Utah House majority leader to step down, take key role in Cox Cabinet
Cox named Moss his pick to oversee the Governor's Office of Economic Opportunity. Moss is slated to take over on May 30, helping oversee business development, innovation, and economic strategy promotion statewide. That's also when he'll resign from the Utah Legislature.
'Jefferson Moss brings a rare combination of public service, private sector experience and a deep understanding of innovation and education,' Cox said in a statement Friday. 'He's been a driving force behind many of Utah's most forward-thinking initiatives, and I'm confident he'll lead the Governor's Office of Economic Opportunity with the same vision, energy, and commitment to our state's future that have defined his career.'
Moss joined the Utah Legislature in 2017, rising in the House of Representatives before becoming the House majority leader, one of the top leadership positions in the chamber. He also serves as the associate commissioner of innovation, commercialization and economic development for the Utah System of Higher Education, a leadership role he will retain despite his new cabinet role.
Before that, he held roles at Utah Valley University and businesses like KeyBank and Credit Suisse. He was also a member of the Saratoga Springs City Council.
'It has been the honor of a lifetime to serve the people of House District 51 and the state of Utah,' he said in a statement. 'I'm incredibly proud of the work we've accomplished together to strengthen our economy, invest in education, and expand opportunity for Utah families. I look forward to continuing my work in a new capacity, helping lead Utah's economic future.'
The Governor's Office of Economic Opportunity oversees several state agencies, committees and programs, including the Utah Office of Tourism and Utah Film Commission. It's also the agency that gave final approval to the Capital City Convention Center Reinvestment Zone, a piece of the financing options for major downtown Salt Lake plans by the Delta Center, as it handles housing and transit reinvestment zones.
Moss will replace Ryan Starks, whose departure was announced last week. He has since been named the director of the Economic Development Corporation of Utah.
Meanwhile, the House Majority Caucus plans to hold a special leadership election 'in the coming weeks' to find a new House majority leader, according to the Utah Legislature.
'Rep. Moss is an extraordinary leader, a trusted colleague, and a loyal friend,' House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooprt, said. 'While we'll miss his leadership in the House, I know he will continue to serve Utah with the same passion and purpose in his new role.'
Lawmakers are expected to meet in a special session the week of May 19, but a spokeswoman for the Legislature said a leadership vote won't take place during those interim meetings and will likely come in early June, after Moss's resignation is official. The caucus last elected new leaders in 2023 after then-Speaker Brad Wilson resigned to run for U.S. Senate. In that case, the three remaining members of GOP leadership each moved up to fill a more senior role.
Rep. Karianne Lisonbee, R-Syracuse, currently serves as majority whip, with Rep. Casey Snider, R-Paradise, as assistant whip.
Republican delegates from Utah County will vote to elect a replacement for Moss in House District 51, and Utah County Republican Party Chairwoman Cristy Henshaw told KSL.com the party would release a timeline for that convention Friday night or Saturday. The state GOP organizing convention is May 17.
