November 2012 California Ballot Measure Recommendations

[swmartin]

Before diving into the individual propositions, I thought it time to update my “general principles”:

1) In general, ballot measures are a bad idea. They aren't vetted by the normal legislative processes, which allow for compromise and amendment, and they create a "higher level" of statutory law which the Legislature cannot easily amend if changes

Comments

[jimkeller]

The fact that Mercury Insurance has spent millions to put an almost identical measure back on the ballot means they obviously expect this change to bring them even more millions in profit by somehow increasing overall insurance rates. The fact that it’s not obvious HOW just makes me more suspicious.

I suspect the "how" is that they plan to convert millions of uninsured individuals into insured individuals with the promise of lower insurance rates for continuous coverage. That means a dramatic increase in the sale of "non-owner" policies, and a financial disincentive for letting your coverage lapse for a few months, hoping you won't get caught. They must believe that the discounts provided for those with continuous coverage will be more than made up for by the increased income from the broader customer base (which is, after all, how insurance works in the first place).

[colleency]

As always Scott, Thank you.

[colleency]

Your recommendations point me in the right direction, so I can figure out what I need to research.