Proposition Summary

INSURANCE RATES, REGULATION. INITIATIVE. Provides minimum 20 percent reduction in certain rates for good drivers from January 1, 1988, levels. Requires companies insure any good driver in counties where company sells automobile insurance. Requires ongoing minimum 20 percent good-driver differential. Funds automobile insurance fraud investigations, prosecutions. Provides consumers comparative automobile insurance prices. Applies laws prohibiting discrimination, price-fixing, and unfair practices to insurance companies. Requires hearing, Insurance Commissioner approval for automobile, other property/casualty, health insurance rate changes. Establishes Insurance Consumer Advocate. Increases enforcement, penalties for fraudulent health insurance sales to seniors. Cancels conflicting provisions of Propositions 101, 104, and 106 including attorney contingent fee limits and prohibits future laws setting attorney fees unless approved by voters or Legislature. Authorizes insurance activities by banks. Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: Would increase state administrative costs by $8 million for Department of Insurance and $2 million for Department of Justice in 1988-89, varying thereafter with workload, to be paid by additional fees on the insurance industry. Would increase costs for Department of Motor Vehicles by $100,000. Would reduce state revenues from the gross premiums tax by about $20 million in first year if no other changes are made in insurance rates. Would increase revenues for Department of Insurance by over $500,000 annually from fees paid by insurance companies for fraud investigations.

Proposition Number

100

Year

1988

Document Type

Proposition

Pass/Fail

Fail

Popular Vote Results

Y: 3849572; A: 40.9; N: 5562483; B: 59.1

Election Type

General Election

Proposition Type

Initiative statutory

Relevant Case

20th Century Ins. Co. v. Garamendi: 8 Cal. 4th 416: 878 P.2d 566: 32 Cal.Rptr. 2d 807, 1994; Calfarm Ins. Co. v. Deukmejian: 48 Cal. 3d 805: 771 P.2d 1247: 258 Cal. Rptr. 161, 1989; Sanford v. Garamendi: 233 Cal. App. 3d 1109: 284 Cal. Rptr. 897, 1991; Lee v. Travelers Cos.: 205 Cal. App. 3d 691: 252 Cal. Rptr. 468, 1988

For Author

Patricia Ramirez, State Administrator, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD); Carl Jones, Director, Congress of California Seniors; John Van De Kamp, Attorney General of California

Against Author

Henry J. Voss, President, California Farm Federation; Ed Davis, State Senator, 19th District Vice Chair, Senate Judiciary Committee; Betty Smith, Former Chair, California Democratic Party

Rebuttal Author

Henry J. Voss, President, California Farm Federation; Ed Davis, State Senator, 19th District Vice Chair, Senate Judiciary Committee; Betty Smith, Former Chair, California Democratic Party

Rebuttal Against Author

Steven Miller, President, Insurance Consumer Action Network (ICAN); J. Robert Hunter, Jr., President, National Insurance Consumer Organization (NICO); Stephen Brobeck, Executive Director, Consumer Federation of America (CFA)

Download

Share

COinS