Insurance Law

The Supreme Court may not be so anxious to rein in Congress' broad power to pass regulatory laws under the Constitution's commerce clause, the key point of dispute in the pending court battles over President Obama's health insurance law. By a 7-2 vote, the justices turned down a constitutional challenge to a 2002 law that makes it a federal crime for a felon to have body armor or a bulletproof vest. The majority's decision, rendered without comment, could make it more difficult for those challenging health insurance reform to win court orders overturning parts of the new law. "The federal power claimed is the authority to regulate anything ?

I just applied for an insurance plan for my 10-year-old daughter, but she was denied because she has asthma. I thought the new health reform law required insurance companies to cover kids. You're mostly correct. As of Sept. 23, 2010, insurance companies that sell "child-only" health plans - as well as individually purchased family plans that cover dependents - cannot deny coverage to anyone under the age of 19 because of a health condition. They also can't exclude care associated with a pre-existing medical condition.

The Senate voted Thursday to repeal a consumer credit insurance law that former Sen. Alan Robbins admitted taking a $12,200 bribe to help enact in 1985. Approval of the repealer occurred with brief debate and only a pair of veiled references to the bribe and the long-running political corruption scandal that forced Robbins from office in November. The bill by Assemblyman Lloyd G. Connelly (D-Sacramento) was approved 30 to 3 and returned to the Assembly, the final stop before it reaches Gov.

Other highlights in the country's history of health insurance include: The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Produced as a bipartisan compromise in 1996, it guaranteed that workers could continue coverage from their jobs even after getting laid off and that spouses could retain coverage even after a divorce. But you had to pay the full cost of the coverage — your premium and the company's premium — plus a 2% fee. The State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP)

Your chances of bending fenders with an uninsured driver on California's highways are about half what they were last year, largely because of a law that isn't even enforced. Officers stopped writing citations for breaking the financial responsibility law in early December after the Supreme Court shelved it pending a decision on whether it is constitutional.

Enforcement of the most sweeping provision of a tougher mandatory auto insurance law will be delayed for three months beyond its Jan. 1 legal start-up date, according to the head of the state Department of Motor Vehicles. DMV Director Sally Reed said that until March 30 it is not feasible for her agency to begin requiring the state's 26 million drivers to submit proof of having insurance when they apply for their annual vehicle registrations.

Dear Traffic Talk: I was reading an article in The Times about the confiscation of cars and what will happen to people when they are driving without a driver's license. I would like to know what will happen when police stop you and you don't have car insurance. I was stopped recently and got a ticket but I was not asked for proof of my car insurance. Elmo E. Star Sylmar Dear Reader: Welcome to the vagaries of California law.

Robert E. Keeton, 88, leading scholar on insurance law and emeritus professor at Harvard University who also served as a District Court judge, died July 2 in Cambridge, Mass., according to a statement from the school. Among his most important contributions to insurance law was a study he worked on with University of Virginia professor Jeffrey O'Connell in the early 1970s on the automobile insurance system. That study led to the passage of Massachusetts' no-fault auto insurance law.

The state Supreme Court heard oral arguments for an hour Monday on a lawsuit challenging California's new mandatory auto insurance law, with attorneys for minority-group plaintiffs contending that if the Legislature is going to require drivers to carry insurance it must also see to it that it is actually available. The high court suspended the law last December, pending adjudication of the case. No opinion from the court is expected for several months.

The radio spot, broadcast recently over a Christian station, attacks the incumbent Democratic congressman for supporting breaks for "high-risk homosexuals" in voting against a Capitol Hill move to overturn the District of Columbia's new AIDS insurance law. His Republican opponent, the announcer intones, "opposes this ridiculous law" and "supports the American family."