Contributing: Bridger Beal-Cvetko
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Epstein saga hangs over Congress's sprint to summer recess
The controversy surrounding the Trump administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files is poised to dominate the conversation on Capitol Hill this week, as Congress sprints to August recess — and prepares to dive into government funding conversations. The House returns to Washington on Monday for its last week before breaking for the long summer recess, while the Senate is in session for its penultimate week, a final stretch that will be inundated by conversations surrounding Epstein, whether the documents related to him should be released and how the Justice Department has dealt with the current uproar. The situation has been a difficult one for Congressional Republicans, who are weighing listening to the MAGA base and calling for the release of the documents against President Trump, who has urged his party to drop the matter. Aside from Epstein, Congress this week will spend some time focusing on government funding, as the Sept. 30 shutdown deadline inches closer. The Senate is expected to consider its first of 12 full-year funding bills, though that effort could be complicated after Republicans passed a bill to claw back $9 billion in federal funding. Also this week, the Senate is scheduled to vote on a number of Trump nominees as the president urges the upper chamber to cancel its August recess. And House Republicans are slated to select a new chair of the Homeland Security Committee following former Chair Mark Green's (R-Tenn.) departure from Congress. Lawmakers confront lingering Epstein scandal The outcry over the Trump administration's handling of the Epstein files is likely to continue this week, as Republicans await the grand jury testimony Trump directed for release and some continue to call for the release of all the documents in the case. Adding to the controversy is a potential — though unlikely — vote in the House on a non-binding resolution, prepared by Republicans, that calls for the release of some materials from the case but gives Attorney General Pam Bondi the ability to exempt some parts. The House Rules Committee advanced the resolution after hours of deliberations last week, delaying a vote on a package to claw back $9 billion in federal funding. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), however, has not committed to holding a vote on the measure, a posture that will likely spark criticism from Democrats and even some Republicans who want the documents to see the light of day. 'We'll determine what happens with all that,' Johnson said when asked if he will put the Epstein resolution on the floor. 'There's a lot developing. The president made his statements this afternoon, he's asked the attorney general to release the information, I'm certain that she will, and everybody can make their own decisions about that.' Pressed on if he would commit to staging a vote on the legislation, Johnson again stopped short, telling reporters: 'We will see how all this develops.' 'We're in line with the White House, there's no daylight between us,' he added. 'We want transparency, and I think that will be delivered for the people.' Johnson suggested that the vote was a way to give Republicans on the Rules Committee cover after they voted against a different measure last week calling for the release of the documents. In the meantime, reaction is likely to continue rolling in about The Wall Street Journal's reporting that Trump, in 2003, allegedly sent Epstein a 'bawdy' letter for his birthday. Republicans have slammed the report, and Trump sued the outlet and Rupert Murdoch, an owner of the outlet. And lawmakers are awaiting the grand jury transcripts that Trump directed Bondi to release. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), who has called for the release of the Epstein files, said, 'I believe that will pretty much cover everything,' referring to the transcripts, but he noted that he still wants all the files to be released. Democrats, meanwhile, are downplaying the importance of the transcripts, arguing that they will only pertain to Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, a convicted sex offender who is serving time for wrongdoing in connection to Epstein. Hanging over the entire controversy is a bipartisan effort, led by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), to force a vote on a resolution that calls for the disclosure of Epstein files. The pair is vowing to file a discharge petition for the measure, which already has 10 other GOP supporters. Government shutdown deadline inches closer This week marks the final one that both the House and Senate are in session at the same time before August recess — and before Congress returns to a government funding sprint in September. With less than 10 weeks to go until the shutdown deadline — and less than 20 legislative days until the cliff — Congress is behind the eight ball, staring down a mountain of work that has to be done before funding runs out in Washington. The House has only passed two out of 12 full-year appropriations bills, while the Senate has approved none of the dozen. The upper chamber will try to chip away at their to-do list this week, with an initial procedural vote expected on Tuesday on the bill to fund military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs and related agencies. Votes on the measures in each chamber, however, are unable to bring Congress closer to averting a government shutdown, since the full-year measures are written at different levels. Adding to the dilemma is the bill Republicans approved this month to claw back $9 billion in federal funding, targeting foreign aid and public broadcasting. Democrats warned that passage of that package would tarnish the appropriations process, setting the stage for a high-stakes stretch to Sept. 30. Earlier this month, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said clearing the legislation — known as a rescissions bill — 'would be an affront to the bipartisan appropriations process.' 