Texas Tribune

And now for something completely different: Rick Perry and Bill White are virtually tied in the race for governor, according to a poll done for Texas Watch by Republican pollster Hill Research Consultants.  [...]

On their own issues, they found that voters think insurance rates are too high and think the state’s regulation of that industry favors insurers over the people who buy insurance. Most Texans — 84 percent — think the state’s insurance commissioner should be elected rather than appointed, and 73 percent think companies should have to get the state’s approval before rates can go up.

BurkaBlog (Texas Monthly)

The poll today from Hill Research Consultants casts the governor’s race in a new light. It shows Perry with a one point lead, 42-41. The poll is somewhat eccentric since the ballot test is secondary to the main thrust of the poll, which is to examine Texans’ attitude on insurance reform issues and how they might affect the governor’s race. The Hill firm did a previous poll on the subject of insurance reform before the 2009 legislative session. The poll showed that Texans’ favored such reforms as an elected insurance commissioner.  [...]

I believe that prior approval would make a difference. Under the current “file and use” rules, companies can file rates and start collecting premium income immediately. Under “prior approval,” the insurance commissioner would first determine whether the rates are fair and reasonable. Only if he answered in the affirmative would the rates be allowed to take effect. Under “file and use,” rates would take effect immediately. Consumers could challenge the rates, but the process would end up in court. Companies could rake in the money during the time the case was being tried. Only if the rates were determined to be too high would consumers be able to get refunds, and only then after companies had been raking in the profits from the excessive rates. The consumers lose the float. It doesn’t take a genius to see which method is more consumer-friendly.

Houston Chronicle/San Antonio Express-News

A pair of polls released Tuesday showed Gov. Rick Perry’s re-election bid had slipped toward a statistical tie with Democrat Bill White, but both surveys may have reflected more of a short-term Democratic attack than a shift in the race.  [...]

The Texas Watch poll was conducted by Hill Research Consultants of The Woodlands, a Republican firm. The survey of 600 registered voters was done Aug. 25-29 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

The survey found 73 percent of Texas voters favor insurance reform requiring companies to obtain prior approval from state regulators before raising rates, a reform promoted by White. Currently, companies can raise rates that are subject to state review, and some companies have refused to lower rates when told to do so.

KUT (Texas Public Radio)

A new poll out today shows the Texas governor’s race in a virtual dead heat.  The poll from Hill Research Consultants has Governor Rick Perry leading former Houston Mayor Bill White 42-percent to 41-percent.  Other polls this summer have shown the two-term incumbent with much larger leads.  [...]

Other than the governor’s race, Texas Watch also used the poll to highlight what the group feels is a need for legislation to help regulate home insurance rates.  The poll showed the majority of all voters surveyed – Democrat, Republican, other – in favor of tighter controls on the home insurance market.

Quorum Report (Subscription)

A new poll conducted by the GOP polling firm Hill Research Consultants on behalf of insurance industry watchdog group Texas Watch has a startling number in the Governor’s Race: Rick Perry 42, Bill White 41.

That’s pretty different from other recent polls where Perry has a bigger lead. We looked at the questionnaire and the preference question is a straight up horse race question with no candidate statements read beforehand that could influence the response.  [...]

The survey also finds strong support for a slate of insurance reforms touted by Texas Watch, including prior approval (74 percent approve strongly or somewhat), direct election of the Insurance Commissioner (84 percent approve strongly or somewhat), prohibiting the use of credit ratings in charging higher prices or denying coverage (52 percent approve strongly or somewhat), requiring insurance companies to offer standard policies written in plain language (85 percent approve strongly or somewhat) and giving consumers more legal option against insurance companies (78 percent approve strongly or somewhat).

The pollsters found that backing these options would make the respondents more likely to vote for their preferred candidates, regardless of party affiliation. Eighty-one percent of White voters said they would be more likely to vote for their guy if he embraced this set of insurance reforms while 71 percent of Perry voters said they he would be more likely to vote for the Governor if he pushed these proposals.

