Full Breakdown
Florida Gubernatorial Candidates Clash Over Hurricane Insurance Reform
By Drooid · · How we work
The Policy Standoff: Competing Plans to Lower Homeowners Insurance
Democratic nominee David Jolly and Republican nominee Byron Donalds each propose a state-level strategy to curb Florida’s soaring homeowners insurance premiums. Jolly’s plan would shift hurricane-wind coverage from private policies into a newly created state-backed catastrophe fund, which he says could cut premiums by 60-70 percent. Donalds’ “Bring Down the Bill” plan keeps private insurers as the primary writers but seeks to lower costs by eliminating a 25 percent surcharge on the existing Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund (the “kicker”) and by increasing market transparency through an insurer scorecard. Both candidates cite data, but their assumptions differ sharply.
Background: Florida’s Catastrophe Fund and Rising Premiums
After Hurricane Andrew devastated South Florida in 1992, the state established the Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund (FHCF) to stabilize the market by reimbursing insurers for catastrophic losses. The fund is financed mainly by premiums paid by insurers and investment income. As of December 2025, the FHCF held a $9.6 billion balance, with a projected $12 billion balance by the end of 2026 if the season remains quiet. Persistent insurer bankruptcies and record-high premiums have kept the issue at the forefront of the gubernatorial race.
Data & Statistics
- FHCF statutory limit: $17 billion.
- Current FHCF reserve (2025): $9.6 billion; projected $12 billion (2026).
- Donalds’ “kicker” removal would affect the 25 percent surcharge applied when the fund holds sufficient reserves.
- Jolly’s model for a $300,000 home estimates a drop from $7,136 annual premium to $2,556, a 64 percent reduction.
- Jolly’s proposed fund would require a minimum capital base of $32 billion.
Official Statements & Responses
- Jolly emphasizes that the state fund would use reinsurance and could partner with private carriers to process claims.
- He notes support from Governor Ron DeSantis and former President Donald Trump.
Criticism & Opposition
Insurance-industry experts caution that moving all wind risk into a single state entity could create a “hurricane tax” on nearly all policyholders and concentrate financial exposure. Karen Clark, a catastrophe-risk modeler, warned that such a fund would shift the burden to all consumers, not just homeowners. Gabriel Carrillo, program director at the University of Central Florida’s Center for Risk Management and Insurance Education, questioned whether a government fund could deliver lower costs more efficiently than a diversified private market.
Verbatim Quotes
- “I think voters need relief. I think the property owners need relief,” — S. Rep. Byron Donalds
- “We are not going to solve this without government taking on a larger role in backing this. Otherwise, people are going to be priced out of their homes,” — David Jolly
- “The risk would then be borne by all consumers, not just homeowners.” — Karen Clark
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
- The Florida State University study cited by Donalds projects a possible $1,000 emergency assessment, but it examined a scenario where Citizens Property Insurance Corp. assumed wind coverage—not Jolly’s specific fund design.
- Jolly’s claim of a 60-70 percent premium reduction is based on the proportion of current premiums attributed to wind risk; experts note that operating expenses, reinsurance costs, and administrative overhead could diminish actual savings.
What’s Next
Both proposals require legislative action to amend the FHCF, create a new state fund, or implement the scorecard system. Voters will also decide on Amendment 3, a ballot measure that would raise the homestead property-tax exemption, in the upcoming election. The candidates have indicated that the election outcome will determine which insurance reform path, if any, moves forward.
