Comments
DISASTER PREPAREDNESS - California prides itself on preparing for disasters. Yet when it comes to earthquake insurance, millions of homeowners are essentially being told to roll the dice. Scientists estimate there is more than a 99 percent chance that California will experience one or more major earthquakes over the next three decades. Everyone knows another devastating quake is coming.
Yet only about 13 percent of California homeowners carry earthquake insurance. That is not because Californians are reckless. It is because too many simply cannot afford it. When insurance premiums cost thousands of dollars each year and deductibles can reach tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars before coverage begins, many families decide they have no choice but to hope disaster never arrives. Hope is not public policy. It is a gamble.
California's leaders often talk about affordability, but too little attention has been paid to the one factor that ultimately determines insurance costs: risk. Insurance companies do not set premiums based on politics; they price policies based on the likelihood and severity of future losses. The greater the risk, the higher the premiums. If California truly wants affordable insurance, it must become a lower-risk state.
The lesson should have been learned after the devastating 1994 Northridge earthquake. The disaster generated billions of dollars in losses, forcing many insurers to retreat from California's homeowners’ market and prompting the creation of the California Earthquake Authority to stabilize coverage.
That intervention prevented a complete market collapse, but nearly three decades later we are still treating the symptoms instead of addressing the underlying problem. Insurance does not become affordable simply because government creates another program. Insurance becomes affordable when expected losses decline.
California has already demonstrated that prevention works. Through the Earthquake Brace + Bolt program, nearly 40,000 homeowners have strengthened older homes against major seismic damage. Retrofitted homes are more likely to survive earthquakes with less structural damage, reducing insurance claims while helping families avoid financial catastrophe. That successful model should be expanded dramatically. California should increase retrofit grants, provide low-interest financing, streamline local permitting, and require insurers to offer meaningful premium discounts for homeowners who invest in proven mitigation measures.
The same principle applies to California's growing wildfire insurance crisis. The state cannot subsidize its way out of catastrophic wildfire losses, nor can it regulate insurers into ignoring financial reality. The answer is not endless political fights over premiums—it is reducing the underlying risk. Hardening homes, creating defensible space, improving forest management, modernizing building codes, and investing in community resilience will do far more to stabilize insurance markets than government mandates alone.
Lower risk leads to fewer losses, fewer losses lead to lower premiums, and lower premiums encourage greater competition among insurers. That is how healthy insurance markets are supposed to function.
Consumers also deserve greater transparency. Millions of Californians mistakenly believe their standard homeowners insurance policy covers earthquake damage. In most cases, it does not. That misunderstanding could financially devastate thousands of families after the next major earthquake. California should launch an aggressive statewide public education campaign, so homeowners fully understand what is and is not covered before disaster strikes. An informed consumer is far better equipped to protect both their family and their financial future.
Preparing for disasters is about far more than emergency response. It means reducing vulnerability before catastrophe strikes. Every proposal should be measured by one simple question: Does it reduce risk for California families? If the answer is yes, it deserves serious consideration. If the answer is no, it is unlikely to make insurance more affordable over the long term.
California cannot prevent earthquakes, but it can prevent homeowners from being financially devastated by them. The next major earthquake is not a remote possibility it is inevitable. The real choice before us is whether we continue asking Californians to gamble with the largest investment of their lives or whether we finally build an insurance system based on prevention, resilience, responsibility, and common sense. That choice cannot wait until the ground starts shaking.
(Yonthan Mendal is an accomplished writer, researcher and leading expert on Jewish-Arab relations and Middle East affairs. He serves as Director of the Center for Jewish-Arab Relations at the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute and as a Research Fellow at the Forum for Regional Thought. His work focuses on politics, identity, media and regional dynamics in Israel and the broader Middle East. Widely respected for his scholarly analysis and public commentary, Mendel is a prominent voice on democracy, coexistence, public policy and cross-cultural dialogue.)
