Landrieu is insisting an amendment to the measure to ndefinitely delay mandated hikes to flood insurance premiums be cleared for floor vote. The rate increases were a part of the reauthorization of the the National Flood Insurance Program. Boxer is manager of the bill as chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

The bill, approved unanimously by the panel, would authorize funding to refurbish the nation's locks and dams, provide harbor and river maintenance, assist with flood protection, and restore key environmental areas.

It has nothing to do with the NFIP, but Landrieu and fellow Louisiana Sen. David Vitter, a Republican, are demanding a vote on the amended bill because they are under intense pressure from constituents to delay or nullify the rate hikes.

The NFIP reauthoirization bill adopted a year ago mandates that actuarially sound rates be phased in over five years for second homes as well as homes in flood plains subject to repeated flooding.

It also raises the overall cap on rate hikes from 10 percent to 20 percent and permits the NFIP to charge an assessment to set up a reserve fund. The act also eliminates subsidies on structures built before communities adopted flood maps in the 1970s.     

"Most Federal officials and regulators agree that the National Flood Insurance Program must be actuarially sound, but the dilemma and 'Catch-22' for federal officials is how to achieve sound rates without the shock of high unaffordable rate increases for primary and secondary residences," said Mike Chaney, Mississippi insurance commissioner, and chairman of the NAIC's Property and Casualty Working Group.

"The Coastal states and their elected officials share a common history in addressing and solving catastrophic disasters, and I think a sound affordable phase-in plan is in order, especially after Sandy," Chaney said.

The Landrieu-Vitter amendment would stop premium rate increases on second homes under the NFIP until the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) conducts an affordability study and there is adequate time to act on the results.

But that could be a while because FEMA under the measure is required to conduct 12 comprehensive studies on flood-related issues.

Landrieu is holding the water resources bill hostage because it is one of the few bills with bipartisan support being taken up by the gridlocked Senate.

However, Boxer is opposed because she fears the bill, strongly supported by agricultural and other interests in her state, would get tied up if non-germane amendments would be cleared for floor action.

"We've made progress on this bill the last couple of days," Reid said. "It's an important bill for every state in the union and I hope it's not bogged down with a lot of non-relevant, non-germane amendments. If people want to offer them, have at it. I just don't think it's the right thing to do on this bill."

He noted that Landrieu wants her amendment cleared for floor action because flood is such an important issue in her state.

"She has been here like she is, I don't mean this in a negative sense, but a bulldog," Reid said.

"She gets hold of something, it's hard to loosen her jaw," Reid said. "She's been here all afternoon working on this. I hope something can be worked out in the next 48 hours on this national bill."

"I have been warning about these increases for some time and calling on FEMA to address these rate increases for nearly a year," Landrieu said in announcing she will seek to add the amendment to the water resources bill. "We don't have time to wait for FEMA – we need to stop these rate increases now."

"Families and businesses in Louisiana are already paying exorbitant rates for flood insurance and some could see those rates go up dramatically under these proposals," she added."My amendment will stop these increases until FEMA conducts an affordability study and Congress can act on the results. I agree that the National Flood Insurance Program needs to be self-sustaining, but this is not the right way."

Legislators in Gulf Coast states from Florida to Mississippi are being caught in what Chaney and other legislators describe as a "Catch-22."

They are facing strong feedback from constituents faced with the rate hikes, but at the same time many Republican members are demanding fiscal restraint from the Obama administration, including support for legislation that would reduce government spending without tax hikes as their price for raising the federal government debt limit.