Insurance

Health Insurers Target The Individual Market

August 21, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<strong>Aetna, WellPoint, Others Roll Out Policies That Cater to People Who Lack Employer Coverage; Stripping Out Maternity Care</strong><br/> <br/> Health insurers are targeting the two groups of people least likely to be covered by insurance...

Arnold Appointee Says Donations Matter

August 20, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<font face="verdana,sans-serif" size="2">Kim Fletcher, a <a href="http://arnoldwatch.org/articles/articles_001062.php3">$110,600 donor</a> who was appointed to a seat on the Del Mar Fair Board by the governor last month, told the North...</font>

State to get a bigger cut of any stem cell revenue;

August 20, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Payback rate raised to 25 percent for all</h3><p class="source">San Francisco Business Times</p> <p>John Simpson, stem cell project director for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, said CIRM's intellectual property rules still fall short in terms of affordable access to treatments and cures. The state attorney general, Simpson said, "should have the ability to march in and do something about that."</p>

Allstate exhibits remain public;

August 18, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Judge sees no trade secrets in material</h3><p class="source">Times-Picayune (New Orleans, LA)</p> <p>Vance also ruled Thursday that two national consumer groups, the California group the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, which was being represented by the Washington, D.C., advocacy group Public Justice, had a right to intervene in the case over the record-sealing issues.</p>

CONSUMER CONFIDENTIAL: Hopes for ’07 health reform on critical list

August 15, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The Los Angeles Times</p> <p>The insurance industry, meanwhile, has responded to recent reform efforts by becoming even more organized. Consumer advocates say insurers are shoveling piles of cash toward controlling the healthcare debate and protecting their lucrative livelihood. "The industry is saying that it will accept reform only if it's good for them," said Jamie Court, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. "The problem is that if it's good for the industry, it won't be good for the public."</p>

Groups want Allstate trial trial records kept open;

August 14, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Insurer wants to seal storm claims manual</h3><p class="source">Times-Picayune (New Orleans)</p> <p>The California insurance group the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, and the Washington public interest law firm Public Justice filed a motion in court last week opposing Allstate's request to seal the key documents from Weiss v. Allstate. In April, jurors awarded Dr. Robert Weiss of Slidell a $2.8 million judgment against Allstate. Weiss later settled the case on confidential terms after the company in post-trial motions had asked U.S. District Judge Sarah Vance to order a new trial or reduce the jury's "irrational verdict."</p>

Share the fruits of state-funded research with taxpayers

August 11, 2007  ·  John M. Simpson

<p class="source">Wisconsin Technology Network</p> <p>When venture capitalists provide money to companies they require clearly spelled out conditions and expectations. There is no reason it should be any different when Wisconsin's taxpayers put their hard-earned dollars on the line to fund research. They are entitled to insist upon maximum public benefit for their investment.</p>

Share the fruits of state-funded research with taxpayers

August 11, 2007  ·  John M. Simpson

<p class="source">Wisconsin Technology Network</p> <p>When venture capitalists provide money to companies they require clearly spelled out conditions and expectations. There is no reason it should be any different when Wisconsin's taxpayers put their hard-earned dollars on the line to fund research. They are entitled to insist upon maximum public benefit for their investment.</p>

FIRE HAZARD: HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE AT RISK;

August 9, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Setting Policy With Policies; Allstate's Move To Limit California Exposure Jolts Debate On Land Use In Danger Zones</h3><p class="source">The Press Enterprise (Riverside, CA)</p> <p>Carmen Balber, consumer advocate for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica, blasted Allstate's decision. While the marketplace might not feel an immediate fallout, Balber said, large insurers such as Allstate are making money "hand over fist," with the top insurers paying out a maximum of 40 cents per dollar on claims.</p>

State hearing on Blue Cross

August 7, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The San Francisco Chronicle</p> <p>State regulators will hold a public hearing today in Los Angeles to investigate criticisms that have surfaced about Blue Cross of California since the 2004 acquisition of its parent company by a Midwestern health insurer.</p>

State plans to monitor its PPOs

August 7, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The Record (Stockton, California)</p> <p>While lauding greater public reporting, the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights' Jerry Flanagan said the new PPO report card should not be modeled after HMO report cards. "It reads more like a dining guide than a report card. All the insurers get a star, but it's silent on affordability and doesn't expose deficiencies. It just rates broad categories with no distinctions. It's totally meaningless for consumers," said Flanagan, with the Santa Monica-based nonpartisan consumer advocacy organization. "We think they should include very specific reasons on what the insurers are doing wrong, such as rescinding coverage," he said. "Instead of receiving stars, HMOs, PPOs and health insurers should receive bad grades corresponding to specific areas where they fail to uphold standards of patient care."</p>

Stem cell grant picks ill-served by secrecy

August 7, 2007  ·  John M. Simpson

<p class="source">Sacramento Bee</p> <p>The stem cell committee should direct that scientific review of building projects be handled like the facilities review -- in public. As it stands now, the two-step process is apparently premised on the notion that it's unwise to risk embarrassing an institution for its lack of scientific ability, but it's all right to say it doesn't know how to construct a decent building. That approach serves neither scientist nor architect, but especially not the public.</p>