Stacy Korsgaden, California insurance commissioner candidate, 2026 primary election questionnaire

Ahead of the June primary election, the Southern California News Group compiled a list of questions to pose to the candidates who wish to represent you. You can find the full questionnaire below. Questionnaires may have been edited for spelling, grammar, length and, in some instances, to remove hate speech and offensive language.

Name: Stacy A. Korsgaden

Current job title: Financial and Insurance Advisor

Age: 62

Political party affiliation: Republican

Incumbent: No

Other political positions held: Fire Safe Council for San Luis Obispo County

City where you reside: Grover Beach

Campaign website or social media: stacyforinsurancecommissioner.com

Why do you want to become the insurance commissioner? What does a commissioner do? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Insurance is the foundation of a family, a community, and a state. It is in crisis, and I am called to protect the people of California by restoring a competitive market, lowering risk through real mitigation, and ensuring that families are not left without choices or crushed by higher costs. I have held an active California insurance license (#0750748) since 1988 and, for nearly 40 years, have helped families and small businesses navigate complex insurance policies, devastating losses, and an increasingly broken regulatory system. My approach is straightforward and practical: restore a functional insurance marketplace, protect consumers, crack down on fraud, and ensure the system works for the people who pay into it. I outline my plan on my website at stacyforinsurancecommissioner.com/myplan.

When it comes to wildfire risks, how would you balance consumer protection with a functioning, competitive market? What would you have done differently to reform homeowners' insurance following efforts to help L.A. rebuild from the wildfires? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

You cannot protect the consumer when the state is uninsurable. California families are paying the price for failed policies, rising insurance premiums, shrinking coverage options, wildfire devastation, and public safety concerns. It's time for leadership that tackles the root causes, not just the symptoms.

I advocate for aggressive wildfire risk reduction and forest management reform. I serve as a vocal advocate to lawmakers to reevaluate and amend policies that have contributed to unhealthy forests. Push for fuel reduction, improved forest management, and investments that mitigate wildfire risk statewide. Years of bad environmental policies, forest management and fuel reduction are destroying our environment. This is unacceptable, and I will be the voice of reason and communicate to our elected leaders. I would also promote innovative, regional firefighting solutions. Champion regional responses and proven technologies, such as the City of Yorba Linda's heli-hydrant system using 5,000-gallon helicopter tanks and local helicopters. This has already proven to be successful, and we need to support local programs.

The state's Department of Insurance says it is holding insurers accountable with its new "sustainable insurance strategy." SIS allows insurance companies to increase rates based on the growing threat of climate change, passing on to their customers costs for insuring high-risk homes. In exchange, insurance companies are expected to write more polices in fire-prone parts of the state, where they've ended coverage for hundreds of thousands of homeowners over the past decade. The goal of SIS is to help transition property owners off the FAIR Plan. Tell us why you do -- or don't -- support this strategy. (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

When the Department says it will "hold insurers accountable," what it really means is more top-down regulation in the hope of forcing companies to insure in California's most at-risk markets. Under the new Sustainable Insurance Strategy, insurers are allowed to raise rates, but only if they agree to write a mandated percentage of homes in high wildfire risk areas. While this builds on pieces of Proposition 103, it misses the central issue: we are not solving risk, we're just reallocating it.

Tying rate approvals to quotas in wildfire-distressed areas may check a regulatory box, but it does not make communities safer or the market more stable over the long term. It attempts to manage outcomes through compulsion instead of addressing the underlying drivers of the crisis: overloaded fuel loads, unhealthy forests, and communities that have not been given the tools or resources to harden against fire.

The best way to bring insurance protection back to life in California is to lower the actual risk on the ground. That means an all-out assault on overgrown, fire-stacked brush and unhealthy forests, coupled with aggressive implementation of proven mitigation standards around homes and communities. When we reduce the probability and severity of catastrophic loss, insurers can price coverage appropriately, and capital will return without having to be forced.

By focusing first on risk reduction and welcoming private capital and insurers back to compete for market share, we can rebuild a healthy insurance ecosystem. A competitive market, supported by real mitigation and forest management, will restore choice, improve availability, and ultimately protect consumers far better than mandates and quota-driven regulation ever will.

State Farm teetered on insolvency in the state after the L.A. wildfires. Everyone's homeowners' insurance policies rose this past year due to the consumer bailout of State Farm and the FAIR Plan, both of which sought huge rate increases. Is this fair to consumers who don't live in fire-prone areas? Tell us why or why not. (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

State Farm is one of California's biggest insurers, yet its financial position has become so strained that it needed a massive cash infusion from its parent company just to stay sound. They have also shed risk that sat on their books for decades because they were carrying too much exposure. Californians should be asking a hard question: how did we get here?

We are in this position because for years we've had leaders who were soft on crime, pushed environmental policies that failed to actually protect our beautiful state, and allowed mega-fires, homelessness, open drug use, and vandalism to spiral out of control. All of these problems show up as insured risks: fire, liability, property damage, and business interruption. When those risks explode, insurance costs explode with them.

Insurance is designed to spread risk, and in that sense, it is fair that they price and spread that risk. But it is a travesty that California has been allowed to become so unsafe and unstable that we are now on the edge of being uninsurable. That is a failure of leadership, and voters have the power to change it.

