House panel to probe AI use in insurance after reform push stalled last Session

State lawmakers will begin a fact-finding mission next week to determine how insurers use artificial intelligence, potentially renewing efforts that stalled last Session amid scrutiny of algorithms in claim decisions, pricing and consumer services.

The House Insurance and Banking Subcommittee^[1], chaired by New Port Richey Republican Rep. Brad Yeager, has scheduled a Tuesday panel^[2] on the industry’s current and future AI uses.

No bills^[3] are listed on the 12:30 p.m. meeting’s agenda.

Yeager told Florida Politics the purpose of the meeting is to gather testimony ahead of the 2026 Session.

“It’s just education. We know AI is here. It’s on the rise in all facets of business and life, and we need to learn more about it,” he said.

“Some people hear ‘AI’ and it scares them to death. Others are early adopters and probably use it before it’s really ready to be used for something. We want to get more information about it, give the committee a time to ask and answer questions and dive into what AI is and what it really means in this application.”

The hearing follows proposals that failed this Spring that would have curbed automated claim denials. A pair of Senate bills (SB 1740^[4], SB 794^[5]) would have required a “qualified human professional” to make or sign off on any denial decision and bar AI, machine-learning or automated systems from serving as the sole basis to deny a claim.

Those measures, sponsored respectively by former Sen. Blaise Ingoglia — now the state’s CFO — and Fleming Island Republican Sen. Jennifer Bradley, cleared their initial committee stops but died in appropriations.

House companions (HB 1433^[6], HB 1555^[7]) by Republican Reps. Yvette Bennaroch of Marco Island and Hillary Cassel of Dania Beach fared no better. Cassel is Vice Chair of the Insurance and Banking Subcommittee.

National regulators have been laying groundwork for some restrictions. The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) adopted broad AI principles in 2020^[8] — prioritizing fairness, accountability, compliance and transparency — and followed with a detailed “model bulletin^[9][10]” in 2023, which states can adopt, urging carriers to document and govern their AI systems, monitor data quality and bias, and maintain human oversight throughout policy lifecycles.

Florida’s review comes as consumer unease^[11] persists over opaque automation. In a press release this week, former House candidate Jay Shooster, a Democratic lawyer with ample ties^[12] to the tech industry, backed mandatory call center disclosures so consumers know when they’re interacting with AI. He cited a survey by live answering service company Answering Service Care^[13], which found that 8 in 10 respondents want to know if they’re speaking to AI and 37% would lose trust in a company that hides it.

“If AI becomes advanced enough to be indistinguishable from humans and is used without disclosure, consumers can be misled and manipulated,” Shooster said in a statement. “That’s a dangerous path, whether in consumer service, healthcare, finance, or political communication.”

On the telephone front, the Federal Communications Commission last year ruled that AI-generated voices in robocalls are covered by the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, making such calls illegal without consent^[14] and giving enforcers another tool against deceptive voice cloning.

Other states have forged ahead on the issue. California’s Physicians Make Decisions Act^[15], which went into effect in January, requires that any denial, delay or modification of care based on medical necessity be decided by a licensed clinician with relevant expertise, not solely by AI tools used by insurers.

Utah enacted an AI disclosure statute^[16] for consumer interactions last year, and Colorado’s AI Act, effective next year^[17], will mandate that companies use care in using high-stakes AI and guarantee access to a human following an adverse decision, like denying a job or loan.

Health insurers have faced particular scrutiny over their AI use^[18] after investigations into algorithmic claim handling and prior authorization denials. But the reach of states is uneven; they have clearer authority over fully insured plans than over large employers’ self-funded coverage, while Medicaid is shaped by federal rules and contracts.

That complex, asymmetrical tapestry is among the reasons some Legislatures, including Florida’s, have focused on universal “humans in the loop^[19]” requirements, documentation and notice standards that can apply across product lines overseen by state regulators.

For Florida’s property insurance market, still struggling^[20] with storm losses^[21] and carrier exits^[22], lawmakers and regulators are watching how AI is used in claims, underwriting, fraud detection, catastrophe modeling and customer service.

The NAIC bulletin’s emphasis on data governance and bias testing could feature heavily into Tuesday’s discussion, as could whether lawmakers should copy earlier AI-focused legislation or craft a separate disclosure-and-appeals framework that preserves the speed advantages of automation without allowing so-called “black box^[23]” denials.

Florida’s 2026 Legislative Session begins its regular schedule Jan. 13.