Our view: FEMA should do its job, rather than dumping it on citizens. The Federal Emergency Management Agency hasn't had a very good reputation since Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans back in 2005. The group's response to the disaster was a disaster itself, and may have done more harm than good, at least in the short term.

Since then the agency has embarked on a warped campaign that will certainly improve its performance. But it's not working so much on doing a better job, but rather is just telling much of the nation that anything bad that happens isn't FEMA's problem. The agency is redrawing its maps of areas that could flood in a once-in-a-century storm. And in doing so, it's just wishing away levees that have protected communities for years without a problem.

Unless a levee is certified as safe — at the cost of $300,000 a mile — or some other agency accepts liability for any damage that would result should a levee break, FEMA just pretends that levee doesn't exist. Areas that have never flooded, and likely never will flood, are shown as floodplain. Property owners in the make-believe floodplain then have to buy very real and very expensive flood insurance. Any new building will have to be constructed as if the contractor was standing in a foot or so of make-believe water while driving nails.

The cost to a homeowner? Maybe $1,500 a year. The impact on the area's economy? It would be crippled.  The only winner in the process is FEMA. The agency is abdicating its responsibility, casting it onto the people it was created to protect. It won't have to worry about criticism the next time a Katrina comes along, because hey, it's telling us that we're on our own.

There are cases where the process is perhaps proper. As Sacramento continues to expand large-scale into the Natomas Basin — a known floodplain — FEMA should demand that the levees are absolutely secure. Same with the ironically named Plumas Lakes development in southern Yuba County, an area that was underwater the last time a Feather River levee broke.

But the one-size-fits-all approach is a disservice to rural communities that have been in place for years, growing moderately, and have never had flooding problems. The agency should be evaluating risk and assigning actual danger, rather than just assuming the worst and whacking citizens in the pocketbook. It should be doing its job, rather than covering its tail.

The agency's cure is a far more certain disaster than a flood that's as about as likely as you or me winning the lottery. A revolt is in order. The citizenry should let their representatives in Congress know this is not acceptable. And Congress needs to jerk FEMA back into serving the public, rather than skewering it.