Catastrophe modeling is a computer-based process that simulates thousands of potential natural or man-made disasters to estimate potential financial losses. Do you believe California could utilize catastrophe modeling that could lead to rate increases for homeowners? Why or why not? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Yes, insurance is a predictive science, and companies should be free to use the best forecasting and catastrophe models available to price risk accurately and responsibly. Our risks in California, unlike Florida's hurricane exposure, can be more predictable when policy focuses on fundamentals. That means reducing regulatory obstacles and making a strong commitment to lowering risk through effective fire reduction, active forest management, and empowering property owners to protect and improve their own land.

The California FAIR Plan is the state's insurer of last resort. Is it fair for the plan to charge people to recover losses on a $1 billion assessment to pay for L.A. fire claims, even when these same people weren't living in the wildfire areas? Please explain why or why not. (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Yes, it is fair for the FAIR Plan to assess, because that is how the system was set up under California law. The FAIR Plan exists as an industry-funded pool that steps in only when the regular market cannot or will not insure a risk.

The real problem today is that the FAIR Plan is becoming the first place people go for coverage, not the last. That is happening because the primary market has been weakened by ineffective leadership at the Department of Insurance, rising risks in California, and heavy regulation that makes it hard for insurers to price for those risks. When that system fails, policyholders end up paying the price through higher costs and fewer choices.

We need leadership that will restore a strong, competitive traditional market and deliberately depopulate the FAIR Plan so it returns to being a true safety net, not a growing burden on the entire marketplace.

Shouldn't major insurers like State Farm and Allstate be permitted to cancel policies and leave the marketplace? Why not just let them leave? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Should State Farm and Allstate be allowed to cancel policies and leave the market? Yes. In a free economy, companies must be able to manage their own risk, or they simply stop investing and stop doing business.

The real question is this: how did the world's fourth-largest economy, with so much talent and wealth, become nearly impossible to insure? The answer is that risk has grown too high while California leadership has piled unreasonable burdens on businesses of all kinds, not just insurance companies.

When costs, regulation, crime, and wildfire risk all climb together, insurers retreat, capital dries up, and the people who pay the price are hard-working Californians left with higher premiums, fewer companies, and shrinking coverage options. We need leaders who will tackle risk at its source and create conditions where businesses want to come back, compete, and serve this state again.

As of March, Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara is moving forward with finalizing new regulations to limit public oversight and transparency in insurance rate increases under 7%. A finalized rule effectively curtails public challenges to insurance rate increases by denying compensation to groups like Consumer Watchdog and other advocacy organizations. What do you think of this plan? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Consumer Watchdog has, in effect, undermined the very consumer protection it claims to defend. By focusing almost entirely on fighting rate increases for existing risks, they treat insurance as only a price issue, not a risk issue. They rarely push for real fire reduction, homelessness reduction, or a reduction in vandalism and other hazards that drive claims. Instead, they operate more like a money-making machine funded by insurance companies, all while the ultimate price is paid by everyday consumers who face fewer choices and higher costs.

The solution is to protect consumers by restoring a healthy, competitive market. That means creating a new business environment that encourages more insurers to enter and compete, not fewer. By lowering risk through aggressive mitigation, paired with competition from an abundance of companies, Californians will see superior service and better prices, because premiums will finally start to reflect a marketplace where risk is going down.

Car insurance rates are skyrocketing in California, with rates jumping over 30% since 2022, driven by expensive vehicles, complex repairs and new safety requirements. What could you do to contain auto insurance costs when a driver has no accidents? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Auto insurance continues to rise for many reasons, including higher repair and medical costs, more severe crashes, pricier vehicles, inflation, and growing claims pressure on insurers. Part of the solution is to let insurers price more accurately for actual driving and vehicle risk, while simultaneously lowering those risks through better policy and infrastructure, not just imposing price freezes. This means allowing fairer risk-based pricing, encouraging more competition so consumers can shop among multiple carriers, and rewarding safe drivers with meaningful discounts, usage-based programs, and automatic recognition for clean records so responsibility is clearly and financially rewarded. At the same time, improving road design, strengthening DUI enforcement, and promoting safer vehicles and proven good driver programs can reduce crashes and claims. Reducing unnecessary regulatory and litigation costs will also help keep claims and medical billing overhead from being passed on to drivers, giving Californians more affordable, stable auto coverage.

How do you think taxpayers could better understand the work of this office? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

The Department of Insurance collects around $4 billion in tax and fee revenue from the insurance industry, and those funds flow into the state's general fund. For government officials focused on spending, that is a very large revenue stream tied directly to insurance premiums: when rates go up, the state's take also tends to rise.

This creates a structural conflict: the same entity that is supposed to protect consumers and keep the insurance market healthy also benefits financially when premiums climb. If premiums are pushed higher, whether by regulation, litigation, or risk, the state revenue from insurance goes up, which can encourage more spending and make it harder to push back on policies that ultimately hurt consumers through higher costs and fewer choices.

If the legislature fails to meet clear risk-reduction goals such as expanding wildfire mitigation, reducing FAIR Plan load, or improving building standards, reduce the portion of insurance-related tax revenue sent to the general fund. That money can instead be returned to policyholders as a targeted insurance-related tax credit or refund, so hard-working Californians benefit directly when leaders fail to act.

What's a hidden talent you have? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

I sing and play the guitar. Also, I have an identical twin. We are actually mirror twins. She is left-handed, and I am right-handed.

©2026 MediaNews Group, Inc. Visit ocregister.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.