Twenty-three years ago, California voters decided the state should have more control over the insurance industry. Proposition 103, approved by a thin margin (51%) in 1988, increased the Department of Insurance’s clout in a number of areas — most notably automobile insurance — and changed the status of the California insurance commissioner’s job from being a governor appointee to an elected officer.
Absent from that ballot initiative two decades ago was health insurance.
Now the Legislature is considering a proposal to give the state more authority over health insurers. AB 52 by Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles) allows the state — either the insurance commissioner or the Department of Managed Health Care — to reject health insurance premium rates if they are deemed excessive.
The insurance commissioner can reject premium hikes in other kinds of insurance — such as automobile — but the state does not have that authority over health insurance premiums.
Yet.
The Assembly passed AB 52 and sent it to the Senate, where it’s expected to come to a vote later this month.
As they did 23 years ago, groups are lining up in favor and against the proposal. According to some stakeholders, the arrival of national health care reform makes the issue more complex.
We asked stakeholders what it would mean for Californians if AB 52 is approved in the Senate and signed into law. More than a dozen stakeholders were invited to contribute, including Republican leaders in the state Senate and Assembly and the California Chamber of Commerce.
We got responses from:
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.Some elements may be removed from this article due to republishing restrictions. If you have questions about available photos or other content, please contact khnweb@kff.org.