

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"Big Oil took its playbook directly from the minds of Big Tobacco and think they can get away with the same deliberate disinformation campaign, coercing the public to pay for the very harms they suffer."
Efforts to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable for the climate emergency continued in Washington state this week as homeowners sued oil giants and a trade association over their decades of lies and rising insurance premium rates.
"As natural disasters become more costly, homeowners foot the bill," explains the complaint, filed on Tuesday in the US District Court for the Western District of Washington against the American Petroleum Institute, BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, and Shell and its subsidiary Equilon Enterprises.
"In 2023, a significant number of natural catastrophes... impacted the United States, at an estimated cost of $114 billion, of which approximately $80 billion was insured," the filing notes. "In the state of Washington alone, homeowners' rates have increased by a total of 51% over the past six years. But climate change has driven insurance premium increases throughout the country because insurance generally operates by pooling risks."
There are two named plaintiffs in the proposed class action suit. Margaret Hazard lives in Carson, an "area that is very dry and prone to forest fires." Since she began paying for home insurance in 2017, her premiums have doubled, and she recently had to switch to a policy with less coverage. Richard Kennedy of Normandy Park has also paid for homeowner's insurance since then; his premiums have gone from $1,012.10 to $2,149.18, an increase of nearly 113%.
"This case is about holding the fossil fuel defendants accountable for the increased homeowners' insurance premiums that their coordinated and deliberate scheme to hide the truth about climate change and the effects of burning fossil fuels has brought about and for their conduct contributing to climate change; a cost the highly profitable trillion-dollar industry can easily afford, and one that it should not be permitted to simply pass along to the everyday people who are presently bearing the burden of these increased premiums," the complaint states.
The document highlights that "defendants have known since at least the 1960s, based on their own internal scientific research, that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas pollution caused by the unchecked sales of its highly profitable petroleum products would inevitably lead to 'catastrophic' weather-related consequences with 'considerable significance to civilization' and that only a narrow window of time existed in which to act before severe consequences would result."
Big Oil "took this internal calculus seriously," the filing details, but "rather than inform the public, or... undertake meaningful remedial steps, defendants chose instead to protect their profits by engaging in a massive, deliberate, decadeslong misinformation campaign intended to sow doubt in the minds of the media [and] business leaders, and deceive the public and consumers about the conclusions they themselves had reached about the substantial consequences that the sale of their products would have."
As journalists and academic researchers have revealed what fossil fuel companies knew, and when, over the past decade—while extreme weather, from rapidly intensifying hurricanes to historic wildfires, ravaged US communities—various climate liability lawsuits have been filed across the country by states, municipalities, tribes, and individuals.
According to the Center for Climate Integrity's national tracker, in Washington state alone, there are at least three other cases: two brought by tribes in December 2023 and a wrongful death suit filed in May by the daughter of Juliana Leon, who died during the extreme heatwave that plagued the Pacific Northwest in 2021.
The cases have often drawn comparisons to the tobacco industry's deception, and the one filed this week is no exception. In fact, the plaintiffs for the new federal suit in Washington are represented by the law firm Hagens Berman, whose managing partner and cofounder, Steve Berman, served as special assistant attorney general for 13 states against Big Tobacco.
"Big Oil took its playbook directly from the minds of Big Tobacco and think they can get away with the same deliberate disinformation campaign, coercing the public to pay for the very harms they suffer," Berman said in a statement. "We see a direct correlation between Big Oil's lies and the alarming increase of homeowners insurance due to the rising threat of natural disasters."
"It's absurd for Chubb to continue to underwrite activities that are causing climate change and then turn around and pay for the claims and payouts caused by these activities," said one critic.
Chubb's 2019 decision to stop underwriting new coal projects or offering policies to businesses that generate more than 30% of their revenue or energy production from the fossil fuel was welcomed as a "major step forward" that could pressure other insurance giants to follow suit—but six years later, Wednesday reporting revealed that the company "has reversed its stance."
"It appears to have broken that pledge last week by reinsuring Nghi Son 2, a 1.2GW power plant on Vietnam's coast fueled entirely by coal," The Bureau of Investigative Journalism detailed. "Nghi Son 2 could emit up to 175 million metric tons of CO2 over 25 years—more than the annual emissions of the Philippines—according to Global Energy Monitor, which tracks energy data."
While Chubb CEO Evan Greenberg said six years ago that the company recognizes the reality of climate change and the substantial impact of human activity on our planet," neither the insurer nor Nghi Son 2 Power responded to the outlet's requests for comment.
