« South Miami to pay $90,000 settlement for cops who crashed girl's quinceañera party | Main | Sexual predator reforms gain momentum as legislators pass a flurry of bills »

Gun bill gets fast track attention -- even absent little evidence of a problem

One annual measure of who holds the real clout in Tallahassee is to watch which bills move through committees prior to the Legislative session. The gun lobby flexed its considerable muscle again Tuesday when the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee passed a bill to prohibit insurance companies from discriminating against gun owners by charging them more, or canceling their policies, because they own a gun. 

The bill, SB 424 by Sen. Tom Lee, R-Brandon, would allow state regulators to fine or impose penalties on auto or property insurance companies that "refuse to issue, renew, or cancel a policy" because the policyholder owns a gun. It also prohibits the insurance company from disclosing to third party if the policyholder has a gun. 

So how big is the problem of insurance companies discriminating against homeowners and auto owners for owning a gun? According to the staff analysis of the bill:

"Professional staff of the Banking and Insurance Committee requested information from the OIR regarding the use of firearm ownership information as an underwriting factor by the top 5 writers of homeowners’ insurance. According to the OIR, only one of these companies addressed firearm ownership in the underwriting guidelines. Citizens does not use firearm ownership in the underwriting process and the Citizens clearinghouse application does not contain questions about firearm ownership."

The staff analysis also notes that existing state and federal law already protect the privacy rights of gun owners. So, maybe it's not a big problem -- but it must clearly be worth fast-track attention. 

"This bill will stop some wrong doing and insurance companies who don’t discriminate don’t have to worry about a bill that says you can’t discriminate,” said Marian Hammer of the NRA and the Unified Sportsman of Florida.

Lee said he introduced the bill because, until recently, Citizens Property Insurance asked homeowners if they owned a gun. A Citizens spokesman told the Herald/Times that Lee was incorrect and the company has never asked the question. 

"The choice to have a trampoline on your property is a privilege, whereas the choice to have a gun on your property is a Second Amendment right,'' he said. "This would preclude insurance companies from going on a fishing expendition any more than going on a fishing expedition to ask you how many chain saws you owned or now many sharp kitchen knives." 

The committee approved the bill 9-1 with Sen. Gwen Margolis, D-Miami Beach, the lone no vote. 

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Pablo

The citizens of Florida wish that the Senate Banking and Insurance would do its job of performing its oversight responsibilities over the insurance industry instead of wasting time dealing with problems that do not exist. The legislature passes legislation to help insurance companies that promises to reduce auto insurance premiums, yet premiums continue to increase.

The Senate Banking and Insurance committee shamefully allows Citizens Insurance to give away reserves to start-up under-capitalized insurance companies that are GOP donors. At the same time, they are allowing back-door premium increases by Citizens that cut coverage, make it harder to collect on legitimate claims and force policyholders to litigate the claim.

Barry Hirsh

The more obstacles put in the path of potential mischief the better.

Contrary to the expressed editorial comment, it is not a waste of time.

TexTopCat

"Gwen Margolis, D-Miami Beach, the lone no vote. "
It is no real surprise that she as a "D" after her name. One more elected official that needs replacement.

Chris Brooks

So it's ok to preemptively restrict gun owners but not Ins. companies?

I love these moments of conflict on the left.
Do you side against guns or against the evil ins. companies?

The comments to this entry are closed.