John Oliver talks about floods, insurance and hungry seagulls

John Oliver discusses the ins and outs of flooding, federal disaster insurance, and those hungry, hungry seagulls on Last Week Tonight.

On the latest episode of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver spoke about one of the most frequent and looming natural disasters facing the United States — flooding. Floods, he said, “are clearly catastrophic, traumatic events”. They’re also “the ‘Despacito’ of natural disasters”, meaning that they are everywhere and that no one should blame Puerto Rico for the damage caused.

Don’t believe him? Take FEMA’s estimation that floods are responsible for 91% of America’s natural disasters. In fact, FEMA even calls it “America’s #1 Natural Hazard!” — exclamation point and all.

Climate change is going to make it worse, but we (and John Oliver) honestly don’t have the time to talk about whether or not extreme weather has anything to with human-caused climate change. Except, you know, it is. Maybe all of the red block letters flashing on the screen will help convince you.

So, with all of this evidence that flooding is bad and will very likely get worse, why do people keep living and building in flood-prone regions?

Warning: this clip contains language that is not safe for work.

Why live in a flood zone?

For some, they were born there and have built families there. They may even be effectively trapped there by home prices and a sagging market. After all, who else wants to buy a home that’s been flooded over and over?

For others, living in a flood zone might be a necessity for making a living. What fisherman wants to get off their boat and then drive hours inland to get home?

Other people may live there for the luxury of beach-front property, the presence of “flying beach rats” (a term Oliver believes is more accurate than “seagull”) notwithstanding.

One man interviewed claimed that he forgot about all the problems because he could see dolphins and roseate spoonbills. That didn’t quite land with Oliver, in part because he couldn’t understand the appeal of roseate spoonbills. According to the Audubon Society, these birds are “gorgeous at a distance and bizarre up close”.

Making matters worse is the inability to exactly predict flooding. For instance, not every flood-prone area is obviously so. Houston, for example, was not directly by a coast but was devastated by the recent Hurricane Harvey. The concrete landscape of the growing urban and suburban areas surrounding Houston also kept water from seeping into the ground.

The problem with flood insurance

But it isn’t all urban sprawl and the poetic appeal of living on a bayou that’s caused this problem. Many people are at risk because of poorly managed flood insurance programs.

Flood insurance can be surprisingly cheap. That’s thanks to underwriting by the National Flood Insurance Program, a government agency. The NFIP started over 50 years ago when flooding ravaged American communities through the 1960s.

Because of this disastrous flooding, insurance companies wouldn’t cover them at a reasonable rate. The government, meanwhile, realized that it was spending huge amounts of money on disaster relief — hence the NFIP. With the NFIP’s discounted insurance, people were more likely to buy the insurance. That way, hoped the government, there would be more money for rebuilding.

But this wasn’t entirely the point of the NFIP. The government was banking on the hope that people, once they were told they were at risk, would move out of flood-prone areas. Perhaps hindsight is 20/20, but it seems astonishing now that officials would think that people would follow suit with this plan.

Oliver was similarly unsurprised by the lack of movement from flood zones:

"Of course it hasn’t because that’s how people work. We’ll gladly accept huge risks to our personal safety for the sake of a discount. That was the entire premise behind the McDonald’s Dollar Menu."

According to Oliver, practically everything about the NFIP needs fixing. Insurance mandates are poorly enforced, for example. Meanwhile, FEMA flooding maps can be so inaccurate as to be practically useless. During Hurricane Harvey, some analysts found that flood zone maps failed to predict up to 75% of flooding in some neighborhoods.

Making money on disasters

Another flaw lies in the administration of the NFIP. You see, the government doesn’t insure people directly. Rather, it pays a fee to private insurers to cover people. However, the federal government is responsible for paying for damages.

Private companies also get paid for each claim they handle. Insurance companies, therefore, make more money on big disasters. Indeed, the bigger the disaster, the better.

Meanwhile, taxpayers and the government are left with huge losses. And when we say “huge”, we really mean it. Before the most recent spate of hurricanes, the NFIP was already $25 billion in debt to the Treasury.

That’s not all, however. A large chunk of NFIP money goes to “repetitive loss properties”. That includes, in Oliver’s words, “literally insane” properties, like homes practically in the water on Alabama’s Dauphin Island. And 1 out of 5 homes covered by the NFIP is a second home. That means that all of this money is going in large part to pay for someone’s possibly poorly-planned vacation home.

Oliver argued that you should totally be allowed to build your home in whatever risky place you want. In the ocean — great! Next to a river of lava — fantastic views! On the sun — plenty of solar power! That said, you shouldn’t expect the government to repeatedly bail you out and pay for your ill-conceived housing ideas.

How to help people who actually need it

Still, before you think that everyone covered by the NFIP is a smug amateur architect, consider those who actually need this program. What about the people who simply can’t move? “The vast majority of NFIP beneficiaries are not wealthy or second homeowners,” said Oliver.

Remember that moving is not as simple as packing your bags and moving to a magically-appointed new home. How do you sell your old home, anyway, given that it might be currently underwater? Unfortunately, buyout programs are slow-moving, poorly-funded behemoths. They simply don’t move fast enough to help people.

“There just has to be a better way here,” claimed Oliver. We could start by getting rid of discounts for second homes and increasing insurance rates on some properties. Some political action could help, too, if it ever got going. Congress tried to do something with the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012, but you can probably guess how that turned out. People’s rates skyrocketed, making frightened politicians scale back reforms to appease their worried constituents.

Next: John Oliver talks Equifax and credit reports on Last Week Tonight

Okay, you might say. We build a whole bunch of levees and put everyone’s houses on stilts. Problem solved, right? Yet expensive interventions like these can only buy time. They aren’t going to do anything about increasingly bad rainfall and more frequent and intense storms. We’ve all heard about steadily climbing sea levels, which, yes, definitely, is because of climate change.

Oliver’s talking seagull friend agreed on the necessity for change (when it wasn’t pleading for just one more Tostitos tortilla chip). “While leaving your home is hard, being forced out while it’s uninhabitable is ten times harder.”