Meanwhile, Giovanna Eichner, shareholder advocate at Green Century Capital Management, which holds shares in the insurer, said that "it's absurd for Chubb to continue to underwrite activities that are causing climate change and then turn around and pay for the claims and payouts caused by these activities."
In fact, the outlet highlighted, Chubb stopped covering wildfire-prone areas of California in 2021. Experts at the advocacy groups As You Sow and the Consumer Federation of America called out Chubb for contravening its coal policy—and doing so while ditching customers who need coverage in the face of extreme weather made worse by the continued use of fossil fuels.
Chubb, one of the world’s largest insurers, was one of the first to stop covering coal-projects, pledging to ‘do its part as a steward of Earth’But it has now become the lead reinsurer for a coal-fired power plant in Vietnam
[image or embed]
— The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (@tbij.bsky.social) July 23, 2025 at 7:07 AM
It's not immediately clear what Chubb's reported move in Vietnam will mean for other decisions. For example, as with the 2019 coal announcement, the insurer was praised by climate, environmental, and Indigenous rights defenders last year for abandoning a highly controversial methane gas project on the Texas Gulf Coast after facing months of grassroots community pressure.
Wednesday's reporting comes after a working paper published last month by a trio of researchers at the University of Zurich explained that insurers adopting restrictions on coal were accelerating the shift away from it.
Writing about the findings on Substack, longtime climate campaigner Peter Bosshard noted that "the Insure Our Future campaign has pressured the insurance industry to shift away from coal and other fossil fuels since 2017. We have seen a lot of anecdotal evidence that the restrictions which insurers adopted during this period have created bottlenecks for coal companies and made it impossible to build new coal power plants in much of the world."
"Through freedom of information requests, the Zurich researchers managed to access 9,745 insurance policies across 456 mines during the 2014-24 period, covering more than three-quarters of U.S. coal production," he continued. "Based on this data, they can for the first time offer hard evidence on the impact of insurers' coal restrictions."
While the paper identifies two exceptions to the overall trend—Lloyd's and Zurich—the researchers still concluded that insurers' policies can limit coal mining activity. Given that, Bosshard asserted that "insurance companies should use their clout to accelerate not just the shift away from coal, but also from oil and gas."
"We always have had to take matters into our own hands, and we have protected ourselves against enormous companies," one local campaigner said.
Louisiana advocates and their allies are not giving up in their fight to stop the liquefied natural gas buildout that threatens the health and well-being of Gulf Coast communities—not to mention the stability of the global climate—even as the Trump administration doubles down on its commitment to expanding LNG infrastructure.
In a briefing on Tuesday, community members, local advocates, and international campaigners shared how they would continue to push back against Venture Global, an LNG company that has amassed a record of ecosystem destruction and air pollution violations at its currently operating Calcasieu Pass export terminal in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. Despite this, the Trump administration's Department of Energy granted conditional approval for the company’s nearby Calcasieu Pass 2 (CP2), undoing the pause that the outgoing Biden administration had placed on it and other LNG approvals as it considered the public interest ramifications of LNG exports.
Yet Gulf Coast campaigners, who are used to dealing with a lax regulatory environment at the state level, were not defeated.
"Anybody who reports here in Louisiana regularly understands that we've never been protected by our regulatory environment. Never," Anne Rolfes, who directs the Louisiana Bucket Brigade, told reporters. "And so we always have had to take matters into our own hands, and we have protected ourselves against enormous companies."
One key strategy that the Louisiana Bucket Brigade and others have used to get around the regulatory rubber stamping of bad actors is to raise public awareness of how the companies turning coastal Louisiana into a sacrifice zone really operate.
Case in point is Venture Global. Rolfe and John Allaire—a 40-year veteran of the oil and gas industry who lives next door to the Calcasieu Pass terminal—laid out its short but extensive record of environmental violations and unethical business practices.
Even before the original Calcasieu Pass began exporting, in January 2022, it had to clear a space for tankers to access the facility.
"It's understood that this is a volatile fuel to lock into, that you don't want to rely on a fuel that Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump control."
"They pumped hundreds of thousands of cubic yards of black viscous sludge from their marine berth out into the front of the Gulf of Mexico," Allaire said. "And that was the first indication of what was to come with Venture Global."
Since it began operating, the company has added air, noise, and light pollution to the water pollution that has devastated local fisheries.
Allaire has taken hundreds of videos and photos of flaring incidents.
