The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) has long been a point of contention in Congress, and the ongoing reluctance to enact meaningful reforms is hitting Louisiana homeowners hard, particularly those living near the coast. Premiums have been steadily rising, leaving many residents struggling to maintain coverage.
Over the past six years, my own NFIP premiums have doubled, yet they remain relatively affordable compared to others in higher-risk areas. My home, which was removed from a high-risk flood zone years ago, currently costs $971 per year to insure—up from $450 in 2018. Although the city reclassified my home’s flood risk, I have opted to continue coverage. My wife and I purchased our home in 1982 for $85,000; today, its replacement cost is $286,000 for the structure and $215,000 for personal property.
For many Louisianans living closer to the coast, the situation is far more dire. Their home replacement costs are significantly higher, and rising flood insurance premiums are forcing some to abandon their coverage altogether. Despite strong advocacy from the state’s congressional delegation, the challenge of reducing NFIP costs has become increasingly difficult in Washington, D.C.
Senator Bill Cassidy, R-Baton Rouge, stands out as one of the most vocal proponents for keeping flood insurance affordable. In a speech to the Senate on April 16, he urged Congress to take action. Cassidy’s concerns were echoed during a roundtable meeting with Louisiana Realtors in June, where the soaring cost of flood insurance was identified as a significant barrier to home ownership in the state.
During a Senate Banking Committee hearing, Cassidy highlighted the devastating impact of FEMA’s Risk Rating 2.0 program, which has caused some policyholders to see their premiums rise by over 1,000%. For many, flood insurance has become more expensive than their mortgage payments, prompting them to drop their policies.
In another Senate address in June, Cassidy shared personal stories from Louisiana residents struggling with skyrocketing flood insurance costs. He called on his fellow senators to collaborate on NFIP reauthorization and reform, advocating for a system that considers a home’s elevation rather than grouping properties by zone.
One resident from Larose switched to private flood insurance, paying $2,200 annually. While still costly, this was a significant savings compared to the $4,500 to $5,000 he would have paid under the NFIP—despite his home being six feet above sea level and never having experienced flooding. Cassidy criticized the NFIP’s failure to account for a home’s height, noting that this arbitrary zoning approach is contributing to the exorbitant costs.
Another case involved a retired couple living on Bayou Lafourche near Raceland, who were forced to drop their NFIP policy as premiums skyrocketed from $500 to $2,400 annually. Their son, who lives nearby, has seen his flood insurance costs surge from $500 to $6,300.
Cassidy also recounted the struggles of an elderly Korean War veteran and his wife, who took out a reverse mortgage to cover medical bills. Despite living behind a 12-foot levee, their NFIP premiums have soared to $6,500 a year, on top of their homeowner’s insurance. The couple fears they may lose their home if costs continue to rise.
Flooding has devastated families across the country, even in states where it’s not typically expected. Cassidy emphasized that states like Alabama, California, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia have all experienced more than $1 billion in NFIP claims since 1978.
FEMA has defended its new Risk Rating 2.0 program, but the agency itself has predicted that over 20% of policyholders could leave the program within the next decade if premiums continue to rise. Cassidy warned that the NFIP is on the brink of collapse if Congress doesn’t act soon.
Established in 1968 to assist those in flood-prone areas, the NFIP has been plagued by financial instability for decades. While Congress has repeatedly renewed the program, substantial reforms have remained elusive. With flooding becoming more frequent and severe, particularly in coastal states, the need for reform is more urgent than ever.
