Exactly. Insurance handles low-probability high-impact uncorrelated disasters really nicely, and is worth paying for to protect against those.
Correlated disasters require public policy and shared infrastructure to lower their risk and the extent to which people are exposed to them.
Actually passing a law or spending money to change the situation would mean getting the House of Representatives on board, and Republicans have a majority there.
Exactly. I'll vote for the kind of politician I want in the primary, and vote tactically for the one who is closest to my views, but who stands something of a chance of winning in the general.
What's going on here is that Sheldon Whitehouse, the Democratic Senator, held a hearing which made data about insurance drops and rate increases public. That's creating a news cycle about it
You probably can't pay out of pocket to replace your house if it burns down.
This article is about homeowners insurance, not health insurance
Both sides do raise money to operate, but the people funding the two parties are, to a very large extent, different.
This of course
This is one making the case that it's not in the interest of the US to export more gas. It's hopefully going to create a bit of a political barrier to approving more exports in the future.
People have actually done a lot; we've shifted from a path where were likely to see 4°C or more by 2100 to one where we're likely to see something like 3°C by then.
It's not yet enough, but it's a lot more than nothing.
People have been talking about it for years, but it's now written up in an official report
They do occasionally enforce the signal jamming laws. Do it with any regularity in a way that messes up police radio, and they will work to catch you.
The Senate could of course do the right thing and refuse to confirm Kennedy or any of the people in his orbit. Not that I expect the Republicans who will be in the majority to do the right thing.