"The light pollution is unbelievable," he said. "At night, I can literally read a book when the flares are going, and I'm over a mile away from their flare stacks."
Allaire's observations are backed up by the official record. In June 2023, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality sent Venture Global a compliance order detailing over 2,000 air permit violations from its first 10 months of operation, Allaire said. The company has yet to resolve the complaint, and the state sent them a warning letter in March covering their 2024 and 2025 rule-breaking.
The company also has a history of failing to report its flares and other excess emissions to the Department of Environmental Quality as required by the Clean Air Act.
If they reported and then investigated their violations, "that would enable them to really understand what's happening at their facility so that they could prevent future problems," Rolfe said. "They absolutely aren't doing that."
In March, the Louisiana Bucket Brigade and the Habitat Recovery Project notified Venture Global of intent to sue the company over Clean Air Act violations at its Calcasieu Pass facility.
But the environmental groups aren't the only ones suing Venture Global. The company stretched its commissioning phase—during which it is considered still in the process of establishing itself and can sell its products to the highest bidder rather than honoring its contracts—for three years and three months, beginning normal operations just this April.
"This is absolutely off from the industry norm," Rolfe said.
Now, other major fossil fuel companies, including Shell and BP, are pursuing arbitration claims against Venture Global for breach of contract. Investors have joined a class-action lawsuit against it, saying it violated federal securities law by misrepresenting its prospects.
Yet Venture Global has huge ambitions for the region. In addition to Calcasieu Pass and CP2, it wants to build three other export terminals in coastal Louisiana and more than triple its capacity from 30 million tons per annum (MTPA) of liquid gas—already over a quarter of the 88 MTPA exported by the U.S. exports in 2024—to 104 MTPA.
"As a review, they're flouting the Clean Air Act. They've manipulated the commissioning phase. They're being sued by everybody they've done business with. Is this a company that our country and our state should put such faith in?" Rolfe asked.
She answered her own question: "Of course, our answer is no."
Another strategy the Louisiana Bucket Brigade and their allies seek to employ is to delay Venture Global's ambitions long enough for the economic reality of the LNG boom to catch up with it.
In addition to the approval of CP2, Australian company Woodside announced on Monday that it had approved a Louisiana LNG project worth $17.5 billion. Yet the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis concluded in April that the massive growth in LNG capacity would exceed dwindling demand within two years.
"It's understood that this is a volatile fuel to lock into, that you don't want to rely on a fuel that Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump control. So people are trying to get off of gas," Rolfe said.
"The economics are going to catch up with them. I just want it to be before they destroy the coast of Louisiana."
This means that LNG companies like Woodside and Venture Global are behaving "like a kid in a candy store," Rolfe continued. "That kid, unchecked, will eat so much, they'll throw up. I think the same is true with this industry. Unchecked, it will do itself harm."
The key is therefore to stall the buildout long enough that many projects become infeasible. This tactic has worked for frontline communities during the first Trump administration, Rolfe said. Through a combination of public pressure, records requests, and legal action, community advocates were able to delay the construction of a plastic plant proposed by the Chinese company Wanhua Chemical U.S. Operation, LLC, which would have released the World War 1-era nerve gas phosgene into the already pollution-burdened St. James Parish.
The economic outlook for the plant had always been "dubious" Rolfe said, and eventually the company gave up on trying to build it.
"They could have gotten approval and gotten on their way within a month. But our suit and then our constant presence and making them table things and so forth, drew it out and let the economics catch up with them," Rolfe said.
Rolfe added that the gas industry has similarly gotten ahead of itself.
"They're greedy, right? They want to grab all the candy they can, and the economics are going to catch up with them. I just want it to be before they destroy the coast of Louisiana."
Another strategy to slow down the building of new LNG facilities like CP2 is to target the one thing, in addition to permits and funds, that they can't move forward without: insurance.
Insurance is one sector in which the economic impact of the climate crisis is already being felt, as Ethan Nuss, senior energy finance campaigner at Rainforest Action Network, explained.
For example, major insurer Chubb earns $1.5 billion a year in premiums from the fossil fuel industry, which was already canceled out early this year with the $1.5 billion in pre-tax losses they took from the Los Angeles wildfires. On a local level, some insurers have pulled out of Louisiana all together to avoid insuring against climate-fueled extreme weather events.
"Once they are really educated about the permit violations and the legal risks and the true risk landscape that they're facing by taking on this client, many of them are very concerned."
