Public Policy Argument May Not Serve the Public
It’s interesting—though not surprising—to read the 6/7/07 Wall Street Journal report that insurers are leaving the coastal states. HURRICANE WARNINGS As Insurers Flee Coast, States Face New Threat.
It is difficult to over-emphasize any one of the factors that led to this exodus. Most of the factors have been beyond control. Recent storms have been severe. Climate change theories suggest that past loss experience may understate future losses. But one factor was well within human control, Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood’s insurance initiative.
Following Katrina, Mr. Hood pursued insurers very aggressively. He argued that flood exclusions should be ignored. Mr. Hood’s expansive interpretation of coverage was supposedly justified by public policy.
But since insurers are now leaving the coastal states, I wonder whether Mr. Hood’s public policy arguments really served the public?