'That's why a number of Senate Republicans know it is absurd for them to expect Democrats to act as business as usual and engage in a bipartisan appropriations process to fund the government, while they concurrently plot to pass a purely partisan rescissions bill to defund those same programs negotiated on a bipartisan basis behind the scenes,' he wrote in a letter to colleagues, later adding: 'This is beyond a bait and switch — it is a bait and poison-to-kill.' The current dynamics are making the possibility of a continuing resolution in September more-and-more likely. Senate to vote on nominees as Trump calls for canceling recess The Senate this week is slated to continue churning through Trump's nominees, as the president puts pressure on the upper chamber to confirm more of his picks — and urges Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to cancel recess for that reason. The focus on nominations comes after the Senate spent considerable floor time on the 'big, beautiful bill' and legislation to lock in cuts made by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which monopolized recent weeks. The Senate will vote on Joshua M. Divine's nomination to be U.S. district judge for the Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri, Cristian M. Stevens's nomination to be U.S. district judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, Aaron Lukas's nomination to be principal deputy director of national intelligence, Bradley Hansell's nomination to be undersecretary of defense for intelligence and security, Arielle Roth's nomination to be assistant secretary of commerce for communications and information, and John Hurley's nomination to be undersecretary for terrorism and financial crimes. The focus on confirming Trump's picks comes after the president over the weekend encouraged Thune to nix the chamber's August recess, which is set to begin at the end of next week and run through the month. 'Hopefully the very talented John Thune, fresh off our many victories over the past two weeks and, indeed, 6 months, will cancel August recess (and long weekends!), in order to get my incredible nominees confirmed. We need them badly!!! DJT' Trump wrote on Truth Social. It remains unclear if Thune will heed the president's advice and cancel recess. While Republicans want to continue confirming Trump's nominees, they are also eager to head home for the month to sell the 'big, beautiful bill' to constituents, which they see as vital as the midterm elections inch closer. House GOP to select new Homeland Security Committee chair House Republicans will vote on a new chairman for the Homeland Security Committee this week, after Green officially resigned from Congress. Republican Reps. Michael Guest (Miss.), Andrew Garbarino (N.Y.), Carlos Gimenez (Fla.) and Clay Higgins (La.) are all vying for the leadership position. The Republican Steering Committee — a group of Republican leaders and regional representatives — is scheduled to meet Monday and recommend a candidate for the job, who will likely be rubber-stamped by the conference later in the week. The four candidates each bring different qualities to the table. Guest, currently serving as chairman of the House Ethics Committee, is a former prosecutor who has held stints as vice chair and a subcommittee chair on the Homeland Security panel. The Mississippi Republican has also underscored that he was an impeachment manager when the House penalized then-Homland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Garbarino has pointed to his New York roots, arguing that the panel should turn back to its focus on counterterrorism, which was the focal point after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack. Gimenez, a former mayor and firefighter, has said that his background dealing with emergency planning in Florida, a state prone to hurricanes, has uniquely prepared him for the role. He has also said there should be 'nuance' in some of Trump's immigration policies. And Higgins, a former police officer, is the most senior of the candidates running, giving him a leg up in an environment where seniority is taken into consideration. A number of Louisiana Republicans, however, are already in leadership — Johnson and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), for example — which could work against him. Johnson said the candidates have created 'quite a horse race.'
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
New York establishment Democrats mull over Mamdani charm offensive