"This is not a time to build something like CP2 that would deepen the climate crisis," Nuss said.
Because insurers are on the books for both fossil fuel projects and the damage for climate disasters, and because many of them have climate and human rights policies, they are vulnerable to growing pressure from the climate movement to drop the oil and gas clients costing them so much money.
RAN in February published the names of the major insurers for Venture Global's Calcasieu Pass, which it obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request. These included Chubb subsidiary ACE American Insurance Company, AIG subsidiary National Union Fire Insurance Co., Allianz, Swiss Re, AXA, and Tokio Marine subsidiary Houston Casualty Company.
"That has kicked off a global effort to reach out to those insurers and begin to educate them about what is happening in Southwest Louisiana, the impacts from Calcasieu Pass, and what associated risks they're facing," Nuss said.
As a result of these efforts, Swiss Re has agreed to meet with the fishing community of Southwest Louisiana, to talk about the "devastating impacts on their livelihoods" from Calcasieu Pass' operations.
"Often with these global financial institutions, they aren't fully aware of what's really happening on the ground. That client is maybe just another line on the spreadsheet. But once they really start hearing the stories, once they are really educated about the permit violations and the legal risks and the true risk landscape that they're facing by taking on this client, many of them are very concerned," Nuss said.
Nuss hopes that, once fully informed, insurers would decide any project of Venture Global's is a "very risky business that they don't want to be involved in."
From LA’s wildfires to Asheville’s floods, disasters are intensifying and demand resilience. Public banking offers a blueprint for recovery: leverage public dollars to cut long-term costs, create jobs, and rebuild smarter.
On the night of January 7th, as the Palisades Fire surged to 2,000 acres to the west and the Eaton Fire exploded to 1,000 to the east, I joined thousands fleeing hurricane-force winds that hurled embers for miles. But while I evacuated out of precaution, across Los Angeles, many Angelenos were not as fortunate. Like so many here, I spent those first sleepless nights glued to wall-to-wall news coverage, tracking the fires’ paths. But while flames dominated headlines, a slower crisis burns, one that Los Angeles has yet to confront.
Caught in a cycle of destruction and recovery that grows more urgent every year, fire season is no longer a season—it’s a year-round threat. Entire neighborhoods in Altadena have lost more than homes—they’ve watched their generational wealth turn to rubble. In Pacific Palisades, emergency teams scrambled to stabilize hillsides before landslides erased what remained. With wildfire losses now climbing past $250 billion, one question echoes through the city: Who pays to rebuild? And how can we do it faster, smarter, without sinking deeper into debt?
Los Angeles isn’t the first to face this reckoning. Back in 1997, Grand Forks, North Dakota, suffered a catastrophic flood. Their city was left in ruins, but they had something most cities don’t: the Bank of North Dakota (BND), America’s only state-owned public bank. Within two weeks, the BND funneled around $70 million in credit for emergency operations and rebuilding. While FEMA took months to distribute aid, the BND’s local presence and public mandate allowed it to act with precision. ND mortgage holders got six-month payment pauses. Show me one Wall Street bank that’s offered that kind of breathing room.
Caught in a cycle of destruction and recovery that grows more urgent every year, fire season is no longer a season—it’s a year-round threat.
This is the power of public banking: swift, people-focused, and designed for crisis response. Unlike profit-driven institutions, a public bank—owned by a city or state—would reinvest public deposits into local resilience rather than shareholder dividends. Imagine transforming tax dollars into a renewable resource: funding fire-resistant infrastructure, upgrading aging power grids, and keeping families housed during disasters.
Look around Los Angeles today. Insurers flee high-risk areas, leaving families stranded. Meanwhile, we’re sending more than $1.4 billion a year in debt service fees to Wall Street—this staggering sum, outlined in the City’s 2024/25 Adopted Budget (Page R-71), is money that could fortify hillsides or retrofit homes. Governor Newsom’s $2.5 billion wildfire package helps clear debris, but it doesn’t address the bigger question: How do we fund tomorrow’s disasters without predatory loans that bleed the city dry?
A public bank is the answer. Picture the Bank of North Dakota model scaled for a metropolis. Need emergency credit after the next natural disaster? Done. Low-interest loans for small businesses distributing supplies mid-crisis? No delays. By partnering with local lenders, a public bank could bridge the gap for families waiting months or years for insurance payouts.
This is the power of public banking: swift, people-focused, and designed for crisis response.
