Democrats Jane Kim, Ben Allen face off in California's insurance commissioner race
California voters on Tuesday are set to decide who will become the next insurance commissioner, as the state continues to navigate an insurance market strained by rising costs and heightened wildfire risks.
Democrats Jane Kim, a former San Francisco supervisor, and Southern California state Sen. Ben Allen emerged from the June primary election as the top two vote-getters. The two are vying to replace current Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, a Democrat first elected in 2018, who has reached his term limit.
The commissioner leads the California Department of Insurance, which licenses and regulates insurance companies, enforces state laws and responds to consumer complaints. The office plays a central role in determining how the state responds to a host of challenges including wildfire-related losses and rising insurance costs.
Kim has proposed a significant restructuring of how California covers losses from major disasters. Her proposal, which she has calleed "Natural Disaster Insurance for All," would establish a public, nonprofit state insurance program to cover events such as wildfires, floods and earthquakes.
The program would be funded through insurance premiums, with the goal of providing universal disaster coverage while directing some of that money toward reducing future risks through wildfire prevention and home-hardening efforts. Kim argues the current system puts too much emphasis on insurance companies' profits rather than preventing losses and protecting policyholders.
The proposal would require legislative approval to establish the new program, and Kim has acknowledged that would take time. Under her plan, private insurers would continue administering policies and handling routine claims, while the new program would assume the disaster risk. The program would be separate from California's FAIR Plan, the state's insurer of last resort when consumers are unable to obtain coverage through traditional insurers.
Allen, meanwhile, has said he favors reforming California's existing insurance market rather than replacing it. He offered sharp criticism of Kim's proposed disaster insurance overhaul, suggesting that the proposal could cost California billions of dollars.
Both candidates have called for greater oversight and transparency from California's FAIR Plan, including its operations and claims handling.
While the FAIR Plan has experienced significant enrollment growth as private insurers have restricted coverage in wildfire-prone areas, Kim argues her disaster fund proposal would greatly reduce the number of Californians who need to rely on the FAIR Plan.
She has said she also wants greater transparency about how insurers are spending policyholders' premiums. Kim argues premiums should be used not only to pay claims but also to help make communities safer and reduce the risks that lead to future disasters.
Allen has offered proposals to reduce the number of people enrolled on the FAIR Plan. He said he would work to convince more insurers to return to California while expanding efforts to make homes and communities more resistant to wildfires. He has also called for faster reviews of insurance rates and policies.
If elected, Allen has said his priority would be to ensure insurance is more accessible and affordable for all. His district includes communities affected by the January 2025 fires in Los Angeles County, and he said helping constituents navigate insurance claims has shaped his approach to the issues.
Allen has authored legislation aimed at requiring insurers to provide larger upfront payments for personal property losses and helping homeowners obtain low-interest loans for improvements that reduce wildfire risk.
Other proposals from Kim include limiting excessive profits for insurance companies and cracking down on illegal price-gouging and penalizing insurers that delay claims. She also wants to make insurance company performance and claims-handling records more accessible to the public.
Both candidates have pledged to reject insurance industry campaign contributions, saying they want to remain independent from the companies they would regulate.