“The frequency of floods in Boston has tripled in the past few decades. For the people I represent in the in MA-7th, that is not an abstract statistic. It means higher costs, lost homes, and long-term trauma.”

“We’re living in an environmental justice crisis made worse by Trump and Republicans who insist on rolling back climate resilience programs, and the harm falls disproportionately on marginalized people.”

Video (YouTube)

WASHINGTON – In a House Financial Services subcommittee hearing, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) discussed how frequent flooding in communities like Chelsea, East Boston, and Dorchester are both a fiscal problem and an environmental justice problem, with low-income households bearing the burden of climate disasters. Congresswoman Pressley, who also acted as Ranking Member for the hearing, called on Congress to pass legislation that helps frontline communities, advances environmental justice, and makes the National Flood Insurance Program more affordable.

A transcript of the Congresswoman’s opening statement and question line is available below, and the full video is available here.

Transcript: Pressley Spotlights Flood Risk in Boston, Calls for Stronger Protections for Frontline Communities

House Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance

April 2, 2026

Opening Statement:

REP. PRESSLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for joining us today. 

The focus of this hearing is on flooding, the cost of the National Flood Insurance Program, but also the real-life impacts for households, businesses, and families due to the increase of flooding during the ongoing affordability and climate crisis.

Flooding accounts for 90% of all U.S. natural disasters, making it the most common and costly natural disaster. Some communities and properties experience this burden repeatedly. We refer to them as frontline communities, and they are disproportionately communities of color and low-income neighborhoods, many that were redlined into these flood-prone areas and under-invested in.

These households are disproportionately located in flood-prone areas and face the harshest impacts. These communities, all across the United States, aren’t doing anything wrong, but remain the victims of climate change, driven by corporate greed and government policies denying climate change even exists.

Compounded by the housing affordability crisis, many of these families are now locked into these areas where natural disasters occur most. Take Chelsea in my district, the Massachusetts’ 7th, this vibrant community was redlined. Perfectly good properties were appraised at lower values because appraisers wrote these homes were, “acquired by Jewish people.”

We cannot deny this history, because we all continue to feel the impacts today. 

This under appraisal and systemic and systematic devaluation meant homeowners received less money for their properties. This isn’t just an issue in my district, it’s an issue across the country, where households were redlined, under-invested in, denied loans, and are now being punished for living in those areas and having fewer resources. 

We need more support for these communities–not less. Private insurers have increasingly withdrawn from the very communities that need coverage the most due to the escalating costs of climate disasters. 

We need to support government agencies that often go overlooked but are essential, like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, NOAA, who operates the integrated ocean observing system, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, who operates the National Flood Insurance Program.

In 2009 under then-Chairwoman Waters, committee Democrats passed legislation with bipartisan support to reauthorize and strengthen the National Flood Insurance Program for eight years. Unfortunately, the legislation under consideration today does not go far enough. 

Severe repetitive-loss properties remain a major challenge. Outdated maps and pricing often fail to reflect true risk, leaving many repeatedly flooded homes unrecognized as high-risk and limiting effective mitigation. Tens of thousands of these homes remain under invested in and under supported. 

Meanwhile, Trump has no plan to address the growing insurance crisis, is weakening FEMA, threatening to fire up to 50% of the staff there. 

This should not be a partisan issue. Flooding impacts red states, blue states, states on the coast and states in the heartland. Democrats welcome the opportunity to work across the aisle to address repetitive-loss properties, expand property level mitigation, and to strengthen federal, state, and local financing tools. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about their proposals. I yield back.

—

Question Line: 

REP. PRESSLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

The frequency of floods in Boston has tripled in the past few decades. For the people I represent in the in MA-7th, that is not an abstract statistic. It means higher costs, lost homes, and long-term trauma. We’re living in an environmental justice crisis made worse by Trump and Republicans who insist on rolling back climate resilience programs, and the harm falls disproportionately on marginalized people. 

Mr. Scata, we know communities of color in low-income neighborhoods face repeated instances of flooding, threatening safety, stability and affordability. What are some of the contributing factors?

MR. SCATA: Thank you for your question. One of the contributing factors has been redlining, as you mentioned earlier. There were multiple studies conducted by organizations like Redfin that showed redlining had directly led to communities of color being put into these high-risk flood zones. Other issues are that in certain areas, lower valued homes are all people can afford, and the reason why they’re lower value is because they’re in flood prone zones, and so it’s really important that when we do mitigation funding, we are targeting those homes, because just providing insurance doesn’t stop flooding from happening. We really need to get people out of harm’s way, whether it’s through buyouts, through elevation, through other means. Thank you.

REP. PRESSLEY: Thank you. And I would add to that list, systemic divestment, structural racism, a lack of affordable housing to that list. 

So when we say communities of color and low-income neighborhoods are overexposed to flood risk, this is what we mean. Families and workers in places like Chelsea and Dorchester are living on the edge of an economic and climate disaster. In fact, in East Boston alone, two-thirds of buildings facing future flooding are mixed-use, so that means both homes and businesses are at risk. Families could see their homes and their livelihoods damaged or completely disappeared. 

So this will cost millions of dollars, hundreds of jobs, especially in transportation, food service, and accommodations, the very sectors that sustain our communities. So I want to talk about solutions. 

In Massachusetts, less than 2% of the state’s roughly 3 million housing units carry the National Flood Insurance Program coverage, leaving most homes uninsured for floods. We need to ensure people can keep coverage and protect their homes. 

Ms. Cackley, what does GAO recommend to help low-income homeowners in places like my district keep NFIP coverage that is affordable?

MS. CACKLEY: Thank you for the question. We are actually doing work right now on the flood insurance protection gap, because your concern is valid that there are very many people in this country who are at risk of flooding but do not have flood insurance of any kind, either through NFIP or through private insurance. And so we are looking right now at what is the available evidence about the extent to which consumers purchase flood insurance, the financial effects of being uninsured, factors that influence whether consumers will purchase flood insurance, and then the actions that would increase consumers’ purchase of flood insurance.That work will be will be available later this year. 

REP. PRESSLEY: Thank you. I think it’s important to make plain for folks watching at home that the consequences of the proposals that are before us right now, this would further strip flood insurance coverage. So I just want to make sure people understand that.

Ms. Horn, in a sentence or two in my remaining minute here, what would it mean for homeowners if severe, repetitive-loss properties were barred from NFIP coverage, especially in those older coastal neighborhoods?

MS. HORN: Thank you for the question. They always have the option of trying to buy insurance in the private market, but the likelihood is that that would be difficult to obtain, or potentially just so expensive that they would not receive, they wouldn’t be able to buy it. Without access to some form of insurance, they would be reliant either on disaster assistance, if that is forthcoming, or state assistance, or they would not be getting assistance to help with recovery from floods.

REP. PRESSLEY: Thank you. At this very moment, what we need are more solutions and less problems. So that’s why we have to stop cutting FEMA’s workforce. We have to stop defunding community grants. We have to stop allowing corporations to poison the environment and exacerbate the climate crisis. 

Congress needs to pass legislation that helps frontline communities and advances environmental justice. 

I don’t believe that homeowners should be punished by the government because a flood happened. Our charge is clear: center equity, strengthen resilience tools, and ensure families who are higher risk are covered at a price that they can actually afford. 

Thank you. I yield back.

###