This isn’t fantasy. A national public banking movement is rising. In 2019, California passed the Public Banking Act, clearing the legal path for cities like Los Angeles to establish their own public banks. New York City plans a public bank to fund affordable housing and support minority communities. Florida eyes the model for local control of state resources. From San Francisco to New Jersey, cities and states recognize that megabanks can’t meet the scale of today’s economic and environmental challenges. Public institutions keep dollars local, funding fire-resilient housing, green energy projects, and businesses that anchor communities during crises.
During COVID-19, the Bank of North Dakota proved this again. While Wall Street prioritized corporations, the BND partnered with community banks to quickly deliver relief to small businesses and frontline workers. Los Angeles deserves that same agility. A public bank could centralize disaster funds, slash bureaucratic delays, and ensure every dollar stays local—rebuilding neighborhoods instead of enriching distant shareholders.
Housing offers another critical test. Today, financing affordable projects takes years as developers navigate a maze of private lenders. A public bank could create a housing fast-track fund, offering below-market loans for shovel-ready developments. Interest payments would recycle into future projects, not Wall Street bonuses. Streamlined funding means lower costs, faster construction, and more Angelenos housed before the next disaster strikes.
The fight isn’t about resources—it’s about control. A public bank keeps investments local, ensuring funds flow to priorities like firebreaks and microgrids rather than stock buybacks.
Critics argue public banks risk politicization. But the BND’s 105-year track record in a solidly red state disproves this: it's rated A+ by S&P with an 18.2% return on equity in 2023. It’s safer than most big banks and exceptionally stable as a public institution. By law, California’s public banks won’t compete with local community banks, instead, they will partner with them, expanding access to credit in underserved communities.
The money to capitalize a public bank exists. We’ve already raised billions for disaster recovery. The fight isn’t about resources—it’s about control. A public bank keeps investments local, ensuring funds flow to priorities like firebreaks and microgrids rather than stock buybacks.
From LA’s wildfires to Asheville’s floods, disasters are intensifying and demand resilience. Public banking offers a blueprint for recovery: leverage public dollars to cut long-term costs, create jobs, and rebuild smarter.
Los Angeles can lead this revolution. By creating the nation’s first major urban public bank, we’ll pioneer a model for cities nationwide. When the next disaster strikes, we won’t be at the mercy of for-profit banks, we’ll have the tools to rebuild ourselves—faster, fairer, and permanently stronger. The alternative is unthinkable: another decade of rubble, debt, and avoidable loss.
"The longer climate deniers keep up this charade, the more expensive things will get," said the JEC chair.
After at least two dozen U.S. disasters with losses exceeding $1 billion during a year that is on track to be the hottest on record, a congressional committee on Monday released a report detailing how the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency poses a "significant threat" to the country's housing and insurance markets.
"Climate-exacerbated disasters, such as wildfires, hurricanes, floods, drought, and excessive heat, are increasing risk and causing damage to homes across the country," states the report from Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee (JEC). "Last year, roughly 70% of Americans reported that their community experienced an extreme weather event."
"In the 1980s, the United States experienced an average of one billion-dollar disaster (adjusted for inflation) every four months; now, these significant disasters occur approximately every three weeks," the document continues. "2023 was the worst year for home insurers since 2000, with losses reaching $15.2 billion—more than twice the losses reported in 2022."
"Rising premiums and this issue of uninsurability could seriously disrupt the housing market and stress state-operated insurance programs, public services, and disaster relief."
The insurance industry is already responding to that stress. The publication highlights that "insurers are pulling out of some states with substantial wildfire or hurricane risk—like California, Arizona, Florida, and North Carolina—leaving some areas 'uninsurable,'" and "in many regions, even if the homeowner can get insurance, the policy covers less than the actual physical climate risks (for example, rising sea levels or more intense wildfires) that their home faces, leaving them 'underinsured.'"
JEC Democratic staff found that last year, "the average U.S. homeowners' insurance rate rose over 11%," and from 2011-21, it soared 44%. Researchers also documented state-by-state jumps for 2020-23. For increases, Florida was the highest ($1,272), followed by Louisiana ($986), the District of Columbia ($971), Colorado ($892), Massachusetts ($855), and Nebraska ($849).
The highest premiums for 2023 were in Florida ($3,547), Nebraska ($3,055), Oklahoma ($2,990), Massachusetts ($2,980), Colorado ($2,972), Hawaii ($2,958), D.C. ($2,867), Louisana ($2,793), Rhode Island ($2,792), and Mississippi ($2,787).
