Proposition 103 Still on Hold

As both Harvey Rosenfield (“California’s Unfinished Revolution,” Op-Ed Page) and Ken Reich (“Prop. 103: An Upheaval on Hold,” Part A) made clear in their Nov. 8 articles on Proposition 103, the first anniversary of its passage is much more an occasion for mourning than for celebration.

State Insurance Commissioner Roxani Gillespie’s alibi for her year of total inaction, that “the Supreme Court changed Proposition 103,” won’t wash. The Supreme Court made no change in the vast new powers Proposition 103 gives to the commissioner to control industry excesses, made no change in the requirement that the commissioner make competitive information broadly available to consumers, and made no change to the requirement, effective on that anniversary date, that no rate increase take place without the commissioner’s prior approval.

Yet Gillespie has utterly failed to exercise any of these powers to the public’s benefit. Her one stab at it, her Oct. 2 six-month “freeze,” was a five-month sham, since Proposition 103 itself mandates no rate increases without her approval after Nov. 8. A one-year freeze by the commissioner one year ago would have had some meaning, but nothing was done.

It is now totally clear that to get any meaningful relief the voters must speak again next June and November to nominate and elect a new insurance commissioner.

THOMAS A. SKORNIA

San Jose