Insurance Commissioner

Re “The Excuses Don’t Wash,” (editorial, April 28), regarding Insurance Commissioner Chuck Quackenbush: If the consumers of this state failed to avail themselves of the opportunity to protect themselves, finally, from insurance company abuses by failing to pass Propositions 30 and 31 by such an overwhelming margin, how can they expect the insurance commissioner they have elected “to protect the consumers’ interest”? The insurance industry continues to thrive on this mandate.

RICHARD S. ROSENBLUM

Beverly Hills

*

Re “Quackenbush Concedes Mistakes in Judgment,” April 28: My parents’ home was destroyed by the earthquake in 1994 and my father suffered a stroke during the quake that eventually ended in his death, so the issues surrounding Quackenbush have a certain resonance with me.

My own experience with the involved agency was a total inability to get any help despite repeated phone calls, letters and faxes. As a matter of fact, I never got one live person on the phone. My only question in all of this is why the FBI is not involved. Do we really trust the bureaucrats of this state to resolve this in favor of the voters and taxpayers?

STEVEN EDWARDS

Oxnard

*

The insurance companies must also bear responsibility in the deception of how the contributions (read fines) were distributed to the various foundations. These insurance firms were facing fines in the hundreds of millions of dollars, and they could not have been so naive as to believe that $12 million tidied up their legal and social responsibilities. How about a little peek into their role in this fiasco?

PETER DANIELS

Los Angeles