The report ties the rising premiums to "surging" prices for repairs, reinsurers also hiking rates, insurance litigation issues, and rate caps in some states pushing higher costs off to states that regulate the industry less. While JEC Democrats focused on the United States, as Common Dreams reported last week, the climate threat to the insurance industry is a global problem.
"Rising premiums and this issue of uninsurability could seriously disrupt the housing market and stress state-operated insurance programs, public services, and disaster relief," the new report warns. "Given this rising threat, innovations in climate mitigation and adaptation, insurance options, and disaster relief are essential for protecting Americans and their finances."
The publication points out that "a previous JEC report on climate financial risks discussed other potential solutions like parametric insurance (a supplemental insurance plan that can pay homeowners faster), community-based catastrophe insurance that incentivizes community-level resilience efforts, and attempts to use risk-pooling, data, and AI to better price risk."
The new document also promotes the Wildfire Insurance Coverage Study Act, introduced by JEC Chair Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) "to address these data needs and study wildfire risk, insurance, and mitigation to help Americans make more informed decisions about the risks to their homes," and the Shelter Act, which "would create a new tax credit, allowing taxpayers to deduct 25% of disaster mitigation expenditures."
The report further recommends improvements to several Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) programs, including:
The JEC publication comes as the country prepares for President-elect Donald Trump to take office next month after running a campaign backed by billionaires and fossil fuel executives and pledging to "drill, baby, drill," which would increase planet-heating pollution as scientists warn of the need for cutting emissions. Republicans will also have control of both chambers of Congress.
Heinrich on Monday called out the GOP for its climate record, saying that "Republicans have denied that climate change is real for over 40 years, and as a result, homeowners are seeing their insurance costs rise."
"Homeowners in New Mexico have seen their premiums increase by $400 over the last three years because of Republicans' refusal to act," he added, citing the 2020-2023 data. "The longer climate deniers keep up this charade, the more expensive things will get."
Florida already has one of the nation's largest shares of homeowners "who don't have meaningful insurance."
Hurricane Helene continued barreling toward Florida on Thursday, highlighting the impacts of the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, including difficulties securing insurance coverage in regions most affected by extreme weather.
"The Air Force Hurricane Hunters found that the maximum sustained winds have increased to near 120 mph," the National Hurricane Center said Thursday afternoon. "This makes Helene a dangerous Category 3 major hurricane. Additional strengthening is expected before Helene makes landfall in the Florida Big Bend this evening."
Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator Deanne Criswell said during a White House briefing that forecasts suggest Helene will make a "dead-on hit to Tallahassee" and "this is going to be a multistate event with the potential for significant impacts from Florida all the way to Tennessee."
Although this Atlantic hurricane season hasn't yet been as intense as U.S. scientists expected, trends in extreme weather disasters have led some insurance companies to exit the Florida market in recent years. Farmers Insurance announced last year that it would stop covering property in the state, in an effort to "effectively manage risk exposure."
While the Insurance Information Institute, an industry trade group, said in May that "legislative reforms passed in 2022 and 2023 have created a pathway to a stable Florida market," reporting from this week shows that residents—who aren't ultrarich—are still struggling to get and keep coverage.
"Florida ranks sixth among states with the largest shares of homeowners who don't have meaningful insurance. About 18% of homeowners across the state—about 1 in 6—are without it," NBC News noted Wednesday. "Nearly 20% of Florida homeowners pay $4,000 or more a year for homeowners insurance—the largest share in the country, according to the Census Bureau."
According to The Palm Beach Post, the global reinsurance broker Gallagher Re said in a Wednesday analysis that "landfall in the Big Bend or Panhandle region of Florida as a major hurricane (Category 3, 4, or 5) has historically translated to insured losses in the low single-digit billions."
"But Helene is not a typical storm," the firm explained. "Given Helene's very large wind radius, this would still bring hurricane-force wind gusts and high storm surge to coastal areas in the heavily populated Tampa Bay area, tropical storm force winds across most of the Florida peninsula, Georgia, the Carolinas, Tennessee, and southern Appalachia."
Gallagher Re suggested that "Helene's private insurance market losses should be expected to land in the range" of $3 billion to $6 billion, but if the hurricane "unexpectedly" moves toward Tampa, it could be over $10 billion.
Florida isn't the only state facing insurance trouble thanks to climate chaos. Vox reported last year that "insuring property in California has been a dicey proposition," pointing to torrential rainfall that "caused as much as $1.5 billion in insured losses" and "the costliest wildfires in U.S. history, including the 2018 Camp Fire, which led to more than $10 billion in losses."
