We had a server outage, and we're rebuilding the site. Some of the site features won't work. Thank you for your patience.
imc indymedia

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

white themeblack themered themetheme help
About Us Contact Us Calendar Publish RSS
Features
latest news
best of news
syndication
commentary


KILLRADIO

VozMob

ABCF LA

A-Infos Radio

Indymedia On Air

Dope-X-Resistance-LA List

LAAMN List




IMC Network:

Original Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq kenya nigeria south africa canada: hamilton london, ontario maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg east asia: burma jakarta japan korea manila qc europe: abruzzo alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol brussels bulgaria calabria croatia cyprus emilia-romagna estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege liguria lille linksunten lombardia london madrid malta marseille nantes napoli netherlands nice northern england norway oost-vlaanderen paris/Île-de-france patras piemonte poland portugal roma romania russia saint-petersburg scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki torun toscana toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia latin america: argentina bolivia chiapas chile chile sur cmi brasil colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso venezuela venezuela oceania: adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne perth qc sydney south asia: india mumbai united states: arizona arkansas asheville atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado columbus dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca sarasota seattle tampa bay tennessee urbana-champaign vermont western mass worcester west asia: armenia beirut israel palestine process: fbi/legal updates mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer projects: print radio satellite tv video regions: oceania united states topics: biotech

Surviving Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: canada: quebec east asia: japan europe: athens barcelona belgium bristol brussels cyprus germany grenoble ireland istanbul lille linksunten nantes netherlands norway portugal united kingdom latin america: argentina cmi brasil rosario oceania: aotearoa united states: austin big muddy binghamton boston chicago columbus la michigan nyc portland rochester saint louis san diego san francisco bay area santa cruz, ca tennessee urbana-champaign worcester west asia: palestine process: fbi/legal updates process & imc docs projects: radio satellite tv
printable version - js reader version - view hidden posts - tags and related articles

Benefits and bailouts By Ralph Nader

by sfbg.com Sunday, Jul. 15, 2001 at 12:51 AM

In 1996 California's Republican Governor Pete Wilson led a successful bipartisan campaign to support the demands of the state's electric utilities for deregulation. That was one of California's disasters, and today, as a result of deregulation, the state faces record high energy costs, rolling blackouts, poorer service, and taxpayer financed bailouts.

Benefits and bailouts

California's Proposition 103 has led to the strongest pro-consumer insurance regulations in the nation.

By Ralph Nader



California often serves as the nation's laboratory for new public policy initiatives. Some of the initiatives have been disasters. This is particularly true in the area of regulation, where California has bounced from pro-consumer initiatives to "free-market" solutions favored by the state's corporate powers.

In 1996 California's Republican Governor Pete Wilson led a successful bipartisan campaign to support the demands of the state's electric utilities for deregulation. That was one of California's disasters, and today, as a result of deregulation, the state faces record high energy costs, rolling blackouts, poorer service, and taxpayer financed bailouts.

Other initiatives have provided significant benefits, as with automobile insurance reforms. Here the state's voters seized the initiative in 1988 and passed Proposition 103, which has led to the strongest pro-consumer insurance regulations in the nation.

"California regulations are the most state-of-the-art regulations in the nation; far and away the best," says J. Robert Hunter, Director of Insurance for the Consumer Federation of America and former Commissioner of Insurance for the State of Texas. Hunter's findings were based on a study of the results of regulation of automobile insurance in the 50 states.

The numbers lend support to Hunter's words. Under Proposition 103's rate rollback requirement, refunds totaling .3 billion were paid to consumers. During the decade after Proposition 103 was adopted by the people of California, automobile insurance rates in the state went down four percent while rates nationally rose by more than 25 percent.

The consumer savings under Proposition 103 did not come at the expense of the insurance companies. In fact, profits of the California insurers actually were higher than those enjoyed by their colleagues in other states.

From 1990 to 1999 California insurers, for example, amassed profits (return on net worth) of 15.40 percent on personal automobile liability compared to a return of 8.80 percent for insurers nationwide. On personal automobile physical damage, the rate of return on net worth was 18.70 percent for California companies; 17.20 percent nationwide.

In addition to the premium savings, Hunter points to other consumer benefits flowing from Proposition 103. These include fairness requirements, regulation of rating factors such as large good driver discounts, full disclosure, the availability of data by zip code to help determine if redlining is present, public scrutiny of filings, accountability through consumer participation in the process, and an end to the industry's exemption from state antitrust laws.

Under Proposition 103, regulations were adopted to disallow unnecessary costs, such as excessive expenses, fines, bad-faith lawsuit costs, bloated executive salaries, and related outlays.

"Proposition 103 was a shot across the bow of the insurance industry," Hunter says. "Prior to 103 the industry saw itself as a 'pass through' operation."

The old system created what Hunter calls a "perverse incentive" in the rate-making process by allowing the companies to pass through unjustified and excessive costs to the consumers. It also provided no incentive to aggressively combat fraud or to promote highway safety.

Proposition 103 required insurers to open their books to justify rate increases before they were imposed. For the first time, insurers were provided with financial incentives for efficient performance, rather than simply being able to pass on costs (justified or not) to consumers.

The study found that Proposition 103's "Good Driver Protections" provided strong incentives for driver safety. "Clean" drivers with good records receive a 20 percent discount and the right to buy insurance from the company of their choice through the program.

The success of California's Proposition 103 haunts the insurance industry nationwide. If rates can be slashed while insurers continue to enjoy healthy profits, why can't this be duplicated in other states? If full disclosure, prior approval, and consumer-participation work in California, why won't they work in other states? If companies can compete while adhering to state antitrust laws, why can't they do so in other states?

These questions may soon be front and center at the federal level. In the wake of the so-called financial modernization bill of 1999, some elements of the insurance industry for the first time have begun talking about seeking federal charters. If this becomes a reality, Congress has an excellent model in California to provide the basic structure for a federal charter and federal regulatory agency. Congress should accept nothing less.

Report this post as:

© 2000-2018 Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy