Insurance is an enormously powerful and beneficial method of spreading risk and compensating for loss. But even insurance has its limits. A new and misleading aspiration for insurance – that it also can and often does substitute for or significantly complement health and safety regulation – is increasingly in vogue. This vision starts from the uncontroversial recognition that insurers typically adopt measures designed to counteract "moral hazard," the tendency of insurance to blunt policyholders’ incentives to take care. But proponents of this vision go on to contend that the risk-reducing potential of insurance is significantly more extensive than is traditionally imagined, because insurers are strategically-positioned to induce their policyholders to embrace precautions, procedures, policies, or training regimens that decrease the incidence of loss. Proponents of this new "regulation thesis" often dramatically summarize these points by describing insurance as a form of private "regulation” or “loss prevention,” attempting to trade on the positive optics of these notions. Enamored with this idea, commentators, activists, and lawmakers have advanced various proposals to mandate the purchase of insurance or otherwise intervene in insurance markets to address a broad range of modern social ills, including police misconduct, gun violence, cyberattacks, and harms caused by artificial intelligence. Building on emerging criticism of this regulation thesis as well as increasing empirical evidence questioning its accuracy, this Article argues that these regulatory aspirations for insurance are over-optimistic. Creating less loss than insurance otherwise might have created is not regulation or loss prevention. Rather, it is damage-control, and that is what insurance devices designed to combat moral hazard almost always involve. Insurers face a daunting set of obstacles to further reducing policyholder risk below what it would be in the absence of insurance. In short, insurance has substantial limits as a solution for the failures of regulation.
The first principle of insurance reflects the fundamental lesson of the tragic California fires: you can’t get something for nothing. If expected...
There is a live debate going on over whether antitrust should take a broader view of the economics of market concentration. When antitrust reformers...
In New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), the Supreme Court began adopting First Amendment restrictions on liability for defamation and other speech torts...
Over the past twenty-five years, Congress has enacted several major reforms for employer-sponsored retirement plans and individual retirement accounts...
Over the last thirty years, almost every time I stepped out of my narrow academic path to do something that, I hoped, was for the greater public good...
In the last few decades, administrative regulation at both the federal and state levels has much more frequently than in the past deployed a...
This comprehensive textbook applies economic analysis to public law. The economic analysis of law has revolutionized legal scholarship and teaching in...
This Article, written for the annual Clifford Symposium on Tort Law and Social Policy, chronicles a series of developments in American history that...
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could prove pivotal to the future of regulation and interstate commerce in the...
Insurance is an enormously powerful and beneficial method of spreading risk and compensating for loss. But even insurance has its limits. A new and...
In October 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, a Ninth Circuit case out of California...
In Common Cause v. Rucho, the Supreme Court initiated an era of redistricting without restraint. The Court opened the door to state legislatures to...
We explore how adding pro-social preferences to the canonical precaution model of accidents changes either the efficient damages rule or the harm from...
In the internet’s earliest days, all we saw was its promise. The nascent technology was celebrated for its ability to connect strangers and to ease...