Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsCar Insurance Initiatives
IN THE NEWS

Car Insurance Initiatives

FEATURED ARTICLES
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
September 24, 1988
I'll be glad when the election in November is over and the dust settles on all these insurance initiatives. With everyone from insurance companies to trial lawyers pointing their collective accusing fingers at each other, it's no surprise that voters are confused about the issues. O'Connell's column explains very clearly the need for a no-fault system in California. I work for the Automobile Club of Southern California (although not in the insurance division), and am not embarrassed to tell anyone.
ARTICLES BY DATE
BUSINESS
July 30, 2012 | By Marc Lifsher
SACRAMENTO -- Proponents of an auto insurance discount initiative -- backed financially by the chairman of Mercury General Corp. -- are accusing the state attorney general and their opponents of submitting incorrect statements for the official ballot pamphlet. The campaign to pass Proposition 33 in November filed a lawsuit on Friday contending that the legal "title and summary" that is to be put before voters contains "inaccurate language that is highly likely to prejudice voters against the measure.
Advertisement
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
November 6, 1988
As Tuesday rolls around the corner, the media are focusing on the insurance initiatives. Some purport to give a no-nonsense, clear analysis of each of the propositions. Good luck. In reality, the issues are complex, and long-term benefits are certainly subject to question. The God-awful Proposition 103 leads the packs, but there are still a large number of undecided voters. What if they decided to gang up on the state Legislature, vote No on everything and demand their representatives do what they were elected to do?
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
May 7, 2010 | By Carol J. Williams, Times Staff Writer
In a Yes on 17 radio promotion, actors portraying a couple pondering their car insurance bills grumble about "the flaw in the law" that would rob them of a discount if they changed insurance providers. "I can take these coupons to any store in town but can only use the insurance continuous-coverage discount with one company? That's not fair!" laments the actress playing a penny-pinching wife. The proponents of Proposition 17 contend that passage would benefit more than 80% of California drivers because it would allow them to enjoy their continuous-coverage discounts — as much as $250 a year for some drivers — even if they switch carriers to take advantage of lower prices elsewhere.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
November 6, 1988
I am writing to strongly oppose Proposition 106, which would limit the availability of legal representation to many citizens with legitimate legal claims. As vice chairman of the state Senate Judiciary Committee, and a member of the Senate Insurance Committee, I have been a close observer of both our civil and criminal law systems. Proposition 106 would allow lawyers to charge a contingency fee of only 10% for damage awards over $100,000.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
September 24, 1988
O'Connell's column was deceptive in its simplicity. In the context of the insurance initiative battle, O'Connell's analysis does an injustice to voters. Californians do not have the option to vote for the ideal no-fault system outlined by O'Connell. Proposition 104 comes with additional baggage. One-third of Proposition 104 creates a no-fault system with inadequate benefits for consumers. The remaining two-thirds of the initiative prohibits rate regulation in California, and re-enacts and expands the insurance industry's exemption from antitrust laws.
Los Angeles Times Articles
|