view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:

- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
They could tax insurance sales to high risk or high value properties. They're the ones that will ultimately be the biggest burden in a fire anyway.
In reality the costs should fall on the utility companies that likely caused several of the fires. But that would raise prices for everyone.
Insurance companies operating in California are already massively increasing homeowner premiums regardless of risk. Example: my homeowner and earthquake premiums are both up 60% year-on-year. I live in a low fire-risk area, and the risk of an earthquake hasn't changed since last year. They're seeing how far they can push it before the regulators stir themselves from their lethargy and actually do something. And Newsom has consistently shielded big corporations from accountability.
They could make it so PG&E isn’t the only private electricity provider around or have a public option.
It's tricky because the people who live in high risk areas live there because that is frequently what they can afford. It also means they may not be able to afford the rising costs of insurance. The issue is complex and the reality is that wildfire prevention and mitigation is expensive. We will end up paying one way or another.
They could make it so PG&E isn’t the only private electricity provider around or have a public option.