SACRAMENTO, Calif., Aug. 9, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- With the goal of providing California voters accuracy and simplicity, the proponents of Proposition 33 argued today that the Ballot Label, Title and Summary of the proposition was prejudicial and should be changed. Specifically, the idea that insurance companies can unilaterally change insurance rates is untrue and misleading.
Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley said that in reviewing similar cases over his career, "this one troubled me more than most." Judge Frawley went on to say that he would have written the Ballot Label, Title and Summary differently, going so far as to offer an example, but concluded that the law required him to give deference to the Attorney General's language, prompting him not to change it.
"We agree with the judge that the Ballot Label, Title and Summary could have been written in a clearer fashion, and we wanted to have that discussion," said Rachel Hooper with the Proposition 33 campaign. "However, we also believe that Proposition 33 will win on its merits: it will allow consumers to control their discount and shop it with an insurance carrier they choose. It will increase competition between insurance carriers, lower rates and was written to be inclusive and provide incentives for everyone to obtain insurance."
Much more interesting during today's legal hearing, was that corporate trial lawyers, Consumer Watchdog, who have earned a reputation for overheated hyperbole, took the unusual stance in court that their arguments against Proposition 33 are their opinion and in such instances, "the truth is elastic."
"We have finally heard in court what we have always believed to be true and now know to be fact – Consumer Watchdog's idea of the truth is different from that of the average Californian," continued Hooper. "That is part of the message that will emerge over the next 89 days of this campaign… they are not a third party in this discussion, beware of believing anything Consumer Watchdog says."
We urge everyone to read the initiative. We also encourage people to look at the growing support from genuine consumer groups including the Greenlining Institute, founded to combat redlining, the illegal practice of denying services to communities of color, military groups such as the GI Forum of California, the VFW of California, business groups and more. A list of support is available at www.YesProp33.com.
We look forward to a robust campaign, where the merits of Proposition 33 will prevail.
SOURCE Yes on Prop 33