Today a federal judge in New Orleans hears arguments on why the new flood risk rating system created by FEMA for the National Flood Insurance Program should get flushed.
The plaintiffs say the new flood risk rating system comes from flawed methodology, and the government officials who created it know that.
Legal analyst Doug Sunseri, host of All Things Legal on WWL, says plaintiffs will argue that "FEMA acknowledges that their methodologist in determining the flood risk for each individual is flawed, and they acknowledge it's not accurate, but they're still going ahead and implementing rate increases,"
Sunseri says FEMA will argue they have the administrative power to set rates and don't need to share how they make those decisions.
"We're the federal government, we make the rules, and we can change the rules," Sunseri said of the government's argument. "And we don't owe an explanation to the states, we don't owe an explanation to the policy holders on how we come up with these assessments for flood risks and its premiums. You just have to live by them."
Sunseri says he expects the judge here at federal court in downtown New Orleans may have some tough questions.
"How are you coming up with these rates? Are they arbitrary?" Sunseri said the judge is likely to ask. "How are you making these assumptions as to the flood risk of these policyholders?"
