Advertisement

Keep the Imperfect Status Quo

Share

Sen. Quentin L. Kopp (I-San Francisco) thinks California would be better off if the state insurance commissioner were appointed rather than elected. And his bill to achieve that goal continues to move along in the Legislature; it’s now headed for a vote in the full Assembly.

Kopp and supporters argue that the job should be filled by an insurance expert appointed by the governor rather than a “professional politician” who might win the office with the help of millions of dollars in contributions from the insurance industry. But logic and history are not on Kopp’s side. Until 1990, the job was appointive. The reason California changed was that the commissioners selected by governors tended to be far too chummy with the industry they were supposed to regulate. The job was made elective with the passage of Proposition 103 in 1988.

Since then, California has had two elected commissioners--one the insurance companies didn’t like and one they do. The first was Democrat John Garamendi, who refused during his 1990 campaign to take contributions from insurers. Then came Republican Chuck Quackenbush, elected in 1994 with the help of more than $6 million in industry money.

Advertisement

Under Kopp’s bill, SB225, Californians would vote in the 2000 election on whether to keep the job elective or make it appointive once again. They already rendered such a decision less than 10 years ago. There is no need to do it again.

California needs as insurance chief an able administrator who will make sure policyholders are treated fairly while allowing the industry to make a reasonable profit. This is critical in light of state law requiring Californians to buy insurance, such as auto liability policies.

Another reason not to change is that California dramatically overhauled its campaign finance laws by passing Proposition 208 in the last election. It’s no longer possible for any industry to pour millions of dollars in unrestricted contributions into a candidate’s campaign. The best choice in this case is to keep the status quo.

Advertisement