House Panels Face Environmental, Insurer Groups Over Catastrophe Bill

March 10, 2010

  • March 10, 2010 at 2:17 am
    Susan says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    proposal to “spread the risk” – is this the same as “spread the wealth”?
    Subsidizing someone’s home being built in a coastal flooding zone- then crying who will pay me to rebuild when there is flooding? letting all the homeowners take the hit for some? You pay the higher premium when the risk of damage is greater- DA!
    not penalize with higher premiums for all!

  • March 10, 2010 at 5:03 am
    Actuary says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Spread the wealth? It concentrates wealth to those who already have it and own beautiful beach properties.

  • March 11, 2010 at 7:29 am
    Batman says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Holy hitting the nail on the head, Susan! Ever notice that the sponsors for all of these bills to “spread the risk” are from Florida? I say let them eat their sand; it is one thing to spread the risk but it’a another thing to see who benefits. The risk should be a little more less frequent than Florida vs Hurricanes; so everyone pays in but who will be taking out, and how often? I don’t care to make an argument about what is fair or unfair, but I would expect that losses occur a little more randomly. Why not ust bill all homeowners in all other states, other than Florida, for storm damage? Why not admit that they want others to pay for their “loss”? That would amount to the same thing!

  • March 11, 2010 at 10:22 am
    Florida Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The insurance market in Florida is all but non existence. We have startup carriers with no capital when a storm hits the Federal Government will have to bail out Florida from its financial peril just.

    The Citizens of Florida do not want a hand out we want the risk to be properly financed and actuarily sound rates for catastrophe exposures. Just like our neiboring states. We just want the private sector insurance market to be able to handle the exposure. Currently there is no market avaialble exept from our State run Citizens Insurance company which is insolvent or would be in the event of a storm. Our current budget shortfall is 5 billion which we will have to handle ourselves, which we will without the need to establish an State income tax. WE ARE NOT LOOKING FOR A HANDOUT JUST A BACKSTOP THAT WE WILL PAY INTO FOR YEARS UNTIL THERE IS A STORM. IF NOT WE WILL BE COMING TO THE FEDS AFTER A STORM FOR A BAILOUT. WHICH DO YOU WANT?

  • March 11, 2010 at 11:23 am
    layla fanucci says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Let’s change the laws to protect the American people from Insurance companies that do whatever they want. Their motto, deny, deny, deny, wear them down, wear them down.
    “There is no incentive for insurance companies to do what is right, such as live up to the promises made in their policies. Tort reformers fueled by insurance money think big business and the insurance industry need to be protected against “runaway juries.” It’s the other way around. Big business and the insurance industry have always been able to take care of themselves. The little people need protection from them. This country was founded on the common law right of the little guy to get into court with his hired gun to fight the oppressor, be it big government or big business. Take that away and we have nothing left. Look around. It’s being whittled away, bit by bit, caps on damages here, restrictions on jury trials there. It won’t end until we recognize the enemy and join together to take a stand against them. It will take the little people to do this together”. Quote from an attorney. For more information about our story contact me at http://www.laylafanucci.com

  • March 11, 2010 at 12:32 pm
    sarah says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What does this statement have to do with a Federal catastrophe backstop!

    This blog I thought was for insurance professionals.

  • March 11, 2010 at 1:18 am
    Layla says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Look at the big picture and you will figure it out!
    Wow!!!!

  • March 12, 2010 at 9:36 am
    David says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I support independent agents because they also fight for the consumer. I think Florida should look to South Carolina for answers. The legislature in FL is trying to do the right thing but Crist keeps stopping them. Remember this used to be a “north” florida vs. “south” florida problem. Now it’s a “help Florida” situation. No other state qualifies for Federal assistance under the Klein bill than Florida! CA to a lesser extent, but this is a Florida Beach House Bailout that is NOT Good for most of us, including Florida, because it will encourage more development in risky areas. Listen to the Environmental groups! They have it right on this issue!

  • March 13, 2010 at 10:17 am
    Troublemaker says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Even if the state plans had sound underwriting (they don’t), why should some states get federally subsidized reinsurance when others don’t?

    A portion of the premium paid by a homeowner in Indiana goes to profit for insurers/reinsurers in the private market. Why should Floridians get insurance with a reduced/eliminated profit component?

    The global reinsurance market takes care of the risk diversification.

    If there’s an affordability issue, address that with means based welfare programs, not by blindly subsidizing wealthy residential and commercial property owners.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*