New York Democrats cool to their party's Big Apple mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani are weighing their options as the 33-year-old progressive makes his own pitch to centrists that they should back him. The Democratic establishment has been looking for alternatives, but none really satisfy. Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo last week announced an independent run after losing the Democratic primary to Mamdani, but a number of Democrats who spoke to The Hill have doubts he can win. Some also haven't forgotten past Cuomo controversies. Incumbent Eric Adams is also running as an independent, but he has had a scandal-tarred career and his tilting toward MAGA and Trump World hasn't won him too many friends in the Democratic establishment. Political observers say there aren't enough moderates to go around for one — let alone two candidates — and if the establishment wants to prevail, either Adams or Cuomo should exit the race. 'You can't have multiple alternatives,' said Grant Reeher, the director of Syracuse University's Campbell Public Affairs Institute. 'I just don't see any way that Mamdani doesn't win unless one of these folks drops out.' 'If I was a Democratic strategist for the whole party in New York City, and I commanded authority, I would put Adams and Cuomo in a room, and I would say, 'You guys are going to flip a coin,'' he added. A HarrisX poll out earlier this month — before Cuomo announced his independent bid — showed Adams trailing with 13 percent of the vote and Mamdani leading with 26 percent, followed by Cuomo at 23 percent, and Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa at 22 percent. In a three-way race without Adams, the same poll revealed Cuomo would lead the field by 2 percentage points in front of Mamdani. Mamdani appears to recognize the potential danger to his candidacy if voters opposed to him rally around one independent choice. The left-wing candidate this past week sought to make inroads with business leaders and establishment Democrats, including during a trip to Washington where he met Democrats at an event with liberal star Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). On Friday, he met with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) in New York. Following the meeting, a spokesperson for Jeffries called the face-to-face 'constructive, candid and community-centered.' The spokesperson said Jeffries and Mamdani also discussed a 'variety of other important issues including public safety, rising antisemitism, gentrification' and the importance of 'taking back the House in 2026.' Mamdani also recently earned the endorsement of Rep. Ro Khanna (Calif.), another rising Democratic star. Some of Mamdani's efforts appeared to be helping him. 'He's already had those conversations, been in those meetings, and it doesn't seem that there is a wholesale public rebuke of him,' said Democratic strategist Basil Smikle, who served as executive director of the New York State Democratic Party. Smikle said that signals 'that a lot of those constituencies and voters are willing to hear more and are likely going to find a way to work with him.' Mamdani has impressed some Democrats who say the party needs fresh blood. 'He is campaigning like he isn't 94 years old,' said Democratic strategist Eddie Vale, who hails from New York. 'He is out hitting the streets and events and talking to tons of people. He is doing press interviews and podcasts and he is young and natively comfortable online for doing his own videos and social media.' By meeting with establishment operatives and backers, Mamdani has been chipping away at a part of the electorate that strategists say is critical to both Cuomo and Adams. The two independents are, 'for a number of moderate voters, the business community, the real estate community, a firewall against more progressive politics,' Smilke said. Some observers in the race differ over who is the stronger challenger to Mamdani. New-York based Republican strategist Susan Del Percio, who worked for Cuomo as a special adviser in 2014, holds the view it is Adams. 'Cuomo has lost once; he probably will lose again,' she said. 'The only one who really has a path when it comes down to Cuomo, Sliwa, and Adams is Adams,' Del Percio added. 'If he's willing to reinvent himself a bit in light of people being scared of Mamdani — it's almost Cuomo's argument, except I think that there's more that Adams can do now.' 'If you tell [Adams] now, 'You may actually be able to win,' he'll twist himself into a pretzel to do it,' Del Percio added. 'If you told him he had to be disciplined, and this is how you do it, and he has a real campaign, I think he could do it.' Other voices who think Cuomo could win more support point to Adams's unpopular tenure as mayor. While Adams was charged with corruption charges last year, a judge permanently dismissed them in April. The dismissal came weeks after the Trump administration asked prosecutors to drop the charges against Adams. Reeher said Adams has been tarnished with financial corruption and incompetency. 'Nobody's really making the argument that Andrew Cuomo is incompetent and doesn't know what he's doing,' he said. Cuomo faces his own hurdles. The former governor's time in Albany came to an end with 13 women accusing of him sexual assault and accusations that the state purposefully under-reported COVID-19 deaths in nursing homes. And his political opponents, particularly Mamdani, have not let him or the New York City electorate forget it. Some criticized Cuomo for reentering the race last week with an ad filmed on the Upper East Side, a sign to political observers that he has learned nothing about appealing to the issue that New Yorkers care most about — and the issue Mamdani won on in the Democratic primary — affordability. But there is still great worry about Mamdani in the party, strategists acknowledge. 'He can't be the future of the party,' one strategist said. 'He's only going to be fodder for Republicans.' Reeher agreed, saying 'If I put myself in the place of a Republican strategist, I'm wanting [Mamdani] to win.' 'I can imagine the advertisement would be … a list of some of the most extreme things that he has stood for … and I would say, 'This is what Democrats do when they're left to their own devices,'' he said.
Chicago Tribune
a few seconds ago
- Chicago Tribune
After State Farm rate hike, legislators pressured to provide relief. Here's what could be on the table.
