I'm not asserting any state regulators are acting out of some concern about global warming. The commissioners I've had the opportunity to watch have focused on both liquidity and rates. In Maine, for instance, it was a decades long battle with Blue Cross over returns and rates. Then BC went private, and a settlement over capital was reached. In the homeowners market, the commissioner battled over rates and returns, with a tertiary concern over reserves.
Most state commissioners are fighting over rate increase demands based on investment returns, and discerning the true state of the carriers.
None of this is as simple as your (and i) make it seem. Insurers have a vested interest in overstating risk always, either hiding profits or understating the value of reserves.
Global warming is a convenient excuse for higher premiums, but a rogue hurricane will do as well.