Amid the intertwined climate and insurance crises, scientists, campaigners, and homeowners have demanded policy action—and elevated criticism of right-wing attacks on crucial programs.
In a June blog post, Rachel Cleetus, policy director with the Union of Concerned Scientists' Climate and Energy program, wrote that "Congress and regulators need to ensure more transparency in the insurance market on how companies are evaluating risks as they make decisions about premiums. There also needs to be better information on what kinds of incentives companies are providing for adaptation measures that would help reduce risks."
"Alongside the necessary but ultimately bounded role of insurance in a warming world, public and private decision-makers must also shift investments away from business-as-usual maladaptive and risky choices to more resilient ones," Cleetus continued. "The nation must scale up resources for climate resilience and ensure they are reaching communities in a just and equitable way. Funding for safe, affordable, and climate-resilient housing must be expanded."
The Climate & Community Institute on Wednesday also shared recommendations in a new report—Shared Fates: A Housing Resilience Policy Vision for the Home Insurance Crisis—using case studies from California, Florida, and Minnesota.
"We propose the creation of Housing Resilience Agencies (HRAs), either by states or the federal government," the institute said. These agencies would:
"In order to confront the growing housing safety and affordability crisis, we need to understand our fates as shared," the institute added. "We must reimagine our home insurance system for it to reduce risk and provide equitable and fair protection."
From the $35 insulin co-pay to capping insurance premium costs, the legislation has been health-changing and life-changing.
I was honored to be at the White House this month for the Inflation Reduction Act anniversary event, featuring Americans sharing their stories of saving money and saving lives.
Thank you to the millions of people fighting every day for lower drug prices, to Congress for passing the Inflation Reduction Act, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris for casting the deciding vote in the Senate, and President Joe Biden for signing it into law.
Meet Bob Parant, from New York. He’s a 71-year-old man who has been living with type 1 diabetes for over fifty years. He lost his leg in 2010, and became eligible for Medicare. Before the Inflation Reduction Act, the last price Bob paid for a vial of insulin was $580, which was “horrendous.”
We have made so much progress on healthcare. But as everyone reading this knows, there is so much more to do.
Listen to Pam Parker, from Maryland: She’s a retired electrician, 62 years old, and has been diabetic since she was 30. “I had to decide, a lot of months, between mortgage, groceries, utilities, and other things… I would juggle my expenses, and really juggle my healthcare.. I would eat less, or ration my insulin to make it last.. I had high blood pressure, I fell into a coma, my kidneys failed… they told me I coded.”
Learn from Robin Craycroft, from Missouri: When she turned 65 and had access to Medicare, the pharmacist told her that one insulin for three months was $3,000. “Everything that we had planned, cancelled, and our life just changed. And I felt such guilt over that… We’re gonna spend $2,000 a month (two insulin vials) to keep me alive. You start going through, am I worth it? Should I do that to [my husband]?”
Hear Steven Hadfield, from North Carolina: “Before the $35 cap, sometimes you had to skip a dose, sometimes you had to not test yourself, watch what you eat because you couldn’t afford it…”
The $35 insulin co-pay cap for people on Medicare is just one of the health-changing and life-changing parts of the Inflation Reduction Act.
This year, people on Medicare have their out of pocket Part D drug costs capped at around $3,500. And next year, the maximum drops down to $2,000. This means seniors on a fixed income won’t have to choose medicine over food or housing or anything else. Also recommended adult vaccines such as the new shingles vaccine are now free for Medicare recipients.
Pharmaceutical companies that raise their prices higher than inflation are required to pay Medicare a rebate, to encourage them to stop price gouging patients. And in 2026, price negotiations for the first 10 drugs under Medicare go into effect: lowering the costs of those drugs for millions of Americans. The savings will continue for patients and taxpayers as more drug prices are negotiated each year.
But the Inflation Reduction Act doesn’t just help people on Medicare. Over 21 million Americans like me get their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces. When I was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer in 2017, I did not qualify for financial help for insurance. Thankfully I was able to afford a plan anyway, and to pay the maximum deductible for that year. A bargain compared to the over half a million dollars it cost to save my life.
I am so grateful to still be here, and for the Affordable Care Act made truly more affordable to millions of working Americans like me.