Gov. JB Pritzker wasted no time in calling on state legislators to do something about rising insurance rates after State Farm announced it was hiking homeowners insurance by 27.2% beginning this month, citing rising costs due to extreme weather events and pricier repairs. 'Enact a legislative solution during the veto session that prevents insurance companies from taking advantage of consumers through severe and unnecessary rate hikes, such as those proposed by State Farm,' Pritzker said in a social media post. The governor's angry words were met with a quick rebuttal from the Bloomington, Illinois-based insurer and state business interests, but other officials were just as quick to join in the politically popular call to hold down costs. 'I do agree with the governor that what State Farm did is wrong and they need to fix it,' House Speaker Emanuel 'Chris' Welch, a Democrat from Hillside, told the Tribune. 'If they don't, as a leader in this state, as a leader of one of our chambers, we're going to take a look at it because we have to protect our consumers.' Right now in Illinois, there's no effective mechanism to prevent companies like State Farm from imposing rates for home and auto insurance that are deemed to be excessive, according to those familiar with Illinois insurance law. 'You basically are told what your insurance rate premium's going to be. You don't have the ability as a state to really help protect consumers,' state Rep. Bob Morgan, a Deerfield Democrat and the vice chair of the House Insurance Committee, said about homeowners and auto insurance rates. Lawmakers are considering ways to address increased homeowners insurance costs including legislation championed by the Pritzker administration that would require a rate review process, compelling insurance companies to open their books so that state officials can assess whether the rate increases are too burdensome. A bill with some of those elements was introduced during the spring legislative session, but went nowhere as legislators and industry lobbyists haggled over details. Illinois is one of the only states that doesn't have a process in place for the state to take action if officials find that homeowners insurance rates were set inappropriately. Pritzker last year signed into law sweeping health care consumer protection legislation that ended unchecked rate hikes for large group insurance companies. Now, some proponents want to see this principle applied to homeowners insurance. 'With health care, now we can step in and can say, 'That is an unreasonable increase,'' Morgan said. 'These are the kinds of things that I think we're looking at.' Abe Scarr, director of the Illinois Public Interest Research Group, said such a process is crucial for consumer protection. 'This isn't, like, setting caps,' he said. 'This is just creating a regulatory review process that doesn't just leave it up to the insurance industry to regulate itself, to set rates by itself.' Scarr noted that State Farm and another insurance giant, Allstate, are both based in Illinois and have a powerful voice on policy. 'They're major employers,' Scarr said. 'They've long had significant influence in Springfield.' In establishing a rate review process for homeowners, renters and auto insurance, the legislation would require businesses to be more transparent with government entities about any decisions they make to impose rate hikes. The rate review bill was filed in January by state Sen. Michael Hastings of Frankfort and had six other Democratic co-sponsors in the Senate. State officials say an amendment filed in March is now the starting point for any debate on the issue when lawmakers reconvene in Springfield in October for the two-week veto session. The purpose of the amended legislation is to regulate 'insurance rates in order that they will not be excessive, inadequate, or unfairly discriminatory.' The legislation defines excessive rates as those that are 'unreasonably high for the scope of coverage provided.' Insurers would be required to provide information on their rates to the state's Department of Insurance '60 days in advance of a proposed aggregate rate change of 5% or more.' One top state official said that if such a bill was already in effect as a state law, State Farm would not have been in a position to announce its rate increase until the Insurance Department signed off on it. 'It would allow the department to say, if (it) felt that that rate increase was not justified by the data because it was too high, (it wouldn't) approve at 27%, however, 'We think you'd be able to justify, hypothetically, at 9%,' and so (the department) would approve it at 9,' said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak about the issue on the record. In cases where intense market competition was driving down rates, the department could also determine an insurer's rates to be too low, creating a financial solvency issue for the company. 'A healthy industry is in everybody's best interest because without it, homeowners can't get insurance then,' the official said. 'So, keeping insurance companies solvent is also, I feel, that's also a consumer protection.' Another bill filed by Hastings earlier this year would require homeowner and auto insurers operating in Illinois to maintain a website that showed a summary of each year's premium rate changes, as well as rate change data going back five years. The legislation would also require the insurer to provide 'a clear explanation of the primary factors contributing to the rate changes.' Hastings said he's heard from people angry about State Farm's rates. 'Because of what's occurred now, I'm anticipating there being some collaborative effort between the industry and the General Assembly, understanding what's occurred, what was said and what should be done,' Hastings said. 