Insurance

As Lawmakers Grapple With Financial Overhaul, They Call for More Studies

March 16, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

Carmen Balber, Washington director for Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit education and advocacy group, also opposes some of the consumer provisions, but for the opposite reason, saying they do not go far enough. Some of those provisions are subject to study as well.

Editorial: Vote No On Deceptive Proposition 17

March 16, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p> Californians should have no trouble figuring out how to vote on Proposition 17, the auto insurance measure. All they have to do is ask themselves if Mercury Insurance Co., which spent $3.5 million to qualify and support the initiative, has consumers’ welfare or its own financial interests in mind. </p>

Buying Power: How PG&E and Mercury Insurance are spending millions to try to trick Californians into voting for corporate interests

March 16, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

California voters are about to be bombarded by more than $50 million in political advertising designed to convince them to approve a pair of measures desperately sought by two powerful corporations with a long history of lies and political corruption.

Insurance Ballot Fight Warms Up In Court

March 13, 2010  ·  Harvey Rosenfield

<p> Lawsuits ensued over just how that impact would be described in the voter pamphlets, landing all three parties in court: Attoney General Jerry Brown, Harvey Rosenfield and the backers of Proposition 17. Brown, for instance, insisted on language saying the initiative "will allow insurance companies to increase cost of insurance to drivers who do not have a history of continuous insurance coverage." Backers of Proposition 17 wanted that language stricken, but the judge disagreed. </p>

Judges Review Language Of State Ballot Measures

March 13, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<strong>A teachers union's effort to change wording in Prop. 14, which would allow open primaries, was largely rejected. Measures on car insurance and public financing got only minimal adjustments.</strong><br /> <br /> "All Proposition 17 does is allow people to take it with them when they move to a new insurance company and get the lower rate," argued Richard Martland, an attorney for the supporters. But Consumer Watchdog founder Harvey Rosenfield said the measure is a thinly disguised attempt by Mercury to be allowed to charge higher rates for those it doesn't want to insure. Rosenfield's attorney, Fredric Woocher, said the proposition is being misleadingly cast as an opportunity for drivers to retain their loyalty discounts even if they switch insurers. "You can't take it with you," Woocher said. "You are taking away the one thing that makes persistency persistent. It would be like taking a good student discount and extending it to people who fail."

Judge Rules On Proposition 17 Ballot Measure

March 12, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p> Consumer Watchdog argues Prop 17 also allows insurance companies to charge a severe penalty to customers who do not have a history of coverage, therefore, the voter pamphlet should say the initiative will raise rates. “It allows insurance companies to surcharge people just because they didn’t have previous insurance, maybe they didn’t even have a car, or they were in the military serving stateside, or they missed a single payment on their insurance,” said Harvey Rosenfield with Consumer Watchdog. </p>

Assembly Bill Would Slash Coverage Mandates For Health Insurers

March 11, 2010  ·  Jerry Flanagan

Modesto Assemblyman Tom Berryhill (R) has introduced a bill that would allow insurers to drop some four-dozen coverage mandates. These include overnight hospital stays for new mothers. Jerry Flanagan is with the non-profit <a href="http://www.consumerwatchdog.org//">Consumer Watchdog</a>. "If you take those laws away, insurance companies can still charge as much as they want, but provide far less health care," Flanagan argues. "That's really good for the insurance company, because they can keep more of our money for themselves; it's the last thing you want to do for patients."

Insurance rate curbs continue to gain steam

March 11, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p> The latest round of exorbitant health insurance rate increases nationally has helped more and more people recognize what Consumer Watchdog has been arguing for the last year: Congress cannot require all Americans to purchase insurance from the for-profit insurance industry without real oversight of what they charge ...</p>

Health insurance premium curbs are catching on

March 11, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p> Consumer Watchdog's <a href="http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/patients/articles/?storyId=33144">calls for tough and open health insurance rate regulation </a>are being echoed and amplified. The latest instance is in Connecticut, the home state of insurance companies, where Attorney General Earl Blumenthal <a href="http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/patients/articles/?storyId=33144">recently proposed major reforms </a>that would require the state to review and reject, modify or allow a rate change before it goes into effect. No more shrugging and letting it happen without a public review. </p>

California Group Urges National Freeze On Health Insurance Rates

March 10, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

President Obama should include a provision freezing health insurance rates in the package of revisions Democrats are drafting for the Senate-passed health care overhaul bill (HR 3590), a California-based consumer group said Wednesday. Other provisions that the Consumer Watchdog group wants to see included are a requirement that state regulators approve rate increases before they go into effect, and that federal grants be made available to states for developing these "prior approval" regulations. "Given the audacity of health insurance rate increases last year and this year, and with the economy in deep recession, only federal legislation can curb the spiral of unaffordability," said Carmen Balber, the Washington director for the group.

Put corporate political spending to a vote

March 10, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p> When the US Supreme Court decided to allow corporations to spend money directly on campaign advertising, they opened the floodgates to excessive spending by companies to change the outcome of elections. The long-term solution is a... </p>

Calif. Regulators Defend Dropped Insurance Deals

March 10, 2010  ·  Consumer Watchdog

LOS ANGELES, CA (AP) ― State insurance regulators on Wednesday defended their actions against health insurers after a report showed few consumers who complained that their coverage was canceled after they took ill actually benefited from state-negotiated settlements. The settlements may not have appealed to many consumers because they were "very stilted towards insurance companies," said Jerry Flanagan, a health advocate for Consumer Watchdog. Consumers weren't allowed to hire lawyers for arbitration, and had to prove all their past medical bills were "medically necessary, which is a hard legal standard to meet" without a lawyer's help. Additionally, the coverage that was offered through arbitration was usually a policy with a lower benefit than the wrongfully rescinded policy, said Flanagan.