Although emergency response has improved since 1993 and hazard mitigation programs have reduced some risks, the region's flood risk continues to increase as more investments and people are concentrated in flood-prone areas affected by extreme precipitation. Congress and federal agencies have taken steps to address selected flood challenges; at the same time, climate, population, and investment trends have increased the threat, vulnerability, and consequences of flooding. Since 2005, Congress has considered legislation and enacted other measures to address some flood issues; broader efforts to adopt a comprehensive flood policy and management strategy, however, have not been pursued. Many of these tools would require action by local governments, regulation of floodplain use, significant changes to federal programs, and substantially increased investment in flood damage reduction. The report then discusses lessons from the 2008 Midwest flood and contrasts the 2008 flood with the 1993 flood. Flood Policy in a Federalist System: Shared Responsibilities

In the United States, flood-related roles and responsibilities are shared; local governments are responsible for land use and zoning decisions that shape floodplain and coastal development, but state and federal governments also influence community and individual decisions on managing flood risk. The federal government also supports hazard mitigation, offers flood insurance, and provides emergency response and disaster aid for significant floods. Although floodwaters overtopped and breached many Midwest levees and a few dams in 1993 and 2008 causing significant economic damage, the dams and levees worked largely as designed. Much of the railroad traffic in the Midwest was halted. The lower regional damage estimates in 2008 ($15 billion compared to $30 billion in 1993) fail to capture the challenge of recovery in severely affected communities. The general sense is that flood risk reduction in the Mississippi River basin since 1993 paid off in 2008. It authorized using a portion of federal disaster assistance to cover 75% of the cost to acquire, relocate or elevate flood-prone homes and businesses; prior to the change, the federal cost share had been 50%. Recent Congressional Steps to Address the Flood Challenge

The 2008 Midwest flood, Hurricane Katrina, and other levee breaches have increased the congressional debate about how to manage flood and infrastructure risks, what is an acceptable level of risk—especially for low-probability, high-consequence events—and who should bear the costs to reduce flood risk (particularly in the case of levee construction and rehabilitation). A challenge for Congress is structuring federal actions and programs so they provide incentives to reduce flood risk without unduly infringing on private property rights or usurping local decision making. Tackling this challenge would require significant adjustments in the flood insurance program, disaster aid policies and practices, and programs for structural and nonstructural measures and actions. However, levees represent only a portion of the nation's efforts at flood risk management. Reducing Flood Risk

Recommendations for how to improve flood policy abound. These events have raised both concerns about the state of the nation's flood policies, programs, and infrastructure, and awareness of the tradeoff between the benefits and risks of developing flood-prone areas. In summary, although federal programs have improved through congressional and agency action since 1993, the fundamental direction and approach of national flood policies and programs remain largely unchanged.
Floods remain a significant hazard in the United States. Developing and investing in flood-prone areas represents a tradeoff between the location's economic and other benefits and the exposure to a flood hazard. In the United States, flood mitigation, protection, emergency response, and recovery roles and responsibilities are shared. Local governments are responsible for land use and zoning decisions that shape floodplain and coastal development. State and federal programs, policies, and investments influence community and individual decisions on managing flood risk. The federal government constructs some of the nation's dams and levees, offers flood insurance, supports nonstructural risk reduction actions (known as hazard mitigation), and provides emergency response and disaster aid.
In June 2008, a series of storms in several midwestern states caused $15 billion in damages. The 2008 flooding drew comparisons to the devastating 1993 Midwest flood and raised questions about whether the lessons from the 1993 flood were heeded. In 1993, hundreds of levees throughout much of the basin were breached in the Midwest causing $30 billion in damages; much of the damage was agricultural and occurred in soaked upland areas. In contrast, the majority of the 2008 damages were concentrated along a few Mississippi River tributaries and in population centers with breached levees. The magnitude of the two floods simply overwhelmed the region's levees and dams, illustrating that some residual risk remains to people and investment behind these protective structures. Since 1993, emergency response and hazard mitigation programs have reduced risks in some Midwest communities; however, the region's flood risk continues to increase as more investments and people are located in flood-prone areas.
Since 1993, Congress, federal agencies, state, and local governments have taken steps aimed at reducing the nation's flood risk; at the same time, climate, population, and investment trends have increased the threat, vulnerability, and consequences of flooding. For example, Congress authorized using federal disaster assistance to cover more of the costs to acquire, relocate or elevate flood-prone homes and businesses. However, broader efforts to adopt a comprehensive flood policy and management strategy have not been pursued. The fundamental direction and approach of the national policies and programs remain largely unchanged since 1993. A comprehensive strategy would require regulation of floodplain use, significant changes to federal programs, and increased investment in flood risk reduction by all levels of government. Although they would reduce flood risk, these changes face significant opposition.
The 2008 Midwest flooding, Hurricane Ike in 2008, and Hurricane Katrina in 2005 have renewed interest in the suite of tools available to improve flood resiliency. The issue for Congress is deciding on whether and how to enact and implement feasible and affordable flood policies and programs to reduce flood risk. The challenge is how to structure federal actions and programs so they provide incentives to reduce flood risk without unduly infringing on private property rights or usurping local decision making. Tackling this challenge would require adjustments in the flood insurance program, disaster aid policies and practices, and programs for structural and nonstructural flood risk reduction measures and actions.