KXAS-TV

Polls are like Texas weather: if you don’t like it, just wait a few minutes and it’ll change.  Enter the Texas Watch Poll, a self proclaimed “non-partisan, advocacy organization working to improve consumer and insurance protections for Texas families.”  Their polling shows Gov. Rick Perry slightly ahead with 42 percent toBill White’s 41 percent. Fourteen percent of people polled were undecided. The margin of error was +/- 4 percent.

Results with Key Cross-Tabs & Findings
Full Cross-Tab Results
Full Questionnaire with Results

• “Prior Approval,” requiring companies submit and justify rate increases for review by the Department of Insurance before they could go in to effect, not after (73% approve vs. 17% disapprove);
• “Fair Claims,” giving consumers stronger legal remedies and enhancing damages and sanctions if companies unfairly deny, delay, or underpay legitimate claims (77% approve vs. 12% disapprove);
• “Uniform Standards,” requiring companies offer a few standard policies written in plain language that would be consistent across the industry (71% approve vs. 20% disapprove);
• “Neutral Review,” prohibiting insurance companies from using a person’s credit rating when deciding whether to charge higher prices or deny coverage (56% approve vs. 39% disapprove);
• “Direct Election,” making the Insurance Commissioner a state-wide elected position
  chosen by voters, rather than appointed by the Governor (84% approve vs. 11% disapprove).

Most notably, by championing these reforms, both Perry and White could increase support within their own respective political bases while simultaneously appealing to the key bloc of still undecided voters as well.

“Voters want leaders to stand tall on insurance reform,” said Alex Winslow, executive director of the Texas Watch Foundation, an Austin-based consumer-advocacy 501(c)(3) that commissioned the survey. “Candidates cannot hide from this issue. Texans are looking for leaders to deliver results that will hold insurance companies accountable for their prices, coverage, and claims handling.”

Questionnaire design, fielding and analysis was conducted by Hill Research Consultants, a Republican firm that has worked with over a half-dozen state governors, more than a dozen United states Senators, over two dozen members of Congress, in excess of 100 members of state legislatures, and the RNC, NRSC and Republican party organizations in more than a dozen individual states. To avoid bias, particular care was taken to carefully order questions and use neutral language when describing legislative proposals. Final results and cross-tabular datasets are being made available to the media, legislators and members of the general public for thorough examination. To receive a copy, email dbenzion@hillresearch.com.

600 Texas voters — August 25-29, 2010 — live telephone interviewers — margin of error + 4.0%

“Texas homeowners have been beaten up by the insurance industry for too long, paying 76% more than the national average.  We applaud Bill White for committing to support real insurance reform,” said Alex Winslow, executive director of Texas Watch.  “Texans need comprehensive homeowners insurance reform.  Requiring insurance companies to justify their rates is a key part of ensuring that rates are fair and coverage is adequate for all Texans.”

Texas Watch has long advocated providing Texas homeowners a higher level of protection from unwarranted insurance rate hikes by enacting a “prior approval” system which simply requires that insurance companies justify rate changes before they could go into effect.

“Texans are paying more and more while getting less and less when it comes to homeowners insurance,” added Winslow.  “Politicians in Austin have promised to help homeowners for years, but the so-called ‘reforms’ they’ve passed simply benefitted the insurance industry without helping Texas homeowners.”

Some key statistics:

• 23 states currently require prior approval of insurance rates.  14 states require prior approval for all homeowners insurance rate changes; another 9 require it in certain circumstances like a steep hike or non-competitive marketplace. (source: NAIC)
• 75% of likely Texas voters expressed support for prior approval of homeowners insurance rates in a statewide, scientific public opinion survey conducted last year. (source: Hill Research/Texas Watch poll)
• Texans pay among the highest homeowners insurance rates in the nation – 76% higher than the national average. (source: NAIC)
• Homeowners insurance companies have taken in $12.4 billion in gross profits since 2004 when the lax “file and use” scheme was adopted, allowing insurers to raise rates without any prior justification.  That is more than double the $5.6 billion they pocketed between 1998 and 2003 when Texas regulators had a much more active role in overseeing the industry. (source: OPIC)

“Providing homeowners with relief from abusive insurance companies is not a partisan issue.  We hope that all candidates will promise to support Texas homeowners by committing to enact comprehensive insurance reform,” said Winslow.

