been recovering from a near-fatal gunshot wound he suffered in June, but he and his team have been engaged on flood insurance issues, the people said.

"They’re doing everything possible to make sure everyone understands the severity of what will happen," St. Tammany Parish President Pat Brister said of Scalise's office.

Underlying the debate is a fear of unintended consequences.

Congress last reauthorized the program in 2012. The bill set in motion rate increases that lawmakers ended up reversing in 2014 following an outcry from coastal states. To get there, Republicans sidelined Hensarling, who voted against the rollback.

POLITICO Playbook newsletter Sign up today to receive the #1-rated newsletter in politics Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

"I'm praying we're not in a similar situation where you have to enact it to understand it," Graves said in an interview.

In the Senate, progress has been slower.

Last month, the Banking Committee's Republican chairman and top Democrat released a narrow reauthorization proposal. Committee members have yet to settle on what the finished product might look like, adding to the probability that Congress will end up passing a short-term extension of the program and won't make significant changes.

Kennedy, Louisiana's junior senator, is one of the committee's newest members but has emerged as one of its loudest voices on flood insurance.

He drafted a six-year reauthorization bill with Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.). Back home, he touts how the proposal has attracted bipartisan support.

One telling difference between his approach and that of House Republicans: Kennedy's bill would freeze interest on the program's debt, potentially freeing up $400 million a year that could go toward mitigation and affordability assistance.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who doesn't sit on the committee, has introduced his own 10-year reauthorization bill, S. 1313, with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.).

At a news conference in Denham Springs, Louisiana, Kennedy told reporters he was trying to negotiate a deal with Democrats.

"I don't want people to worry," he said, standing beside Graves and Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat. "We're going to extend it. We're going to take some measures to stabilize the program. But we're not going to do it on the backs of the policyholders."

Kennedy said in an interview that the coalitions that have formed to address flood insurance “defy” political parties.

"It's not just Louisiana," he said. "If you get 20 inches of rain in three days, you're going to flood. I don't care if you're on Pikes Peak. You're going to flood, and that can happen in any state, in any community, at any time, and I think most of the senators are starting to understand that."