| Rebuttal to Argument in Favor | This - 213 | Rebuttal to Argument Against |

Argument Against Proposition 213

Arguments on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.


SAY ''NO" TO NO-FAULT FOR RECKLESS DRIVERS . . .
VOTE ''NO" ON PROPOSITION 213

In March, 2/3 of California's voters said ''NO" to Proposition 200--No-Fault auto insurance. We don't want a law that allows reckless drivers to avoid responsibility for their actions.

But Proposition 213 says that if a reckless driver who can afford insurance hits an innocent person who cannot . . . the reckless driver gets off without paying for all the injuries and damage they've done.

That's wrong.

The high cost of insurance makes it impossible for many poor and working people to buy insurance. If insurance companies won't sell affordable insurance, it is completely unfair to deny people full compensation for a car accident that is not even their fault.

YOU CAN SAY ''NO" TO FELONS AND STILL . . .
VOTE ''NO" ON PROPOSITION 213

Courts won't allow convicted felons to get damages for injuries they cause. So why are ''felons" included in the title of Proposition 213?

The insurance companies pushing No-Fault want to divert your attention from their real agenda: boosting their profits to excessive levels.

Insurance companies make money anytime a reckless driver they insure is not held at fault.

The insurance companies couldn't get us to swallow No-Fault in one big gulp, so they're trying to feed it to us in little bites.

YOU CAN SAY ''NO" TO DRUNK DRIVERS AND STILL . . .
VOTE ''NO" ON PROPOSITION 213

California laws already say drunk drivers can't recover damages if they cause an accident. So why are they included in the title of Proposition 213?

The insurance companies have failed twice to get No-Fault insurance started in California. In Proposition 213 they are hiding the No-Fault idea behind wild talk about felons and drunk drivers.

NO MONEY-BACK GUARANTEE . . .
VOTE ''NO" ON PROPOSITION 213

The No-Faulters argue that Proposition 213 will save Californians $323 million per year.

We've heard that line before.

There is nothing in Proposition 213 that says Californians will see their insurance rates go down. In No-Fault states, auto insurance premiums have increased an average of 40% in recent years. No insurance rate reductions. No savings for consumers. The only people who benefit from this No-Fault scheme are reckless drivers . . . and the insurance companies who paid to put it on the ballot.

Insurance companies win, you lose.

SAY ''NO" TO RECKLESS DRIVER NO-FAULT . . .
VOTE ''NO" ON PROPOSITION 213.

HARVEY ROSENFIELD
Proposition 103 Enforcement Project

KEN McELDOWNEY
Executive Director, Consumer Action

INA DeLONG
Executive Director, United Policyholders


| Rebuttal to Argument in Favor | This - 213 | Rebuttal to Argument Against |