Quotes from Attorney General’s Brief, Filed Wednesday Night, in Response to Mercury’s Legal Challenge to the Ballot Title and Summary Prepared by the AG
View a copy of the AG’s brief at: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/AGReplyBrief031010.pdf
• “The proponent’s arguments that the Attorney General cannot tell voters that this measure would allow insurance companies to increase the cost of insurance for certain drivers is without legal merit.”
• Propositon 17 “will allow insurance companies to increase cost of insurance to drivers who do not have a history of continuous insurance coverage.”
• “If the title and summary does not make voters aware that the measure will allow surcharges, voters will be misled into thinking that Proposition 17 simply allows insurers to offer a new discount.”
• “What is certain is that any company that decides to offer this new discount will be allowed to surcharge drivers who don’t qualify for it. And that is all the title and summary says. The fact that car insurance pricing is complicated should not prevent voters from being accurately and fully informed about the key components of Proposition 17.”
• “The proponent and opponents of Proposition 17, as well as the Department of Insurance, are all well aware that in the world of car insurance pricing, you cannot have a discount without a surcharge. The only people who probably are not aware of this principle are the voters.”
• “Proposition 17 provides that insurance companies may offer the new discount ‘[n]otwithstanding section 1861.02 (c)[.]’ The effect of this language is to ensure that companies will be allowed to impose surcharges as well as the new discount. Thus, contrary to the proponent’s suggestions, the actual language of Proposition 17 allows surcharges by waiving the statutory provision that would have prohibited them.”
Prop 17 opponent Harvey Rosenfield also filed a brief with the court in support of the Attorney General’s Title and Summary. That brief is available at: http://bit.ly/a2EziJ