The American Rescue Plan, and then the Inflation Reduction Act, provided financial help for health insurance to many more who needed it. This law caps the cost of premiums at no more than 8.5% of your income, meaning people—especially older folks who face higher premiums, or people in more expensive healthcare markets—don’t get penalized, and can still afford the care they need.
We have made so much progress on healthcare. But as everyone reading this knows, there is so much more to do.
First, we have to defend the advances in the Inflation Reduction Act. A new administration and a new Congress next year means everything we’ve gained could be on the chopping block.
Second, the health insurance tax credits piece expires in 2025. Without that renewal, millions of Americans would go back to being priced out of health insurance.
Third, the Medicare provisions such as the $35 insulin cap, the drug price negotiation, and more, need to be expanded to everyone.
We are grateful to still be here, and to keep fighting until every American can get the healthcare they need. We cannot go back.
"The growing insurance crisis illustrates the vital importance of seeing climate change as a risk to the entire financial system," said one watchdog group.
With extreme weather disasters increasing in frequency and intensity as the global climate crisis rages, wealthy homeowners in some coastal areas of the United States are paying six figures a year to insure their houses against flooding and other impacts of the kind that Hurricane Idalia brought to Florida last week.
Bloomberg's Felipe Marques and Devon Pendleton reported Thursday that the owner of a $50 million mansion on Florida's Star Island was given a $622,000-per-year quote for home insurance.
"Granted, that was a recent quote for a policy on one of the ultraluxe mansions on the Biscayne Bay island, where A-listers like Rick Ross, Ken Griffin, and Alex Rodriguez own homes. But, only last year, the same policy cost $200,000," Marques and Pendleton wrote. "Even for the moderately wealthy, insurance costs are beginning to verge on unaffordable: The cost of so-called high-value insurance, loosely defined as policies covering homes worth more than $1 million, is outpacing the rise in premiums for more modestly valued homes by anywhere from two to 70-fold."
Surging home insurance premiums for the rich underscore a broader crisis that is disproportionately impacting regular homeowners who live in areas particularly vulnerable to climate chaos.
"Insurance premiums are soaring as climate risk grows, pricing everyone but the wealthy out of some coastal areas," Marques and Pendleton wrote. "Even before Hurricane Idalia hit Florida's Gulf Coast last week, leaving a trail of destruction in its wake, tens of thousands of ordinary Floridians were struggling to find affordable policies."
This year alone, the U.S. has seen a record 15 extreme weather disasters that caused damage exceeding $1 billion, a number that scientists say is likely to increase unless urgent action is taken to phase out fossil fuels.
"They've underwritten financing fossil fuels, and then they profit from selling protection from the impacts of those fossil fuels on climate."
With climate risks growing exponentially, major insurers have jacked up rates, restricted coverage in disaster-prone areas, and even withdrawn entirely from states.
"At least five large U.S. property insurers—including Allstate, American Family, Nationwide, Erie Insurance Group, and Berkshire Hathaway—have told regulators that extreme weather patterns caused by climate change have led them to stop writing coverages in some regions, exclude protections from various weather events, and raise monthly premiums and deductibles," The Washington Post reported earlier this week.
Farmers Insurance, one of the nation's largest home insurance providers, announced in July that it would no longer cover properties in Florida. The move followed State Farm's decision in May to stop selling homeowners' insurance in California.
"Wildfires, hurricanes, thunderstorms, and flash floods have wreaked havoc across the U.S. this year, and after each disaster, homeowners have looked to their insurance providers to defray their losses," Carly Fabian, insurance policy advocate with Public Citizen's Climate Team, said Thursday. "More and more often, those companies have packed up and moved on, leaving homeowners fewer and fewer options for insurance."
"The growing insurance crisis illustrates the vital importance of seeing climate change as a risk to the entire financial system," Fabian added. "Year after year, disasters with multi-billion dollar price tags have struck around the globe."
The industry's response to escalating climate risk has drawn greater attention to insurers' role in fueling the crisis.
Last month, Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) noted in a letter to insurance giants that "U.S. insurers currently have approximately $582 billion invested in fossil fuels—with nearly $90 billion in coal alone."
"U.S. insurers continue to underwrite polluting projects while making investments in an industry whose continued expansion poses multiple serious dangers to overall economic stability and to insurance services in particular," the senators wrote.
During a Senate Banking Committee hearing on Thursday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said that insurance companies "have kind of been playing every part of this game."
"They've underwritten financing fossil fuels, and then they profit from selling protection from the impacts of those fossil fuels on climate. Now when climate risks are rising, they're trying to hang American families out to dry."