###

For Immediate Release
August 26, 2010
Contact: Alex Winslow, 512-381-1111

Some key statistics:

• Consumers prevailed in just 27% of cases involving an individual pitted against a corporate or governmental entity.
• In cases where a jury reached a verdict, the Texas Supreme Court reversed the jury’s decision 72% of the time.
• The average score on our Consumer Scorecard for the justices was just 32%.
• The average rate of agreement with the majority was 87%, indicating a lack of judicial debate or disagreement.

A number of new trends emerged this term.  Most notable was the Court’s penchant for shielding governmental entities from accountability.  The Court has a long history of protecting corporate wrongdoers, and that is unchanged as is evidenced by the Court’s reaffirmation of its wrongheaded and decidedly activist decision in Entergy v. Summers.  This term is marked by an increase in governmental immunity protections for state and local governments that put the lives and livelihoods of citizens at risk.  From whistleblowers to unsafe road conditions to abiding by a signed contract, the Court allowed local and state governments to hide behind a cloak of “sovereign immunity” rather than take responsibility for the harm caused to individual citizens.

There were, however, a few bright spots in this otherwise anti-consumer term.  For the first time since the 2001-02 term, the Court made some significant rulings in favor of consumers.  On a related note, three of the justices improved their consumer voting records, each topping 40% in favor of consumers with Justice Medina voting for consumers 49% of the time.  Finally, the Court has nearly halved the percentage of unsigned opinions it releases, opening itself to more accountability and transparency.  We applaud the Court for these positive developments and hope to see a new trend develop.

The 2008-09 term also marks the end of the Court’s four year stable composition of justices.  These nine justices have spent the past four terms together on the Court and, as might be expected, voting alliances have developed.  We hope that the replacement of Justice Brister with Justice Guzman will lead to a more balanced term in 2009-2010.

Read the full report here.

Texas Court Watch is a project of the Texas Watch Foundation, a non-partisan 501(c)(3) organization. Content that appears on this page has been produced by the Texas Watch Foundation for research and public education purposes.

Over the weekend, the Austin American-Statesman reported that the Texas Department of Insurance would start reviewing health insurance rate increases that are deemed “unreasonable.”  This stems from the new federal health care law which says rates can’t be too high.  How “unreasonable” is defined has yet to be determined by the feds, but in the past, TDI has only reviewed health insurance price hikes of 50% or more.  I think we can all agree that is unreasonable.

This comes on the heels of the legislature’s decision to give the insurance commissioner time to review rate increases by the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association (TWIA) – that is the quasi-public insurance pool that provides most coastal homeowners insurance for hurricane damage – before they go into effect.  Under the law passed last year, the commissioner has to act within 30 days of a TWIA rate hike of up to 5% or 60 days for anything higher.

While both of these moves leave consumers vulnerable to abusive behavior by the insurance industry, they are good steps in the right direction.

At the same time that Texas is making improvements (albeit meager) in the oversight of health insurance companies and the windstorm insurance pool, homeowners are left with rising premiums and dwindling coverage.  Yet, there continues to be resistance from some lawmakers and so-called free market “think tanks” to the notion that all insurance companies should have to justify their rates before – not after – they jack up their prices on Texas customers.

The least that the legislature could do is be consistent.  All insurance companies – regardless of type of coverage – should have to justify their prices.  Period.

Texans pay among the highest homeowners insurance premiums in the nation – 76% higher than the national average.  During a period of rising premiums, we have seen the coverage in most policies dramatically reduced.  So, we are paying more and getting less.  And still some lawmakers are resistant to the idea that insurance companies should have to justify their rates.

