This all stems for a statute called the "Valued Policy" statute.
The Mierzwa decision
The Court held that the Florida Valued Policy statute required the insurer to pay the full value of the building as long as any covered peril contributed to the total loss; the covered peril did not need to be the sole cause of the total loss.
The Mierzwa decision was subsequently overruled by an amendment to the Florida Valued Policy law. However, the statutory amendment will not preclude insureds in Louisiana and Mississippi from arguing that a similar interpretation should be applied to the Valued Policy statutes in those states.
Apparently one court has done just that.
It seems the Insurance Companies have several alternatives. They can stop writing policies. They can eliminate wind coverage. They could require flood insurance as a condition of writing new policies.
Most it seem have opted for eliminating wind coverage, although many stopped writing policies altogether.
The state should probably change the law and go to a proportional coverage. Of course that won't eliminate the problem of houses completely destroyed where no evidence of the cause exists.