Insurance

New insurance rules spur debate

July 31, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The Bakersfield Californian</p> <p>"It's the law," Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi said when asked why he pushed for the changes. "Good drivers should get the same rates for the same coverage no matter where they live." Harvey Rosenfield, the crusading president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights and the author of Proposition 103, said, "It really is a testament to the greed and arrogance of the insurance industry that they have managed to delay this for 18 years,"</p>

Bush Vetoes Bill to Loosen Policy on Stem-Cell Research

July 28, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The Chronicle of Higher Education</p> <p>In related news, two public-interest organizations last week mounted a legal challenge to patents on a technique for deriving human embryonic stem cells, claiming that the three patents, owned by a University of Wisconsin affiliate, are "overreaching" and should be revoked.</p>

Hecklers greet governor on 2nd day of campaign tour

July 26, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The San Jose Mercury News (California)</p> <p>When Schwarzenegger arrived in Glendale, Carmen Balber, who supports Proposition 89, which would limit campaign contributions and authorize public financing for state candidates, asked him to support the measure. "He wouldn't commit to it," she complained.</p>

Governor, Democratic rival unveil competing health care plans

July 25, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Associated Press</p> <p>Jerry Flanagan with FTCR, noted that the conversation never touched on the record profits of insurance companies, whose representatives were among the panelists. He said advertising and salaries have become the fastest-growing component of health care costs outpacing even prescription drugs. "When they're at the table and the patients are not, the discussion is all about how we can make consumers use less rather than how we can make health care more affordable," Flanagan said.</p>

Officials in line for pensions based on jobs held briefly;

July 23, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Those who leave office in January would get retirement package based on a salary increase granted in December</h3><p class="source">Contra Costa Times (California)</p> <p>"It's outrageous," said Jamie Court, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. "At a time when we're having to assess whether disabled Californians can get basic cost-of-living adjustments, it's outrageous for constitutional officers to take a platinum parachute from the public based on a salary they only had for a couple days."</p>

Insurance groups sue to halt new regulations

July 21, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The San Diego Union-Tribune</p> <p>Doug Heller, executive director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, whose founder Harvey Rosenfield wrote Proposition 103, said insurers like the status quo "because they have made so much money off of us. They're afraid that the $2 billion in profits that they made in 2005 from California drivers might come down."</p>

Auto insurers attack rules;

July 21, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Suits fight new rate setting tied to driver's record, not ZIP code.</h3><p class="source">Sacramento Bee</p> <p>"The voters made it very clear that auto insurance rates should be based on how you drive, not where you live," said Doug Heller, executive director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica.</p>

Insurers sue Calif. over new auto rules

July 21, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Associated Press</p> <p>"We will fight to ensure that this anti-consumer lawsuit does not stop the savings that good drivers have been waiting nearly two decades to receive," said Douglas Heller, executive director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. "With auto insurers coming off the most profitable year in a generation, customers should view with contempt any insurance company that joins this lawsuit."</p>

Insurers sue to block rate-setting rules;

July 21, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>INDUSTRY CONTENDS AUTO PREMIUMS WILL RISE UNDER NEW REGULATIONS</h3><p class="source">San Jose Mercury News (California)</p> <p>The insurance companies "are dragging their feet in the mud,'' said Douglas Heller, executive director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, a non-profit consumer group. "They just want to charge drivers as much as they want if they live in communities that they don't like. This is a last-ditch effort.''</p>

Groups urge revocation of stem-cell patents;

July 19, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>CALIFORNIA'S INSTITUTE MAY BE HARMED, THEY SAY</h3><p class="source">San Jose Mercury News (California)</p> <p>The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights and the Public Patent Foundation petitioned the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to revoke three patents held by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation. The public interest groups contend the patents -- issued in 1998, 2001 and 2006 -- never should have been granted and are "causing significant public harm" by forcing some U.S. scientists to pursue stem-cell studies in other countries where the patents aren't enforced.</p>

DRIVING LESS WILL CUT INSURANCE PREMIUM;

July 19, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>YOUR RATE NO LONGER FIGURED BY ZIP CODE</h3><p class="source">Modesto Bee</p> <p>Department officials said that under the new regulations, a person's driving record and miles driven are the top two factors in insurance rates. "You should call your agent or your insurance company and say you need to be re-rated," Doug Heller with FTCR said.</p>

UW stem cell patents face challenge: Groups say ownership of rights hurts research, drives scientists away

July 19, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (Wisconsin)</p> <p>A California-based consumer group and a stem cell scientist took action Tuesday to overturn the landmark patents on human embryonic stem cells held by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, claiming that the patents hinder research, drive scientists overseas and waste taxpayer money.</p>