Environmentalists, consumer organizations and insurers have joined forces to oppose a bill expanding the National Flood Insurance Program to include coverage for wind damage.

Such a change, they say, could cost taxpayers billions while providing incentives to build homes and businesses in environmentally fragile areas subject to frequent hurricanes and other storms.

The coalition of 12 organizations, including the National Wildlife Federation, Taxpayers for Common Sense and the Reinsurance Association of America laid out its position in a letter sent to senators this week.

Overhaul of the National Flood Insurance Program, which expires at the end of the year, has been a congresssional priority since hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma devastated the Gulf Coast in 2005 and put the program about $18 billion into debt.

The 2005 hurricanes brought a wave of lawsuits against the insurance industry, which pays claims for damage caused by winds but not for flood damage.

A House-passed flood insurance overhaul (HR 3121) would expand the program to allow individuals and business owners to buy optional “multi-peril” coverage against wind damage. The Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee approved its own draft version of the legislation without the wind provision.

The Senate version would forgive the program’s debt, which could create problems under Democratic pay-as-you-go budget rules.

The White House has threatened to veto any bill with wind coverage.

The flood insurance overhaul already faces a murky future. Committee Chairman Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn, said early this year that he wanted to act quickily, but the two Louisiana senators have placed holds on the bill. Republican David Vitter and Democrat Mary L. Landrieu are concerned that a phase-out of subsidies in the measure would drive up premiums and make living in flood-prone areas too costly, among other issues. They successfully blocked action on similar legislation in the 109th Congress.

If disagreements over the wind provisions, debt, subsidies and other issues cannot be resolved, a short term extension of the program may be the result, with a comprehensive overhaul again left for the next Congress.