For California progressive lawmakers, the introduction of an ideologically driven bill is not entirely unheard of, aiming to make a point of view rather than address any problem, but it is difficult to tolerate such nonsense in a crisis. [emphasis, links added]
California's insurance industry has been in a state of collapse in recent years with a series of devastating wildfires fleeing.
The latest Los Angeles fire will bring insurers more than $30 billion to the minds of policy makers.
We have seen some progress as a few responsible adults pass a series of insurance reform departments that relax the state’s insurance price cap.
Specifically, the state is speeding up the rate assessment process and allowing insurers to use disaster models and increase reinsurance rates in premiums.
They also filled out the state-created insurance companies called the Fair (Fair Access Insurance Requirements) program.
But there is still a lot of stupid legislation.
The worst example is Senate Bill 222, which pretends to solve the insurance situation but is nothing more than trying to blame oil companies for blame climate change and ignore the real reason why insurers have been withdrawing from our market.
With the fruits of real reforms – Seven insurance companies recently announced their intention to expand underwriting in California, cynicals will certainly get the most attention.
SB 222, by Senator Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco:
“A person will be authorized to file a civil lawsuit … including $10,000 or more losses, a violation of the parties responsible for a climate disaster or extreme weather or other event, which is due to misleading and deceptive practices of the party responsible, or providing misunderstandings about the link between their fossil fuel products and climate change and extreme weather or other events, resulting in events that cause risk change.”
This is a sentence that says that The bill would allow wildfire victims and insurers to sue oil companies for losses.
Wiener – alternate between providing wise laws (mainly related to housing regulations) and less wise laws – provides insurance for the latest efforts to undermine the oil industry:
“By forcing fossil fuel companies to drive the climate crisis to pay their fair share, we can help stabilize our insurance market and make the victims of climate disasters throughout.”
That's garbage.
“If passed, SB 222 will cover the disaster in the disaster,” My colleague at the insurance expert at Jerry Theodorou at the R Street Institute said.
“The impact of natural disasters is bad enough. A bill that encourages sub-fruits to electricity and utility providers is to pour gasoline on fire. Loss claims for power providers, insurance companies and ordinary consumers. ”
If its insurance industry keeps fleeing, California's economy will suffer, so imagine what it would be like if oil companies were to be further motivated to return production.
Anyone who is perceptive knows that this will lead to endless litigation and unpredictability in the industry.
The bill is especially surprising given that California Democrats (most notably Gavin Newsom) have been thrilling over the state's highest gas prices.
These are driven by their own regulatory and tax policies, but it is always more interesting to hold press conferences and special legislative sessions columns against price fraud and so-called corporate greed.
Anyone who is perceptive knows that this will lead to endless litigation and unpredictability in the industry. Wiener will introduce something, which is also surprising Make the government an arbitrator that constitutes deceptive speech or misinformation.
One person’s false information is another person’s disagreement. There is so much freedom of speech. As always, it will only kidnap the court for many years.
“SB 222 will relieve local governments and property owners of responsibility for wildfires and blame all of this on oil companies,” Adrian Moore of the Foundation told Southern California News Corp.
Residents in California “will pay for higher gasoline and electricity prices.” But I assume supporters have to know this and the bill is just a distraction.
The climate may be increasing the risk of fire, but it is not an excuse for state governments to refuse to build more resilient infrastructure rather than trying to change the entire Earth’s climate.
By the way, California emits less than one percent of the global greenhouse gases.
I have written about California’s inability to expand its water infrastructure. More water is essential to fighting droughts and fires. The state’s building regulations make reconstruction a hard time.
Reading break in the US audience
