Court Ruling on Proposition 103

In all the current reporting and posturing on Proposition 103 I have yet to read or hear anyone ask a very relevant and reasonable question. In calculating a “fair rate of return” for insurers, will the monies they expended to defeat Proposition 103 be allowed as expenses?

If so, I feel another suit should be instituted to disallow lobbying, legal and advertising fees. Otherwise, it is a horrific precedent and amounts to the winner of a court battle having to pay the costs and fees of the loser in a court case.

I propose that in establishing their return on investment, the amounts spent to defeat 103 be included in the assets column. Through no fault of the electorate these companies chose to “invest” that cash and it is hardly the responsibility of the insured to compensate the carriers for those funds.

The portfolios of these firms are massive and they have called the tune in California far too long. Our Legislature failed to accept its responsibilities in oversight of this industry; the commissioner also has not acted in a responsible fashion. I do not advocate her dismissal, yet; but, I believe the eyes of California are upon her. It is incumbent on Californians to force the implementation of adequate adherence to the intent of 103.

MIKE WARD

Studio City