> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Wojtek Sokolowski
>I would think that the Tobias plan is opposed mainly by
> insurance companies because gasoline tax is a defacto public insurance
> scheme that would force them out of business.
>
> So the fact that nader is on the same side of the barricade on this issue
> is very interesting, indeed. Are you sure that it is just loyalty to
> "trial lawyer ideology" and not to insurance business?
Look, Nader has fought the insurance companies state by state on insurance issues as well. Back in 1990, the insurance companies and the trial lawyers each spent something like $100 million combined on dueling auto insurance initiatives in California. Nader came in and supported Prop 103 to significantly cut insurance rates and end geographic discrimination against inner-city drivers. With almost no money, Nader's endorsement and campaigning was crucial in defeating the insurance companies and the trial lawyers in defense of the consumer-oriented Prop 103. And Prop 103 won.
Nader may have his blind spots -- and his love of the right to sue in almost all situations is one of them -- but it is not because of any alliances with corporate interests, but only because he himself has used courts so effectively that he thinks it is a panacea. So he doesn't like no-fault insurance. But it is not because he loves insurance companies. They sure as hell don't like him, considering the millions of dollars he has cost them not only in California but in other campaigns across the country and at the federal level.
-- Nathan Newman