Lawmakers gathered to discuss an interim committee assignment dealing with “third party liability issues involving workers’ compensation.”  In light of recent Texas workplace disasters and the BP oil spill, advocates told a joint hearing of the House Business & Industry and Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence committees that corporations like BP that cut corners on safety should be held fully responsible.

The groups told lawmakers to turn the page on lobby-driven proposals that are designed to immunize wrongdoers when they cause workplace catastrophes that lead to needless deaths, injuries, environmental disasters, and economic hardship for businesses and local governments.

Alex Winslow with Texas Watch:
“Industry groups like TLR want to socialize the havoc wreaked by a few bad actors who fail to make safety a priority.  Why in the world should good companies be forced to pay for the actions of dangerous ones?  Instead of protecting BP-style behavior, we should reverse the cost-benefit equation so that it costs more to cut corners on safety than it does to implement reasonable safety protocols that are proven to save lives.  The best way to do this is to hold the wrongdoers who cause needless workplace deaths and injuries fully accountable in a court of law.  BP and companies like it should pay a consequence for their egregious behavior.”

Rene Lara with Texas AFL-CIO:
“What is even more stunning about the Entergy decision is that the Texas Supreme Court  handed a blanket of legal immunity to some of the most dangerous workplaces in Texas.  Even a cursory glance at the major industrial tragedies in this state demonstrates this point dramatically.”

Craig McDonald with Texans for Public Justice:
“A spate of preventable workplace tragedies and the BP gulf disaster have brought us to a tipping point.  It’s time to slam the door on special interest groups like TLR who continually push for more limits on liability and new immunities from accountability.  The best way to protect Texas and Texans is to make sure businesses and individuals are fully responsible for the harm they do.  No more, but no less.”

Cyrus Reed with Sierra Club, Lone Star Chapter:
“If the  2005 explosion at BP’s Texas City Refinery happened today, none of the injured workers or the families of the 15 workers killed could seek redress through the courts. It also means all of the court documents that have led to multiple investigations and fines related to illegal environmental emissions and safety shortcuts by BP would never have seen the light of day. It’s time for the Legislature to step in and make sure that owners of the facilities are responsible for what happens to the workers on their site and to the environment around it.”

Michael Cunningham with Texas Building & Construction Trades Council:
“The Supreme Court decision in support of Entergy allowing owners of the most dangerous facilities to protect themselves and all their subcontractors from lawsuits from injured workers and limiting their liabilities from negligence of others is just wrong.  Even when gambling, a person has a chance of winning, but the TLR and the activist Supreme Court Justices were able to create a double-headed coin to hand the workers working in these facilities. Now these Owners get to say ‘Just Flip It and We Call It, but your injury now limits you to Workers Compensation Benefits and You Can’t Sue Anyone.’  This egregious decision prevents injured workers and their families access to the courts in order to determine the negligence of others with the ability for further compensation.”

If recent history is any guide, the discussion at Thursday’s hearing will be dominated by lobbyists pitching even more schemes to immunize their clients from accountability rather than how to prevent workplace catastrophes.  No doubt, industry groups will call for even more restrictions on the rights of workers who are harmed on the job with proposals to force them into a broken workers’ comp system or some new catastrophic injury plan which will socialize damages, forcing companies that heed safety protocols to subsidize the liability of those that don’t.

None of the lobbyist-driven proposals will prevent needless workplace injuries and deaths or protect the environment.

Texas Watch produced a new web video to remind us all what this is really about.  It is about the men and women who have lost their lives because it was cheaper for an industrial plant owner to cut corners on safety than it was to implement proven safety protocols.  One way to improve workplace safety is to reverse that calculation, making it more cost-beneficial for industry to protect workers than it is to shirk their duty to keep their workers safe.

