Regardless of whether it is right or wrong, Republicans are considered to be the pro-business party. It doesn't really matter, for the purposes of this question, whether that's a correct assumption. We can denominate hypothetical parties B and L (to stand in for pro-"business" and pro-"labor").
Assuming that a state, governed by B, adopts a policy which attracts businesses from other states, but there is a close gubernatorial election (but B wins over L by a razor-thin margin), it becomes risky for a business to make long-term commitments in such a state. The next election can reverse the policy.
Is there anything which legally prevents an insurance company from explicitly writing a policy that would pay out a certain sum of money to any business in the state if, in the next election, L wins? I do realize that there are other markers which can be used to stand in for such a direct triggering event, but my question is not about insurance. It's about the law. I can't think of anything which would preclude such an explicit triggering event in an insurance policy (other than maybe prudence or ethics).