'And I'm under the belief … that there will be some solution and some framework put in place for the industry to comply with and doesn't discourage business in Illinois. It protects the consumer and provides them notice.' Without a new law, the Department of Insurance said it has little authority over rates. The department said it can look into whether companies are properly refunding premiums or paying claims in a timely manner, and hears consumer complaints 'to determine whether actual rates comply with what the company filed.' But it does not have the authority to approve or reject rate changes, unlike many other states such as California. Illinois requires only that rates be filed with the department. Pritzker spokesman Alex Gough said that 'special interests have protected the insurance industry instead of consumers, which is why the Governor has called for more regulatory and legislative action to hold powerful corporations accountable.' State Farm says recent weather-related losses in other states have taken a toll on its business. As one example, the insurer said it has received nearly 13,000 claims and paid out more than $4.2 billion to California homeowners who suffered losses during the intense wildfires that spread across the Los Angeles area earlier this year. But even going into 2025, the company said other claims were becoming too costly. State Farm said it paid out $1.26 in claims for every $1 premium collected from Illinois homeowners last year, including $638 million in hail damage claims, second to only Texas. In a statement on Friday, State Farm spokesperson Gina Morss-Fischer said the insurer welcomes 'the opportunity for ongoing discussion with the Department of Insurance, lawmakers, and consumers about the challenges facing the home insurance market' and that the company's recent rate filing in Illinois 'reflects the risk we see in this state.' 'The core promise of homeowners' insurance, that your insurer pays your claim according to your policy, only works if the policy's rates match the underlying risk,' Morss-Fischer said. 'Over-regulation and refusal to allow companies like ours the ability to charge accurate rates leads to a less competitive market and fewer choices for consumers.' Industry officials and some legislators echoed the argument additional regulation of Illinois' insurance market would lead to higher costs. State Rep. Jeff Keicher of Sycamore, a ranking Republican member of the House Insurance Committee, said Illinois has lower insurance rates than other markets because of its 'open and competitive marketplace.' More insurers offering coverage means more competition, which keeps costs lower. Keicher is a 30-year State Farm agent but said he was speaking as a legislator and not a company representative. If Illinois tries to control insurance rates, providers could threaten to pull out of Illinois, Keicher said, similar to what has happened in California. 'The worst thing we can do is force insurers to underprice and go out of business and leave homeowners without a way to get their home fixed if the worst happens,' Keicher said. The Illinois Insurance Association, a trade group for property and casualty insurers, also opposes further regulation. Kevin Martin, executive director of the association, said that insurance markets ebb and flow between 'hard and soft' markets. For the last six to eight years, Martin said, due to increased storms, Illinois has experienced a hard market, meaning that homeowners insurance costs keep climbing. 'It's just a cycle that happens and has happened consistently over the last 40 years, which is reflected in what people have to pay in premium,' Martin said. 'We are hoping we come out of this hard market and costs soften, and people will be able to reduce costs for homeowners insurance.' Martin said his group has talked with legislators in Springfield and the state insurance department about why insurance rates are skyrocketing and how insurers can be more transparent. His group recommends that homeowners shop around for alternative policies annually or biannually from the more than 200 insurance providers in Illinois. Keicher said legislators are also considering a 'state-recognized mitigation plan' for how homes are built and repaired to minimize rebuilding costs as the number of billion-dollar disasters from climate change-related events goes up. Keicher said he thinks the insurance industry would get behind that kind of proposal. State Rep. Thaddeus Jones, a Democrat from Calumet City who chairs the House Insurance Committee, called the insurance rate issue 'complicated' and said the insurance committee has had other priorities. Jones told the Tribune in June that he will now focus on burgeoning homeowners insurance costs and would call hearings soon, inviting residents to testify. Keicher said he supports Jones' calls for hearings. Jones also said he hopes more communities will participate in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Community Rating System, which allows local municipalities to mitigate their flood insurance costs by meeting certain reduced flood risk requirements. Calumet City has been able to lower some of its homeowners insurance costs by participating, said Jones, who also serves as mayor of the south suburb. 'We don't want people choosing between their (home) insurance or prescription drugs or food,' Jones said. 'We want them to be able to live comfortably in their house, but at the same time not feel like they are being forced out of their house and scared to get insurance and make sure it is affordable to them so that families are safe and take that worry off their plate.' 'I think insurance companies are willing to work with us. Let's identify the issues first so we can all talk the same language to help homeowners stay in their houses,' Jones said.
