Rosenfield on Proposition 103

Naivete at times can be charming, but when used maliciously by a sophisticated lawyer in the furtherance of his questionable aims, it is reprehensible.

Rosenfield compares auto insurance (where, according to him, a third of every premium dollar goes to overhead, salaries, and profits) with public utilities (which spend only 5 cents on administration).

Public utilities don’t have any expenses to acquire new customers; since they are monopolies in their service areas, we must come to them. That’s hardly the same (expense-wise) when 200 private companies must compete for customers and employ agents to explain the product and hopefully provide the best fitting supplier for every user’s requirements.

But ignoring that for a moment, there is a good deal of difference between, say, a power company whose only contact with its customers is a monthly meter reading, and an insurance company which must interface continually not only with those of its customers who have claims, but also with third parties who have claims against those customers.

In California, unfortunately, many of those third parties consider an accident with someone who is insured like a ticket to a lottery. By employing an attorney, those accident victims can often parlay their ticket into big money.

In terms of administrative expenses, that, unfortunately, is a far cry from delivering power through a wire or gas through a pipe, and limiting administrative involvement to a monthly bill.

HEINZ J. PULVERMAN

Los Angeles