[BluffTHIS!]

I think many of you in this thread are ignoring what should be the main point here, and that is in what fashion should NO be rebuilt, especially if it involves our federal tax dollars.

Two ways:

1) Rebuild/allow owners to rebuild, as it was;
2) Only allowing rebuilding in areas that are not flood prone which will result in a smaller city.

And I think that pvn's obviously accurate assessment argues for #2, along with the fact that NO should not be shown favoritism in easing federal flood rebuilding/insurance guidelines when areas following the flooding of the Mississippi in many states in 1993 were not, i.e they were forced to elevate or move. We as tax payers should not have to pay for a rebuilding just as before with the possibility of having to do so again any time. This is the same as requiring more stringent building codes in hurricane/earthquake prone areas.