Two Insurance Initiatives Qualify for November Vote

The California secretary of state’s office said Thursday that it has certified for the November ballot the first two of five insurance initiatives for which petition signatures were filed last month.

Chief Deputy Secretary of State Tony Miller said that an initiative submitted by a coalition led by the California Trial Lawyers Assn. and Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp, and a second initiative sponsored by Assemblyman Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles) and Coastal Insurance Chairman Harry Miller, have officially qualified.

Both initiatives, which primarily affect auto insurance, received more than the 372,178 signatures of registered voters necessary to appear on the ballot, Miller said.

The Trial Lawyers-Van de Kamp initiative calls for rate rollbacks of 20% for “good drivers,” regulation by the state Insurance Department of substantial rate hikes and an end to the insurance industry’s antitrust exemptions, as well as giving Van de Kamp’s office the right to intervene on behalf of consumers in rate hearings.

The so-called Polanco initiative would mandate a 50% rollback in bodily injury liability premiums in exchange for restrictions on collecting damages for pain and suffering incurred in accidents.

Miller said two initiatives sponsored by the insurance industry and a third initiative backed by consumer advocate Ralph Nader are still in the process of signature counting.

The insurance industry initiatives call for a no-fault auto insurance system and would sharply restrict lawyers’ contingency fees, respectively. The Nader-backed measure by the Voter Revolt organization calls for even more sweeping rate rollbacks and rate regulation than the lawyers initiative.

In another development, the trial lawyer-led coalition, which also is supported by the California Banking Assn. and the Consumers Union, began an extensive radio advertising campaign against the no-fault system being advanced by the insurers.

The trial lawyers do not like no-fault, which they say would curtail victims’ rights. It also would sharply cut back on the lawyers’ income.

The 60-second commercials contain a three-way conversation between two men and a woman in which it is suggested that the insurance companies sponsoring no-fault are doing it because they would make more money out of the new system, even though they say rates would be cut.

The final line of the commercial has the woman saying: “Whoever heard of an insurance company that wants less money? Now, that is crazy.”

Campaign coordinator Jack McDowell said the insurers have been heavily advertising no-fault and the opponents felt it was time to begin rebutting them, even though the election is five months away.