Insurance

Businesses Question Insurance Tax Credits Some Fear Premium Hikes Will Cut Gains

June 7, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p> Consumer Watchdog founder Harvey Rosenfield wrote and lobbied for Proposition 103 in 1988. With its passage, the state regulated auto and homeowners' insurance and challenged rate hikes, he said. "In California, five companies control 96 percent of the health insurance market. It's almost a cartel," he said. "After a decade's worth of double-digit increases, and you get them again in a recession, there's just no more money to pay the price." </p>

Insurers Weigh in on Democratic Races

June 4, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

“Insurers are spending millions of dollars to influence the outcome of Tuesday’s election, but most voters don’t know insurance companies are out there propping up initiatives and attacking candidates,” said Doug Heller, executive director of Consumer Watchdog, which is virtually single-handedly taking on Mercury Insurance Corp.’s Proposition 17. Mercury has outraised Consumer Watchdog’s PAC $15.9 million to $1 million."

Two Health Care Adversaries Find a Need to Collaborate

June 4, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

After squaring off as political foes for more than a year, the Obama administration and the health insurance industry have suddenly discovered that they need each other. Carmen L. Balber, director of the Washington office of Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit advocacy group, said: ''The success of health care reform depends, in part, on the cooperation of the insurance industry. Insurers have endless opportunities to throw up roadblocks. If they try to hold on to the old way of doing business, it will be much harder for the administration to achieve the goal of high-quality, affordable care.''

Corporate “smart initiatives” will test California voters’ smarts Tuesday

June 3, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p> During my two decades battling in California's ballot initiative process never before have large corporations been poised to gain so much so cleverly as in next Tuesday's election. </p> <p> Industries have long tried to lard ballots...</p>

VC Reporter Endorsements

June 3, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

Those opposed to Prop. 17, including groups like Consumer Watchdog, project that the surcharges will leave more motorists, especially low-income residents, driving on the road uninsured. No $250 courtesy discount can compensate for that. The measure is a metaphorical lemon with a flat tire on ballots next week.

Appointments of Federal Watchdogs Suggest More Tough Scrutiny for Insurers

June 1, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

Pounded by the Obama administration for raising premiums, health insurers now must reckon with a foursome of longtime industry watchdogs who are helping steer the federal government's effort to overhaul the private insurance market. Earlier in Jay Angoff's career, he worked for Ralph Nader's Congress Watch, where he became friends with Harvey Rosenfield, who founded the California-based advocacy group Consumer Watchdog. Rosenfield describes Angoff as "shrewd, analytical, incisive, politically astute and a detail guy."

Auto Insurance Debate Drives Prop. 17

May 27, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p> Mercury is the culprit, according to No on Prop. 17 campaigners, led by the Santa Monica-based Consumer Watchdog. Its director, Doug Heller, says that it’s rarely mentioned that Prop. 17 would give Mercury and other insurers free will to hand down hefty $1,000 surcharges to drivers — four times the savings touted by Prop. 17 supporters.  </p>

Proposition 14, the Open Primary

May 27, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p> <strong>What happens to ossified Sacramento if California voters get to shop around?</strong> </p> <p>   </p> <p> Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit consumer-advocacy group that regularly deals with the state Legislature, thinks fear is a good thing. "I believe in the power of fear to get progressive change," says Court. "Right now, there are too many safe seats occupied by unresponsive politicians."  Court, whose outfit has no position on Prop. 14, says, "The more politicians worry at every stage of the election process, the more good it will be for the public." </p>

Auto Insurer’s Prop. 17 Motives Are Questioned

May 26, 2010  ·  Harvey Rosenfield

<p> <strong>Critics: Some Drivers May Face Surcharge</strong> </p> <p> The insurance company that placed Proposition 17 on the June ballot says it did so to save money for most policyholders. The consumer-advocacy groups opposing it say that’s merely a smoke screen. What the company, Mercury Insurance, really wants is to undermine a provision of a voter-approved insurance initiative passed in 1988, said Harvey Rosenfield, founder of the Santa Monica-based group Consumer Watchdog. That would allow it to assess a surcharge on drivers who seek to restart auto insurance coverage after dropping it temporarily. </p>

Worry about health reform loopholes goes mainstream

May 24, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p> Consumer Watchdog has been warning for weeks that the <a href="http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/patients/articles/?storyId=33875">health reform law will be riddled with costly loopholes </a>if insurers get their way in implementing the regulations that control big expansions in health coverage. It's a hard slog, especially when you're talking about technical, math-laden stuff like "medical loss ratio" and "rate and premium review." Now our concerns are hitting the mainstream, with a boost from the editorial boards of the New York Times and the L.A. Times. </p>

Will Prop. 17 Save Or Cost Californians Money?

May 24, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<strong>Prop. 17 Among Propositions On June 8 Ballot</strong> <p> Harvey Rosenfeld, of the group Consumer Watchdog, has been fighting insurance companies, including Mercury, for decades. He sees it differently. “It’s a fraud on the voters to describe Prop. 17 as saving everybody money,” he said. “It will actually cost people money.” Rosenfeld said Mercury has spent close to $10 million to get Prop. 17 passed. “When was the last time an insurance company spent millions of dollars to save you money,” he asked. “Answer — never.” </p>

Vote ‘No’ On This Tricky Measure

May 23, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

Frankly, there's little credibility in a major insurance company spending beaucoup bucks on a ballot measure just so it can offer motorists a discount. But that is what Mercury Insurance wants you to swallow. We can't trust Mercury Insurance or any big, special interest that goes out and buys a ballot proposition. Vote "no" on Proposition 17.