The Supreme Court may not be so anxious to rein in Congress' broad power to pass regulatory laws under the Constitution's commerce clause, the key point of dispute in the pending court battles over President Obama's health insurance law. By a 7-2 vote, the justices turned down a constitutional challenge to a 2002 law that makes it a federal crime for a felon to have body armor or a bulletproof vest. The majority's decision, rendered without comment, could make it more difficult for those challenging health insurance reform to win court orders overturning parts of the new law. "The federal power claimed is the authority to regulate anything ?

The race for the office of insurance commissioner pits Assemblyman Dave Jones (D- Sacramento), a prolific legislator who has clashed often with insurers, against Assemblyman Mike Villines (R-Clovis), a former GOP leader who positions himself as a more conciliatory force. Just as important as the contrast in styles, though, is the difference in their expertise. Jones, who's been chairman of the Assembly's health and judiciary committees, demonstrates a much better grasp of the details and complexities of insurance regulation.

Give proponents of Proposition 17 credit for chutzpah. Their TV commercials tell voters that there's "only one place to get the facts about Prop. 17: the official voters guide." But then they quote from the opinions the Yes on 17 campaign inserted into the guide's arguments and rebuttals section. No matter what the campaign commercials claim, the measure would not let drivers "take their continuous coverage discounts with them." Instead, it would create a new type of discount whose magnitude and effect are, at this point, unpredictable.

For more than two decades, Mercury General Corp. Chairman George Joseph has been sparring with consumer advocate Harvey Rosenfield over California's landmark automobile insurance law, Proposition 103. They've battled in the courts, the Legislature and the media over complex regulatory questions that affect billions of dollars in premiums paid by the state's 23.7 million licensed drivers. Now they're squaring off over a Mercury Insurance-sponsored initiative on the June ballot.

It's a beautiful summer day and tourists are enjoying the waterfront delights: harbor cruises, the carrier Midway museum, seafood restaurants, the tall ship Star of India. A quaint addition to the scene are the pedicab operators eager to pedal visitors to their next destination: a restaurant in the Gaslamp Quarter, perhaps, or the stores of Seaport Village. Or maybe back to their hotel. But the tourist tradition has become a civic nuisance as the number of pedicabs has soared in recent years.

The art of setting automobile insurance rates is incomprehensible to most of us civilians. Liability coverage, comprehensive insurance, assigned risk pools, discounts, surcharges . . . the list goes on. Just try to figure out how your carrier arrived at the figure at the bottom of your itemized bill -- I know nuclear physicists who can't do that math. So when industry lobbyists cook up a ballot initiative they claim will bring down rates, one's first instinct should be to cry, "Whoa!"

The state's Judicial Council reported Tuesday that judges are not implementing California's mandatory auto insurance law uniformly, and it suggested that the Legislature lower the stiff $1,350 penalty for some first-time violators. The 21-member council headed by Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald M. George said it had surveyed California courts and found that a large majority of judges feel they have discretion to reduce, suspend or do away with the fines altogether in specific cases.

Many Traffic Court judges throughout California are refusing to implement the heavy first-time fines of $1,375 to $2,750 called for under the state's new mandatory auto insurance law, officials of the state Judicial Council report. Judges are slashing the fines to $100 or are suspending them to give drivers a chance to buy the required insurance and then canceling the penalty when they do, the officials said.

FGIC Corp. said that its exposure to mortgage losses exceeded legal risk limits, raising more doubt about its future, as the bond insurer said it was walking away from an agreement to provide $1.9 billion in guarantees on certain securities linked to home loans. New York-based FGIC, the parent of Financial Guaranty Insurance Co., said its exposure to claims exceeded risk limits required by the state. "This is a bombshell," said Rob Haines, senior insurance analyst at CreditSights in New York.

Robert E. Keeton, 88, leading scholar on insurance law and emeritus professor at Harvard University who also served as a District Court judge, died July 2 in Cambridge, Mass., according to a statement from the school. Among his most important contributions to insurance law was a study he worked on with University of Virginia professor Jeffrey O'Connell in the early 1970s on the automobile insurance system. That study led to the passage of Massachusetts' no-fault auto insurance law.