Check out the video:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Other posts of interest:

• Why Does Texas Protect BP?
• BP’s Ungodly Safety Record

The answer is obvious.  Lobbyists have been hard at work in the both the legislature and the courts carving out special protections for plant and refinery owners like BP.  Never mind the fact that BP leads the nation in refinery deaths, that 41 Texans have lost their lives because of safety lapses at its Texas City plant, or that the company has more willful safety violations than any other company by a mile.

This map from the Center for Public Integrity plots OSHA violations at plants across the country.  You can see just how BP’s plant in Texas City stacks up:

To make matters worse, those same lobbyists are astonishingly and shamefully headed to the Texas Capitol again this week to ask for even more protections for BP and its ilk.  They are expected to ask lawmakers to consider socializing the havoc wreaked by a few bad actors who fail make a safety a priority.  They plan to force even more injured workers into a broken workers’ comp system or create some new catastrophic injury plan funded by a new levy on all businesses in Texas.  Why in the world should good companies be forced to pay for the actions of dangerous ones?

Instead of protecting BP-style behavior, we should reverse the cost-benefit equation so that it costs more to cut corners on safety than it does to implement reasonable safety protocols that are proven to save lives.  The best way to do this is to hold the wrongdoers who cause needless workplace deaths and injuries fully accountable in a court of law.  BP and companies like it should pay a consequence for its egregious behavior.

Take a look at our new web video:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

On February 12, 2002, Gov. Perry held a press conference in Austin discussing the problems with homeowners insurance in Texas.  He raised concerns about “troubling trends in the homeowner’s insurance market in Texas,” adding that “homeowner’s insurance is getting more expensive, coverage is becoming harder to get.”

Perry added that the Insurance Commissioner needed more authority to protect consumers from unwarranted rate increases, calling prior approval of insurance rates a “tougher option” than the file and use system that was created in 2003.  He concluded that “Prior approval would require the Insurance Commissioner to approve or disapprove certain rate increases before customers are asked to pay – increasing the Commissioner’s ability to get control of an unstable market and prevent rate shock for Texas consumers.”  (See the full text of Perry’s remarks on his official website here.)

We could not agree more.

Alas, it is more than 8 years later and Texans are still struggling with rising insurance rates and falling insurance protections.  In fact, we pay among the highest premiums in the nation – more than 76% above the national average, according to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.  And, the level of coverage available in most insurance policies is significantly less than it was just a few years ago.

We encourage Texans to contact Gov. Perry and ask him to keep his promise to support real insurance reforms that protect consumers.  Call him today at 1-800-843-5789.  Or send him an e-mail.

If Travelers fails to pull its ad off the air immediately, the Attorney General’s office can seek further legal action, including an injunction, to block the company from airing this ad in Texas.

“We’re glad the Attorney General’s office did the right thing,” said Alex Winslow, Texas Watch’s Executive Director.  “Texas families should never be subjected to false insurance industry advertising that preys on the fears many homeowners have about losing their homes.”

Winslow added that this situation is part of a larger problem that Texas consumers face when dealing with the insurance industry.  “Travelers’ deceptive ad, State Farm’s double-dip rate hike, and Texas Windstorm’s improper handling of customer complaints shows that responsible regulation of the insurance industry is key.”

The Travelers ad entitled Driving Your House suggests that homeowners could be forced to sell their homes if they do not have sufficient auto insurance to cover their liability following an auto accident.  The Texas Constitution strictly prohibits the forced sale of a person’s homestead except in very narrow circumstances, protecting homeowners from the type of situation outlined in the Travelers ad.

Earlier this week, Texas Watch sent a letter to Attorney General Greg Abbott and Insurance Commissioner Mike Geeslin asking that they take action to force Travelers to stop airing this misleading ad.

UPDATE: Travelers has sent a letter to the Attorney General’s office stating that the company has complied with the Cease & Desist order.

Resources:

• OAG’s Cease & Desist letter to Travelers
• Texas Watch’s letter to AG and Insurance Commissioner

###

For More Information: Alex Winslow (512-381-1111)