Likely sees including a state insurance regulator on FSOC as a net positive for systemic financial oversight and consumer protection, but has concerns about politicization and industry capture.

Worries the presidential appointment and Senate confirmation process, plus allowance to pick outside NAIC recommendations, could produce appointees less protective of consumers.

Would favor safeguards to ensure the appointee prioritizes financial stability and consumer interests.

Views the change as a pragmatic improvement to FSOC's composition by adding direct insurance-regulatory expertise.

Supports clearer inclusion of state insurance perspective but is cautious about appointment mechanics, confirmation delays, and vacancy provisions.

Would back the bill if safeguards limit politicization and ensure timely, competent appointments.

Likely opposes adding a President-appointed, Senate-confirmed insurance commissioner as a voting FSOC member because it expands federal control and risks undermining state authority.

Prefers state-selected representation or retaining a nonvoting role.

Concerned this increases federal bureaucracy and politicization of insurance regulation.