No on 17! (Vote No on Proposition 17)

You’ve probably heard the saying about sausage and politics – you don’t really want to see how its done. Well, one proposed solution to that is initiative process – which is supposed to allow the people a chance to create legislation directly, rather than through their elected officials. Once an initiative has enough votes, it is put on the ballot and the people get to vote on it.

On this year’s ballot is Proposition 17. A little background on Prop 17:

1. Mercury Insurance funded the signature collecting process.
2. It is opposed by the Consumer Federation of California.
3. It is opposed by the Campaign for Consumer Rights.

That should be all you need to know, but here is more:

1. The Contra Costa Times staff editorial wrote that Prop 17 “designed to fool voters into believing it is simply a change in the law that would allow insurers to offer a ‘continuous coverage’ discount on policies to new customers who switch auto insurance companies.”
2. In fact, Prop 17 would allow insurance companies to raise rates on anyone who was an interruption in auto insurance, even if the people had no car and no reason to have auto insurance.
3. This means that anyone who did not have insurance for a period – even a single day – could have their rates raised by Mercury or any other insurance company: a soldier returning to civilian life; a person who did not drive while he or she was in school; a family that missed a single payment by a single day and had their insurance rates canceled.

Mercury is touting this proposition as one that allows them to give drivers discounts. Of course, there is nothing precluding them from doing so right now – the law would just allow them to change rates when someone has a period without coverage. Change the rate – not necessarily lower it.

So what do you think they will do? Raise the rate or lower it? And why does Mercury think it needs to spend $3.6 million dolllars on Prop. 17 just to win the right to give you a discount?