Commissioner Roxani Gillespie and Proposition 103 Rollbacks

Again we have an attempt by Harvey Rosenfield (“Brazen Defiance of the People’s Law,” Op-Ed Page, Aug. 31) to justify his sponsoring of Proposition 103 and to blame someone else for its not working. He should just admit that Proposition 103 was a misguided and an ill-conceived effort and that the only way we are going to get any relief from increasing insurance premiums is to cut down on lawyer fees and set limits on amounts that can be recovered under personal injury claims. Insurance company profits are not soaring.

On the contrary, as shown on the graph accompanying his article, we see that the ratio of premiums to payouts has remained about the same. Extrapolating from the graph we see that in 1984 there was a 68% payout (approximately), in ’85 and ‘86, a 62% payout, and in ’87 and ‘88, a 63% payout. The amount for overhead and profit has remained constant.

I must take umbrage with his final paragraph where he states that “public outrage over insurance company failure to obey Proposition 103 could cost them the privilege of doing business in California.” First of all, the public is becoming outraged over being duped by Rosenfield, Ralph Nader, and their ilk, and second, when insurance firms can no longer make a reasonable profit in this state they will leave voluntarily and the consumer will be the poorer for it because of decreased competition and fewer choices.

EUGENE E. JASPER

Whittier